Our National freedoms

Discussion in 'Offtopic' started by Holy Smokes, Apr 24, 2008.

  1. Holy Smokes

    Holy Smokes Senior Member

    6,721
    14
    0
    Here is a post that should raise our concern about what is going on about our national security and freedoms as a sorvgien freedom loving people
    The Forever War
    How long can an emergency last?

    Jacob Sullum | October 2002 Print Edition

    Since 9/11, anyone who has questioned a proposed extension of government power or contraction of individual liberty has had to deal with an intimidating three-word rejoinder: "We?re at war."

    Among other things, "we?re at war" has been offered as a justification for trying noncitizens before military tribunals, holding citizens in military custody without charging them, eavesdropping on attorney-client conversations, conducting secret searches, obtaining e-mail information and library records without a warrant, relaxing restrictions on FBI surveillance of religious and political activity, setting up a nationwide network of civilian informers, installing police cameras in public places, allowing the armed forces to play a more prominent role in law enforcement, establishing a national ID card, conscripting young people into "national service," and repealing President Bush?s tax cuts.

    Despite its rhetorical effectiveness, "we?re at war" does not quite do justice to the situation in which we find ourselves. Even if it did, the claim would not give the government carte blanche to dispense with civil liberties. Although it promises moral clarity, the language of war obscures the issues at stake in the debate about how a free society should respond to terrorism.

    In terms of massive, indiscriminate destructiveness, the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon certainly resembled war. Likewise, U.S. forces fought what looked like a war in Afghanistan, with planes bombing targets, organized groups of men shooting at each other, and civilians suffering "collateral damage." But after the Taliban were defeated and a new government was installed, this literal phase of the war on terrorism seemed to be petering out.

    What was left looked less like World War II, and more like the war on drugs: an intermittently violent campaign against an amorphous enemy that can never be decisively vanquished. Bush did not declare war on Al Qaeda or the Taliban; he declared war on terrorism, which will be with us in one form or another for the foreseeable future. Unlike drug use, of course, terrorism is inherently criminal, a kind of aggression that no civilized society can tolerate. But the open-ended nature of the struggle against it means that the war on terrorism, unlike conventional wars, cannot be viewed as a passing emergency.

    That fact has important implications for the debate about how much liberty we should give up so the government can fight terrorism more effectively. Since there?s no way of knowing when the war is over -- no territory to occupy, no surrender to accept -- any sacrifices we make are likely to be permanent. This uncertainty can fundamentally change the nature of the measures we are being urged to accept. For example, the president has claimed the authority to unilaterally declare citizens "enemy combatants" and lock them up until the "cessation of hostilities." In a war without end, such detention amounts to a life sentence.

    Even in finite wars, courts rightly have insisted on traditional standards of due process when feasible. In a landmark 1866 case, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the constitutional rights of Lamdin P. Milligan, an Indiana man charged with aiding the Confederacy, had been violated when he was tried by a military tribunal instead of a civil court. Such shortcuts are not permitted, the justices declared, "where the courts are open, and in the proper and unobstructed exercise of their jurisdiction."

    Milligan, living in a state threatened by invasion, was accused of secretly assisting the enemy in a war on U.S. soil that imperiled the Union?s very existence. The vindication of his rights in these circumstances speaks volumes about the need to be wary of arbitrary power, especially during times when the public is least likely to resist it. "The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace, and covers with its shield of protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances," the Court declared. It noted that the Framers "foresaw that troublous times would arise, when rulers and people would become restive under restraint, and seek by sharp and decisive measures to accomplish ends deemed just and proper; and that the principles of constitutional liberty would be in peril, unless established by irrepealable law."

    If the Civil War did not trump the Constitution, it?s hard to see why the war on terrorism should. That does not mean there is no room for debate about how to fight terrorism. But the debate should not be based on the assumption that constitutional constraints are a luxury we can no longer afford. Nor should it be limited to the question of what the Constitution permits. The debate is also about what works, and at what cost. It may be perfectly constitutional to put a national ID in every pocket and a surveillance camera on every corner, but that does not mean those are good ideas.

    In any case, the war-vs.-peace paradigm clarifies little. The real issue is not whether we?re at war but whether terrorism is so different from other crimes that special rules should apply. If terrorism is different, it?s because of the damage it does, not because it?s carried out by foreign belligerents. Homegrown terrorists like Timothy McVeigh pose the same sort of threat, although the president would be hard-pressed to put them in a brig as enemy combatants.

