Political Repression In The United States

[audtatious]

Those who will not reason, are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves.Lord Byron

If you quoted the above without listing the author does it change the meaning in the least?

[Armelius]

Lord Byron carries more weight than the quote.

Let me show you.

I have a great mind to believe in Christianity for the mere pleasure of fancying I may be damned.

As you can see without the quote you would think I said that.

And now-

I have a great mind to believe in Christianity for the mere pleasure of fancying I may be damned. Lord Byron

It has historical context.

Again

I have no consistency, except in politics; and that probably arises from my indifference to the subject altogether.

If I had said that then there would be great uproar.

but

I have no consistency, except in politics; and that probably arises from my indifference to the subject altogether. Lord Byron

I am safe.

[WDRacing]

Last chance...

Discuss the actual thread topic or don't post. I don't wanna see any more posts about character, or unrelated quotes from Byron.

Discuss the topic, or don't post. This is an unacceptable trend with your posts. I'm giving you the opportunity to enjoy this forum and partake in it's conversations. But you need to settle down and discuss the topic at hand. The ball is in your court, so if things go badly you can only blame yourself.

If you'd like to discuss Byron make a new thread, but place it in Gen Chat where it belongs.

WD

[Armelius]

America is a model of force and freedom and moderation - with all the coarseness and rudeness of its people.Lord Byron

[WDRacing]

America is a model of force and freedom and moderation - with all the coarseness and rudeness of its people.Lord Byron

You don't learn...

[JustinStrife]

you didn't really expect the Democrats to play nice now that they control the majority of the 3 branches, did you?

[C-Kwik]

While the argument i made might seem to follow along the lines of the fallacy you illustrated, i believe my argument is still valid. You are also exaggerating what im saying, a lot.

My argument is simple. The federal government created a list of people to be treated by local PD as potential domestic terrorists. Are you seriously thinking that the focus of the entire DHS was on one pissant county in Missouri? That this is just some isolated incident, instead of being a standard practice of our government?

They didn’t create a list of people. Again, did you actually READ it? Do you understand its meaning and intent? There are no names other than a very specific person who had committed an act of terrorism before. The other three names are former presidential candidates, none of which are being accused for any involvement in any potential act of terrorism. Their names being in the list are a matter of fact in that potential terrorlst that fit the profile are likely to be supporters of the candidates mentioned. The report itself describes a profile for potential terrorists.

The main problem that i see here is this. We keep getting all these warning signs that our government has moved away from constitutional law, and is seriously into some sht that we the people do NOT want them to be in, yet we do nothing. Torture memos, water boarding, the WHOLE BUSH ADMINISTRATION, secret CIA prisons around the world, GTMO, Abu Ghraib. When you look at all of these things together, it should paint a pretty atrocious picture of our government but yet, no one cares. We ignore the evidence, trivialize it, and move on with our lives because simply, most of us have it pretty good. The stories really dont effect a normal citizens day to day lives, or so they think.

You still fail to make one distinct correlation. How does this report actually violate those constitutional rights? For example, if none of the unconstitutional acts were committed, what bearing would this document have on your argument? It could exist and it would be harmless. Sure, together, it can be a problem, but you are attacking the wrong target. Focus on the actual problem.

I mean what do you people need? A signed document from the POTUS saying something along the lines of 'We are violating your constitutional rights in so many ways, torturing people on the regular, its a fvking circus up here in DC. All the while you fools play partisan politics, ingesting CNN and network news like its strait from God, if you only knew!'

Nope, nowhere did I contest that unconstitutional acts were committed or could be committed. My argument has been quite specific. THIS DOCUMENT IS NOT PART OF THE PROBLEM YOU ARE STATING.

// <--- Charlieo, thats how you do it.

Telecom companies have given untold amounts of supposedly secure information to the government, thats all been made legal. Interestingly enough, they made it legal after the press caught wind of it, it being illegal before hand.

What does this document have to do with this?

These profiling reports come out. These declassified documents which, while read alone might not be some huge atom bomb speak to a larger problem. That being, we have become a surveillance state, and that constitutional law is, at best, interpreted wayyy to liberally.

