Bunker said:

those who are willing to be ruled over dont deserve freedom. let em be slaves to the state

So, I'm going to assume you want to go on the boat trip? I think you'd be a good pirate.

@westside-steve said:

I don't know.

There is really nothing in the patriot act that ruffles my feathers.

I realize a lot of folks get up in arms about the freedoms they are losing.

I don't think we've ever really had any.

And I'll repeat I don't think any other reasonably civilized country is it any better or worse.

People like to band together in groups for power governmental or otherwise.

Weather it's village council or the u s senate they enjoy pushing people around.

I'm just saying I doubt it there's even 1 of the bill of rights that hasn't been compromised.

Remember animal farm?

Every so often the rules painted on the barn wall seemed to have changed.

Maybe that sounds cynical, but it's true, and I don't really lose much sleep over it anyway.

Go through your city or towns rules and regulations sometime and tell me what percentage is chicken shit. Multiply that by the mega thousands for u s government.

But back to the topic, sure, the t s a regulations are a pain in the ass and not very effective.

Bureaucracy in action!

WSS

OK OK OK! I'll admit it - the greatest country in the world has been brought to its knees, our Bill of Rights and our Constitution, which I believe are perfect in every way, have been chipped away by power mongers. We are just marking time until the day when one world government takes over. Thankfully I'll be dead by then. In the meantime, I'd like to hop a boat and live the rest of my life on the waves. The only draw back I can see to that is I hate fish.

@lady-z said:

OK yea, we know that and now everybody on this thread is aware of it too.

But what about post 9/11 and the security state? I mean, can you believe anything Big Sis says about security?

I don't know.

There is really nothing in the patriot act that ruffles my feathers.

I realize a lot of folks get up in arms about the freedoms they are losing.

I don't think we've ever really had any.

And I'll repeat I don't think any other reasonably civilized country is it any better or worse.

People like to band together in groups for power governmental or otherwise.

Weather it's village council or the u s senate they enjoy pushing people around.

I'm just saying I doubt it there's even 1 of the bill of rights that hasn't been compromised.

Remember animal farm?

Every so often the rules painted on the barn wall seemed to have changed.

Maybe that sounds cynical, but it's true, and I don't really lose much sleep over it anyway.

Go through your city or towns rules and regulations sometime and tell me what percentage is chicken shit. Multiply that by the mega thousands for u s government.

But back to the topic, sure, the t s a regulations are a pain in the ass and not very effective.

Bureaucracy in action!

WSS

@westside-steve said:

And king george's men might toss a hand full of coppers on the floor as they left with the horses.

WSS

OK yea, we know that and now everybody on this thread is aware of it too.

But what about post 9/11 and the security state? I mean, can you believe anything Big Sis says about security?

@lady-z said:

As far as I know the property owner gets a take it or leave it offer from the government.

And king george's men might toss a hand full of coppers on the floor as they left with the horses.

WSS

@westside-steve said:

It does indeed.

And who decides just compensation, the owner for the usurper?

Also it occurs to me that was the afterthought. When the founders decided it wasn't such a bad idea to take what they wanted they added The just compensation bit.

WSS

As far as I know the property owner gets a take it or leave it offer from the government.

@lady-z said:

<br /><br /><br />

You might include eminent domain as part of the Fourth Amendment and the Fifth. The Fifth Amendment requires "just compensation" for private property taken for public use.

It does indeed.

And who decides just compensation, the owner for the usurper?

Also it occurs to me that was the afterthought. When the founders decided it wasn't such a bad idea to take what they wanted they added The just compensation bit.

WSS

@westside-steve said:

You might include eminent domain as part of the Fourth Amendment and the Fifth. The Fifth Amendment requires "just compensation" for private property taken for public use.

@westside-steve said:

Yes that was so the king couldn't requisition your farm food horses and weapons for his soldiers.

In other words take your property for the good of the kingdom.

I think we use neutered that one many years ago don't you think?

Eminent domain ring a bell?

WSS

No it's not. There's a section specific to quartering a foreign soldier, and that's the part that you're talking about. That's the antiquated part.

To say that the 4th amendment of the Constitution was only written so the king couldn't take your food and horses is a complete, willful misreading of the original Constitution, and everything that's come since.

Come on, man.

In other words take your property for the good of the kingdom.

I think we use neutered that one many years ago don't you think?

Eminent domain ring a bell?

WSS

@westside-steve said:

No wait, I posted the Fourth Amendment to contrast what the TSA are doing.

Fourth Amendment

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

I don't think it matters which US citizens the president has ordered or will order to be executed. Without due process extrajudicial execution at the president's order violates the Bill of Rights.

You may or may not agree with my opinion that other countries do not recognize human rights as policy. I was thinking of our Bill of Rights and our Constitution, which I believe surpass any other country on human rights.

@westside-steve said:

I'm not attacking your defending the government.

I assume there may have been u s citizens living in hiroshima or nagasaki.

WSS

I don't know what that has to do with this either.

All I'm saying is that when the executive branch wants to target an American citizen they believe is plotting terrorist acts against our government, and that this person is in a hostile foreign country and can't be apprehended, then they have to present the evidence of this person's guilt to some neutral arbiter and have them swear off on it. The Intelligence Committees should probably also be involved. They can't simply decide unilaterally that they've looked at the evidence and think it's okay by them.

@heckofajobbrownie said:

Well, no. They'd gone through a process that had declared him guilty of conspiring to commit acts of terrorism against America. It's just not one that involved any judge or jury that we know of.

There's a court you have to go to if you want to secretly wiretap Americans, for instance. There is no court you go to if the president wants to kill an American with a drone. They have some sort of "legal process." Whatever that was. We don't know.

I know you love to trust in government (except when you don't) but this is troublesome.

I'm not attacking your defending the government.