    One could argue that we should be more willing to risk imprisoning the innocent in cases involving terrorism because the potential cost of freeing the guilty is especially high. The principle here, which suggests that murder suspects should get less due process than people accused of shoplifting, is questionable. But such a position is more honest than the line offered by many conservatives, who argue that it?s outrageous to be concerned about "the rights of terrorists" when American lives are at stake. This formulation assumes the guilt of anyone who falls under government suspicion.

    If you're innocent, in other words, you needn?t worry about giving the government more power to fight terrorism. I must be guilty.

    :usa:
     
  2. pred8er

    pred8er He who eats fuzzy animals

    1,468
    3
    0
    This may just be the conspirorist in me talking, but have you seen the movie "V for Vendetta"? I have to wonder if that movie is not a premonition for the future, not of England, but of the U.S. I can easily see this country turning to a police state in the name of safety and security, all the while robbing the rights and liberties from it's citizens, with no call to arms by those same citizens in just so they may feel safer, even if they are not.:frusty: :frusty: :frusty: :frusty:

    See my sig!
     

  3. Holy Smokes

    Holy Smokes Senior Member

    6,721
    14
    0
    This is the most serious issue we are facing today
    this act needs to be repealed at all cost
    it is a numbering and tracking system to control us all
    we will not be able to hold a job or have a bank account without one of these cards that has an electronic device to tell where and who you are by a device that will pick you up at a distance.

    I just reiterated to my congressman today about this national security breech today
    he is also cosponsoring a bill called no excuses gas prices, to take all the covers off the excuses we are getting from Washington bout this issue. I am glad I voted for this man and he is a real patriot and has responded to me each time I contact him
    I suggest ya'll to do the same for our freedoms if you really want to stay free.
    don't just shrug it off and I am not crying:Cry: wolf this is tha real deal.:usa: :usa:
     
  4. Dredly

    Dredly Site Guru

    4,358
    3
    0
    uhh....

    This nation hasn't declared war since the end of WW2... So its not a war. I think the official definition is something like "Congressionally approved usage of Armed Forces"

    Its also responsible for somewhere around 1 TRILLION in national debt, the quickly crashing dollar value and the even quicker rising oil costs.
     
  5. Dooby

    Dooby Scooby Dooby Doo!

    358
    0
    0
    As an American civilian living overseas there's one thing I'd like to bring to your attention:

    The world is MUCH more DANGEROUS for Americans than it was before Bush dragged this Iraq deal out so long. It's not my opinion...it's a FACT. I get monthly...sometimes more frequent emails from the US consulate letting me know that I should be on alert and avoid certain countries.

    I've been approached by people aggressively BECAUSE I'm an American. Sad part is...when I first moved here Australians LOVED us. Not as much as we seem to like them...but it was still a very cuddly sort of relationship. I find myself being sucked into CONSTANT defense of our country to people who, frankly, should mind their own business.

    For the folks back home...it seems silly that so much crap would be done in the name of defending the country...but people are already IN the US that would do great harm. MILLIONS of people that would give their life to see the US public huddle in fear and be bloody and injured live among you. This is also a FACT...not fiction dreamed up by the government. When I lived in Sydney it was far worse than it is up here in Brisbane.

    There are groups of people who think of western women as little more than sheep to do with as they want. They don't share our values and are violent if confronted with as little as a question. I had an employee who was a "non-extremist" who spoke of his family that colleagues who had managed to nest themselves in the US. I thought nothing of it, since he seemed pretty harmless. Until...

    One day he just seemed a bit ****ier than usual...and actually told me, to my face...that he would be happy to kill every person on our floor...and that it wasn't murder because we weren't innocent by his definition. *boggle* I gave this 'kid' a job...trained him...treated him as my equal...and he felt that I was an "infidel" to be slaughtered as the most horrible of criminals?!

    Be aware my friends...even if it means you must be afraid. When you rest in your bed at night know that sacrifices you cannot image are made...and that many people in this world wish you dead only because you live.

    I'm sorry to be a downer on your thread...truly I am. I live here because I am an American that would be proud to die for being an American...if that's what it takes. I love my life...and my country. I won't run away...and most of you, I'd imagine, wouldn't either. BUT...don't think there is no threat...not even for an instance.