I don’t condone unconstitutional methods of intelligence, but nothing in the document in that of itself screams of unconstitutional acts. You’re drawing some big conclusions without actually connecting any dots.

Your asking me to do the impossible. You want me to get my(anyones really) real rap sheet? Id love it if YOU could do that for me. You know why neither one of us will most likely never find out? Because it would be stupid to let any of that information out for multiple reasons. However, with all this legislation that sets up the legal grounds for literally free reign as far as wiretapping and information gathering goes, the government most likely has one hell of a 'list'.

http://www.criminalsearches.com/

Mine lists one ticket I got in 2004.

I was talking about the quote you took from myself.

Ah…I misunderstood and thought you were referring to the link you posted to the other thread.

However, as I stated already, if the legislation is the problem, then attack the legislation. The report is intended to help us to identify terrorism. As you stated about the bad relationship, we see warning signs…

Reports like this are generated from mass amounts of raw data that is digested by whomever. The mass amount of data is poured through until reasonable conclusions are made. Think about it backwards. For a report like that to come out, how much information had to come in? Think about it from not only the OP's source, but also the leak in Missouri. They are aiming these 'reports'(which would not exist unless there was some legislation behind them in most cases[or legislation thats trying to be passed], thus the need for the report) with huge scopes that could potentially fall on a wide variety of completely innocent Americans.

This is purely an assumption you are making. A rather broad one at that. When an organization is charged with a specific task, in this case, preventing terrorism, how could they not get help from the front lines without releasing such a report?

Can i give you definitive proof that reports such as the self titled 'Memo's of Doom' or these more recent DHS reports come directly from legislation such as the patriot act, protect America act, and the new FISA court system? No. Doing so would require me to be an insider to all of this. I can however draw logical correlaries between said legislation and the reports we are talking about, as i have done.

I haven’t found any logical corollaries in your arguments. Everything is based on assumptions. The case of torture you cite didn’t include any relation to this type of report. In fact, I looked into the topic and found they had his name specifically on a watch list because of contact with another person on said list who was under surveillance. Where the whole situation seemed to start going very wrong was where they stopped trying to prove themselves wrong. Specifically, when Robert Fuller questioned Omar Khadr and Khadr stated he may have seen him at a terrorlst safehouse. Fuller or another agent should have backchecked for any alibis as any legal mind knows that witness testimony is one of the weakest forms of evidence in that of itself. The deportation and torture that ensued are deplorable regardless and should be stopped. There were a series of errors that occurred, but one was not necessarily tied to the other. If we can do away with the “loopholes” that allowed the torture to occur, then even the poor investigation would not have resulted in any major issues.

Some countries citizens cook out of pans they smelt lead in. We are not these countries.

The point I was making is that even if we are doing better than other countries in a particular regard does not mean we stop there. A great athlete doesn’t stop training hard just because they can beat everyone else.

We are the most powerful nation on the face of the planet, and i hold us to a slightly higher standard. Atrocious acts around the globe, from terrorists, nut jobs, ect, do NOT equal senseless acts by our own government. The later is far, far more disturbing and should be dealt with in a manner most unforgiving.

I agree….which is the point I just made, but again, this report that was released has nothing to do with the atrocious acts.

In this case however, they have to be considered together. Its the thin line that should have to be walked when dealing with terrorlst suspects, or suspects in general. From everything that i have seen, there is no thin line currently. Those checks and balances have been completely removed and the government is free to do as it pleases.

They don’t. You CAN separate one from the other. Just because it can lead to something bad doesn’t mean you ignore the potential good. The key to problem solving is targeting the problem. Not ditching the entire plan.

Again, its the question of, to save one life is it worth destroying another? Some lives arnt savable. But by following constitutional law and walking that fine line, many lives can be saved, or simply, not trashed. Again, a random senseless act does not equal a senseless death carried out by our government. The latter is much more atrocious and preventable.