I assume there may have been u s citizens living in hiroshima or nagasaki.

WSS

There's a court you have to go to if you want to secretly wiretap Americans, for instance. There is no court you go to if the president wants to kill an American with a drone. They have some sort of "legal process." Whatever that was. We don't know.

I know you love to trust in government (except when you don't) but this is troublesome.

@heckofajobbrownie said:

The point isn't that he murdered an "innocent" US citizen. It's that there was no real legal process that adjudicated his guilt. The executive branch just said, "We've looked at it, and he's guilty, so we killed him." That's not the way it should be, and people are right to question it.

But that's exactly what it meant.

If in fact a man is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law killing him constitutes murdering an innocent man.

WSS

@westside-steve said:

Which innocent u s citizens are we talking about that the president has murdered?

And, since you don't seem to trust a police officer as to whether or not to search you do trust the judgement of every judge who may be called upon for a warrant?

And I'd still like to see the list of civalized countries with many less freedoms then we have.

Don't miss understand, I don't think we are all that free and we are becoming less so in some ways but I don't think it's ever been much better, and has probably been a lot worse.

WSS

The point isn't that he murdered an "innocent" US citizen. It's that there was no real legal process that adjudicated his guilt. The executive branch just said, "We've looked at it, and he's guilty, so we killed him." That's not the way it should be, and people are right to question it.

@westside-steve said:

Actually I think it's prosperity that makes the world more peaceful or at least wherever it exists.

WSS

Well, that's part of it, but it's obviously not an either/or, and one stems from the other. You can't have real prosperity without freedom. You want economic freedom and political freedom, and the two beget each other. The Chinese, for instance, are becoming more politically free and open as they become more economically free. Petro states, like Saudi Arabia, have pockets of prosperity and widespread poverty, with limited economic or political freedom.

Free markets, free elections, free press, human rights. You don't have to be against those just to have an argument or to try and be different. They're good things.

@lady-z said:

Well that's just it, other countries do not recognize human rights as policy. Our privacy and liberty are being compromised by total government control and it's getting more and more restrictive. You must be aware that violation of privacy and human rights have been codified into our federal laws. One of the latest, Prez Peace Prize insisted on getting legal extrajudicial execution. The law doesn't have limitations, US citizens can be legally executed now without due process on the word of the president.

For example, the TSA doesn't do a good job for all their invasive security theater. I've read about quality control where guns and things that look like bombs get through TSA security. I've read that the TSA is doing their thing at train and subway stations, and plan to take their activities literally onto our roads and highways.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Which innocent u s citizens are we talking about that the president has murdered?

And, since you don't seem to trust a police officer as to whether or not to search you do trust the judgement of every judge who may be called upon for a warrant?

And I'd still like to see the list of civalized countries with many less freedoms then we have.

Don't miss understand, I don't think we are all that free and we are becoming less so in some ways but I don't think it's ever been much better, and has probably been a lot worse.

WSS

@heckofajobbrownie said:

Freedom makes the world more peaceful. And, of course, freer. Those are good things.

Actually I think it's prosperity that makes the world more peaceful or at least wherever it exists.

WSS

@westside-steve said:

Slogans aside, what is it anyone expects freedom to do? Compared to other reasonably civilized country in what ways do we enjoy more liberty?

WSS

-Ben franklin: The only president of the united states who was never president of the united states...

Well that's just it, other countries do not recognize human rights as policy. Our privacy and liberty are being compromised by total government control and it's getting more and more restrictive. You must be aware that violation of privacy and human rights have been codified into our federal laws. One of the latest, Prez Peace Prize insisted on getting legal extrajudicial execution. The law doesn't have limitations, US citizens can be legally executed now without due process on the word of the president.

For example, the TSA doesn't do a good job for all their invasive security theater. I've read about quality control where guns and things that look like bombs get through TSA security. I've read that the TSA is doing their thing at train and subway stations, and plan to take their activities literally onto our roads and highways.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

@westside-steve said:

Well besides the jingoism of the glorious victory, I don't think he's off base.

If I may coin a phrase, " any crisis worth having is worth over reacting to. "

WSS

I'm not sure I see anything close to jingoism.

And I agree on the demagogues.

@diehardbrownsfan said:

True, you can't win the war on terror. But you must do all you can to protect your citizens from terror attacks. There was a time when the USA thought it was invulnerable from terror attacks. That changed with the first WTC basement bombing, then the OKC Federal Building, then of course 9/11. I agree that some of the things the government has done, the TSA for example is pretty worthless. They hire 50,000 screeners, that do no better of a job then the private security they had before. Remember, the hijackers all brought on items that you were then allowed to bring. It's a very difficult situation for anyone to deal with, because no matter what you do someone will attack your actions.

Also in situations of terrorism there is noone to retaliate against. We can bomb afghanistan back into the stone age ( granted that's only a couple 100 years) and these groups will plan their mischief from the sudan yemen pakistan or miami beach.

WSS

@sadbrownsfan said:

Or whoever was before him if it happens early enough in his tenure.

If someone wants to attack us bad enough that they have a total disregard for their own safety, suicide bombers, sooner or later they will find a way. There is no way to "Win" this "war on terror", unlike if we where actually fighting a country or local fighters, sooner or later one side will surrender, but with the war on terror there will never be a peace treaty or someone from the other side saying we don't want to fight anymore.

I agree. I suppose the next thing the TSA will dream up is strip searches for everybody.

May 8, 9:59 AM CIA derails plot with al-Qaida underwear bomb

ADAM GOLDMAN

Associated Press

... The device did not contain metal, meaning it probably could have passed through an airport metal detector. But it was not clear whether new body scanners used in many airports would have detected it. The device is an upgrade of the underwear bomb...

http://hosted.ap.org...-05-07-18-39-31