    God Bless America!!!! :usa::usa::usa:
     
  6. Dooby

    Dooby Scooby Dooby Doo!

    358
    0
    0
    If you have a cell phone, you already have this. A card with a chip on it can't be picked up from orbit or the like...it's like a smart card that is used when you swipe the card anyplace. Even RF tags have a limited range.

    So, at the most, technology would allow people to track you with an RF tag (not same as smart card tech) that could identify you if you want through a doorway. The smart card tech is already used here for public transportation and trust me when I say it's not something that reads you from a distance.

    Consider secure identification as an attempt to ensure you have a driver's license or other government identification that is authentic and genuine...and can be confirmed as such. ID's must evolve for the same reason that US currency has been updated. Because criminals are getting better and better at fraud.

    If a teenager can get a fake ID to get beer at 18....what's to keep Osama Bin Blowyourassup from getting the same type of ID and walking in from Mexico, Canada, or any port where passports aren't checked.

    Better and more integrated personal identification helps fend off these guys as well as identity thieves. It's not a lojac to find out how many time you might have slipped into the corner liquor store or strip club.
     
  7. pred8er

    pred8er He who eats fuzzy animals

    1,468
    3
    0
    Which is exactly why I HATE cell phones and will not be renewing my contract.

    When technology develops, the power it creates will be abused by someone. It may not be ment for this purpose, but it will be used for this purpose. Look at the internet right now. It wasn't designed to track your spending, or what you like to "research", but the programs out there monitor your spending and viewing with the intent of "better serving you". What they are really doing is tracking what you are doing and what you are spending your money on.

    If I were doing a research project on IED's for a school paper, and continually looked up how to make them, what they are made from, or where people get the materials to make them, how long do you think it would be before BATFE would be knocking at my door asking questions that really are none of their buisness?
     
  8. Dooby

    Dooby Scooby Dooby Doo!

    358
    0
    0
    No offense, but if you're researching anything more than where they've been used and body counts...I'd hope someone did a swing past your house. Finding out a bit about their construction is a gray zone...but when you start looking at ways to source the materials to make one...well....I'd prefer you to be annoyed than someone of less pure intent getting away with blowing up my family to tickles.

    Fair enough if you wish to lead a technophobic lifestyle. That's a choice for you to make...though you'll miss out on most luxuries life has to offer. I obey the law, don't research how I might do illegal things, and enjoy the benefits technology can offer. Whatever ya do, be happy :hug:.
     
  9. Holy Smokes

    Holy Smokes Senior Member

    6,721
    14
    0
    thanks for this much known but valuable heads up from your corner of tha world
    i realized this a couple of years ago and said it is time to git a permit to carry
    i have my heater on me while out and about and many near me while at home.
    do ya'll have a right to carry over in the Down under or is it a communistic state.
    we have a few communistic states here in the good ol USA.
    I will refuse to live in one as long as there is place that is not one.:peace:
    I also see tha big pic on the Real ID act
    It is a numbering system that the whole world is been lead into so as to have a one world Gov.
    next is tha Anti Christ
    I have made up in my mind to pay what ever fines I must but I will refuse to a part for this unGodly system, in other words I ain't gonna have one of em'
    Call me radical ,stupid, or paranoid if you please but I ain't taking no chances being involved with this scheme:decision:
    Who will join a freedom loving and God fearing man
    I do greatly appreciate your perspectives and they do lead to some serious thought of the present and future
    God Save the USA:usa2:
     
  10. Dredly

    Dredly Site Guru

    4,358
    3
    0
    haha you say fines like thats gonna happen...

    More then likely what will happen is you will be arrested, sent to prison and released once they have set you up so that they can monitor you... instead of paying bail of course (doing you a favor!)
     
  11. Holy Smokes

    Holy Smokes Senior Member

    6,721
    14
    0
    That'll be tha only way
    i will go kick and screaming for all my litlle freedom loving heart will do.
    How bout you!
     
  12. pred8er

    pred8er He who eats fuzzy animals

    1,468
    3
    0
    Information should never be illegal!!!!! It doesn't matter what I want to know, it's what I do with the info once I have it that makes something illegal. It all starts somewhere, and the sheep go blindly along agreeing to small removals of liberty in the name of safety. See my signature.