My argument here is that we can save that one life without destroying another (perhaps except for those of which that are actually trying to harm others). There is a harsh reality that we can’t possibly stop all bad things from occurring. But as far as I can tell, you seem to be arguing in favor of stopping any practices even remotely associated with the problem you are against without stopping to realize that you can separate the bad from the good.

You would think.

And I do.

No. Im not trivializing life at all. Im putting it up on a pedestal. One life, be it a baby or anyone in more cases is a terrible thing to lose. Im trivializing your argument.

You are trivializing life in your argument (I’m fairly certain you don’t intend to place no value on life here) by saying that the constitution is more important than a life. I mean, what good is the constitution to those that are dead?

I understand this is a catch 22 but bear in mind, it was merely a retort to get you to simply stop trying to attack my arguments by calling them trivial rather than address them directly.

What is worse, 10 people being killed in an 'act of god' or one person being killed by our governments wrongful action?

Both are wrong.

One out of those 11 deaths was preventable.

How are you certain? The assumption you make here is that we haven’t been able to stop all terrorists, when in fact, we have.

I dont believe that at all. I believe that they simply dont exist without the other currently.

Currently, perhaps. But for one who asks another to broaden their scope, consider how narrow yours is in this context.

Again, i have a really, really wide scope in this thread and you dont. I took it somewhere else, and i suppose i didnt lay down a path that could be followed as i should have.

I don’t have a problem with broadening the discussion. I asked you to narrow your scope so you can see the specific argument I have been making. Having a broad scope isn’t a bad thing. But when viewing problems, finding the root source of a problem is key. Sometimes, there are indeed problems throughout, but I don’t believe this to be one of them. Releasing a profile of potential terror threats is hardly a precursor to unconstitutional acts or torture.

Again.. Patriot act, Protect America Act, the new FISA courts, all have brought questions of constitutionality but yet not a single case has been filed to the Constitutions defense.

And that is a problem. But it has nothing to do with this report. Can the report be used improperly and end in an unconstitutional act? Sure. But the report isn’t the source of the problem. The legislation and courts you described are.

Where did PC come from...? This is about our constitutional rights that no one seems to give a s*** about anymore. Believe me, if there is a credible source, and the intel community goes through a set of streamlined legal hoops to check this person up, down and inside out, then thats fine by me and is in our best interests. Instead of legal hoops however, its just open season. When you let the dogs loose, sometimes they dont always bring back what you were aiming for.

The PC came from the complaints many were lodging over the reports in the first place. If there is indeed a threat, there shouldn’t be such a need to appease to everyone. It should be able to state the facts as they are.

// <---- You can write these down if it helps.

Id rather not, because politics and our government is such a massive topic that narrowing your scope means that you miss, ignore, and forget certain things that should never be overlooked or forgotten.

Well, I can’t tell you what to do. But simply consider looking at it this way. Had these reports not been released, would it have stopped the unconstitutional acts or the torture?

... So your assumption is somehow still valid? Prove it please?

I think you have the burden here. That is, you must draw the direct correlation between the reports that were distributed and the unconstitutional acts. Although, I think I’ve been pretty clear in this post as to why its not while responding to your other arguments.

Exactly. No one gives a damn until its their personal problem. Then you got the rest of the people like you, which is granted 98 percent of all humans on the earth(*********this percentage may be exaggerated considering the military and terrorism, still its a small fraction of the world population) who just say, oh, f***ing sucks for you buddy and does absolutely nothing.

Sure. Its human nature. But my point is that the majority of Americans and the world are not being watched. The arguments you make suggest that we all are.

Until its ripped out from underneath you as if it was never there at all.

While its unlikely to happen, sure, I understand the sentiment. But I still contend that to solve this problem, you can do so by targeting the specific problem.

Its to bad you cant walk a day in my shoes.

I prefer not to walk around looking over my shoulder all the time. But thanks.

Finally. Someone asks me the questions iv been dying to be asked for the last 3 years. To bad i cant fvking answer it. Thats life for ya. Still, props for being the first person with an open enough mind to ask. Im afraid i leave you with no other choice but to label me a paranoid nut job.