    This is a personal choice, but I feel as though I would rather die from a firey bombing knowing that I did so as a free man than to live my life behind the walls of oppression. Our fine government is always protecting itself from it's own citizens, when in reality it's the citizens that should be protecting themselves from their government.

    Smokes, I was going to get a permit, but that list is the first place they'll start when the lib's get into office and make them illegal. In fact, I have no guns anymore:rolleyes: for just this reason!
     
  13. Holy Smokes

    Holy Smokes Senior Member

    6,721
    14
    0
    yey I gave that a good long thought to that to
    If comes down to a fight Thats what we'll do.
     
  14. Dooby

    Dooby Scooby Dooby Doo!

    358
    0
    0
    I'll have to take an Einstein on this thread. Everything is relative driven by relative perception. To hear any living American preach about their oppression is like an Aussie teenager from the burbs trying to tell people about his trials growing up in the "hood".

    :: From here I divert from topic a bit, no hijack intended, just a dump ::

    The most concerning attack on freedom I see coming in the US is adoption of heavy controls on firearms, like Australia has done. It worked really well here (read with EXTREMELY thick sarcasm). Laws were put in place to take all guns, no matter the type...because criminals were shooting each other. Now, criminals still shoot others (cause they still have guns) and hunters/sportsmen are milked for ever cent IF they shoot. Petty crime (theft, breaking and entering, etc.) is stupidly high here because the criminals don't worry about being injured. As for little gang bangers who can't afford guns...they just kill each other with knives. So, they made double edged knives illegal....so they kill each other with kitchen knives.

    Fair enough most people don't need to hunt with an assault rifle that has a 60 round clip, but when did the primary purpose of a 3 round pump action shotgun become urban assault?

    Thankfully bows are still legal here...but even that is under threat. Study up on Australia sometime...and you'll see the grim future if we allow hunting to go away and blanket controls on guns/etc. to be implemented.

    For a bit of EXTRA reading, since I know public healthcare is a big deal this election year....study Australia's "success". Public healthcare is a sham. The care is crap...and I wouldn't trust the doctors here to lance a boil on my butt. It's scarey when the physicians look at you blankly and ask what treatment you'd like them to perform (in a heavy accent...with very little chance they'll understand what you say to them first time).

    :tape: :tape: :tape:
     
  15. Holy Smokes

    Holy Smokes Senior Member

    6,721
    14
    0
    well spoken and a word to the wish hearted to hang on to their guns at any cost and to put gun loving congressmen in office.
     
  16. pred8er

    pred8er He who eats fuzzy animals

    1,468
    3
    0
    Dooby, I hear ya on the health care thing! I'm in the Navy and the health care system blows (and not the wind type of blow)! It's next to impossible to get anything done unless all you need is Motrin. :frusty: What doctor in his/her right mind is going to work for little to nothing? Have you heard the joke: "What do you call the last guy who graduates medical school?" and the answer is supposed to be "Doctor". Well in the Navy the answer is "Lieutenant". There is a reason someone graduates medical school and joins the Navy, it's because they don't need malpractice insurance and they can't be sued for wrong doing. If the government takes over the health care system how much different do we think it will be from what the military already has?:frusty: :frusty:
     
  17. Holy Smokes

    Holy Smokes Senior Member

    6,721
    14
    0
    :loco: :loco: :loco: :loco:
    crazy bout tha :usa2:
     
  18. Hoyt Katera

    Hoyt Katera New Member

    4
    0
    0
    Good Thread

    Have any of u guys reserched RON PAUL. HE wants to withdrawl all of the troops from Forgien Countries because they are just being put over there so they can die and we won't have enough troops to fight back aginst the government.(I u research this a lot u would now what I'm talking about with the attacking of the government)
     
  19. Holy Smokes

    Holy Smokes Senior Member

    6,721
    14
    0
    HK we got tha best government on the face of the earth and I would glady lay my lfe on the line agian for it
    I want it to stay that way and believe it or not there is a faction here and yes a lot of them are in a position of leadership in our ranks
    that wants to destroy all that our great nation stands for
    I don't agree 100% with any but Paul will help us keep our national sorvienty and consititution as we need it to be keep.
    People really don't understand just what a fix this nation is in
    its to deep to go into it on this post