LOL!

[HashiriyaS14]

If I see the phrase "New World Order" one more time, I think my eyeballs are going to fall out of my head.

At any rate, like it or not, extremist right-wing Americans tend to kill more people than extremist left-wing Americans.

Rowdy as the GOP Convention 2008 protestors were, they didn't blow up any government buildigs or shoot any abortion doctors.

Sure, the Libbies had Ayers, but that was a generation ago. RECENTLY, almost all of the most credible domestic terrorlst threats have been from the right wing.

That said, I'm not going to imply that the extremists are somehow remotely grouped with the majority of conservatives. The average conservative wanted to fry Tim McVeigh just as much as the average liberal, potentially more so.

Just saying, the odds/history are not in favor of a big ZOMG statement about "oh noes, liberal extremists". Liberal "extremists" throw paint on fur coats, lol.

[Urabus GodofTraction]

Whats the first thing you say to a friend who gets out of a bad relationship? Whats the first think you WANT to say..? // <--- Charlieo, thats how you do it.

I wasn't even in this thread!

"Whats the first think you want to say" is brilliant, by the way. I'm putting it in the quotes section of my facebook!

[VersaMG08]

This thread is a good reason if you don't like Obama, join the Libertarian party! I'm thinking about doing so...

[themadscientist]

DHS calls you a potential malitia member based upon your statement. I'm scared of you now.

[VersaMG08]

lol...that's pathetic of you j/k

I'm going to fill out my voter registration tomorrow and mail it in to the county. Within 21 days, I'll officially be part of the Libertarian party.

[themadscientist]

I don't affiliate with any party. Any party you could name likely has something in their platform I am against and some I am for. It would be nice to be able to count myself among the ranks of a formal party but untill the polarization fades I just can't join one.

[RiceRocketGal]

Just a few comments tonight.

1. Before this election KKK and skinheads were both saying they hope Obama wins because it would make recruitment much easier for them.... and like it or not... they were right.

2. Since the election... sales of guns and ammo have more than quadrupled in this nation. My fiance will likely have to reserve ammo in order to target practice.... and I seriously doubt Code Pink is buying the stuff. People are so worried that Obama is going to raise the price of ammo that they have gone on a buying frenzy which has led to the price of ammo going through the roof without any help from the government. Thank you NRA!

3. The report did not say ALL people who are against abortion are extremist... it spoke of extremists with those beliefs. You know... the people who sit outside of abortion clinics and yell obscenities at pregnant teenagers... and blow up abortion clinics.. etc.

I am a right wing conservative. I used to be a Registered Republican... but the propaganda I have seen coming from that party since the start of the last election season sickens me and has served to turn me away from the party. Taking something like this memo and turning it into a tool to make half of this nation feel even more alienated from our fellow citizens on the other side is just another nail in the party's coffin as far as I am concerned.

We are conservative people with conservative morals. We are not fools. Do not attempt to play us as if we are.

That's all I have time for now.

[VersaMG08]

I don't affiliate with any party. Any party you could name likely has something in their platform I am against and some I am for. It would be nice to be able to count myself among the ranks of a formal party but untill the polarization fades I just can't join one.

That's how I feel with the Republican party right now. Until they can change from being a different version of the Democrats or Demolight, I'll be Libertarian.

[themadscientist]

2. Since the election... sales of guns and ammo have more than quadrupled in this nation. My fiance will likely have to reserve ammo in order to target practice.... and I seriously doubt Code Pink is buying the stuff. People are so worried that Obama is going to raise the price of ammo that they have gone on a buying frenzy which has led to the price of ammo going through the roof without any help from the government. Thank you NRA!

Thank the right people, the Obama administration. Feinstein, Pelosi, etc. If they were'nt making statements and moves that demonstrate their intentions there would be no panic. Panic is often a justified emotion when one is in danger. I invite your participation.

zer...begin

[VersaMG08]

I checked my voter status online today, and I'm already registered Libertarian. I mailed in my registration yesterday. That was quick!

[themadscientist]

They have a lot of free time.