Guest Nic-Rebel450CA Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 to simply put it' date=' when you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns. [/quote'] Best quote ever. I love that cam. Very profound statement. I think I am gonna have to watch that gun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMortensen Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 Just had another thought. We haven't declared war on anybody. So the "war" on terror is kind of a blanket statement that the govt uses to describe our willingness to fight. Should we have given up civil liberties for the "War on Drugs" or the "War on Poverty" or the "War on Homelessness"? Jon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
denny411 Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 I doubt there is anything that could be found on my pc or in my financial records that could even remotely be considered ILLEGAL. If your NOT doing anything wrong.... I really don`t know what liberties we have actually given up. Certainly nothing that has to do with airport security could be considered an infringment on our rights. I have never seen anything in the bill of rights about our "right to fly" The airlines are privately owned companies and have every right to refuse sevice to ANYONE for ANY reason. As far as wire taps go, What could you possibly be worried about "them" hearing you say? So far, the only people arrested or prosecuted other than terror suspects have been drug trafficers and child porographers. I`m not sure where you stand on these issues, but I personally would give up a few rights (even in peace time) to get these people off the streets. BTW... the ACLU is fighting on behalf of those degenerates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMortensen Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 I doubt there is anything that could be found on my pc or in my financial records that could even remotely be considered ILLEGAL. If your NOT doing anything wrong.... So by that line of thinking you wouldn't mind the government getting into every aspect of your life, because hey, you're not doing anything wrong. Well I disagree with that line of thinking. The more the government intrudes into our lives, the more easily they can control us. The more rights we give up voluntarily, the less able we are to keep them from TAKING away our rights in the future. The fact that the government is trying to "protect" us now in no way dismisses the possibility that they may not be trying to "protect" us later. The way that Germans were sucked into the Holocaust by Hitler was first the demonizing of particular groups, gypsies, the mentally retarded or insane, etc. Then they started rounding them up not for trips to concentration camps where they would be used as slave laborers and exterminated, but they were being "relocated". Incidentally, they did this with the elderly too. They would be "relocated" to a govt facility, then their families would be notified that their parents or grandparents had "unexpectedly passed away." With regards to data mining: "Supporters of this system have claimed that it does nothing more than make existing everyday police activities more efficient. We now know that is not the case," said Barry Steinhardt, Director of the ACLU’s Technology and Liberty Program. "This is data mining pure and simple: the authorities compile information from numerous public and private sources and let a computer decide if you’re a threat. That capability is completely unprecedented in our history, and remains unrestrained by our legal system." That's directly from the ACLU website, BTW. I'm NOT a big fan of the ACLU. I think they're mostly out to punish religious people and protect criminals. But this use of information goes against the ideals used to draft the Constitution, most directly the idea of "innocent until proven guilty". Here's another example of how information of this type can be misused in a BIG way: The concentration camps in Lety near Pisek and Hodonin u Kunstat were the height of anti-Gypsy policies of prewar Czechoslovakia, whose parliament had, in 1927, voted in the so-called Gypsy abatement of nuisance legislation. This legislation enabled the creation of special records concerning Gypsies and the setting up of special Gypsy identification and, before the war, measures were accepted and realized which led to the forced concentration of Gypsies. Following the occupation of Czechoslovakia by the Nazi army and the setting up of protectorates for Bohemia and Moravia, the Nazis had at their disposal a completely prepared list of Gypsies with their entire families. I'm NOT calling Bush or anyone in the govt a nazi. Not at all. In fact, if the election were held tomorrow, Bush would have my vote. I just want to bring to people's attention the possibility that govt programs that get into your personal business are not a good idea, not because they might figure out that you're a child pornographer, but because 99.99999% of the information they gain isn't related to child porn or terrorism. What they will do with the rest of that info is entirely unknown, but it CAN be used for less than altruistic purposes. Here's a timeline of Nazis taking power in Germany. Remember, Nazis were the German socialist party, dedicated to making life better for Germans and improving their economy in the post WWI era, which they did. 1930 September 14 Adolph Hitler's National Socialist Party gains 107 seats in the new German Reichstag. The Nazis are now the second largest political party in Germany. 1932 April 10 In the run-off election of the German presidency, Adolph Hitler loses to President Hindenburg. However, he did get 37% of the vote and terms the results a "victory for National Socialism." July 31 The Nazi Party doubled its seats in the Reichstag over 1930, from 107 to 229. 1933 January 30 Adolph Hitler becomes Chancellor of Germany. He is the leader of the National Socialist German Workers Party and commander of the SA, the Storm Troopers (founded in 1922). February 27 The Reichstag building is set on fire by secret order of Hitler's Chief of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels. A young Dutchman, identified as a Communist, is arrested and charged with setting the fire. February 28 The very next day, Hitler persuades President Hindenburg to sign Article 48, an "emergency" decree authorizing Hitler to suspend all civil rights, arrest (and execute) any suspicious person. A reign of terror ensued in which thousands (communists, socialists, labor union leaders) were arrested and sent to prison. To maximize Nazi influence, the non-Nazi press was outlawed. From there it was all downhill. This whole thing gets back to the purpose of the 2nd Amendment, now enumerated by quite a few people: we have guns so that we can keep the govt from becoming oppressive. The 2nd Amendment is being chipped away, and so are the 1st and 4th. These things should not be taken lightly. I know that the founders of the Constitution would not sit back and wait to see how govt would use the info. They would probably be getting drunk and dressing up like Indians and throwing PC's into a bay somewhere... Jon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 Habeas Corpus was suspended during the war of 1812 and during the civil war. Restrictions on freedom of the press and assembly were enacted during WW1 and WW2. Eminent Domain laws were greatly exapanded during WW2 (the Manhattan Project) and Roosevelt became a de-facto economic dictator. In his book "All the Law But One" Chief Justice Willaim Rehnquist stated, "Its is neither desirable nor is it remotely likely that civil liberty will occupy as favored a position in wartime as it does in peacetime. The laws will not be silent in time of war, but they will speak with a somewhat different voice." Since the Korean War Congress has 3 times given the President the purse strings to wage war without any formal declaration needed. It is not unconstititional for the President to wage war without a formal declaration as numerous legal challenges have failed to be granted review by the Supreme Court. Under a war declaration, its understood that the country faces a national emergency and impelentation of new laws that restrict some fundamentaly right are known to be temporary in nature. There is some fear now that, without a formal war declaration, that these temporary restrictions will not be lifted after the emergency is over. Personally I think that fear is unjustified and our built in checks-and-balances will self correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikelly Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 This is a time of war... And not unlike EVERY MAJOR conflict this country has been involved in, this one will be a long haul exercise as well... Anyone who thinks otherwise is foolish. Further, The president stepped up to the podium and warned us that it would be a long and difficult battle just days after the towers fell... I don't recall a single politician (Other than Dean) who stepped up and said this is wrong... Not a single one. Funny how short our memories have become... Mr. Bin Laddin would be very proud and happy that his preductions of the "Impatient Americans" is coming true... And his organizations WILL strike again... The clock is ticking. Mike 8) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMortensen Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 Well John, I guess the fact that you have more trust in the govt than I do is really the issue. By the way with regards to Roosevelt became a de-facto economic dictator I think we're still paying for that one... EDIT--Mike, you're EXACTLY RIGHT. That's why I take issue with this. If this were a well defined conflict and the govt could say, this will end when Bin Laden is captured or something to that effect I might be able to stand by and let it happen. But terrorism has existed since the dawn of mankind, so when is this rights "curtailment" supposed to end??? Jon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMortensen Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 OK, I feel better now. I've figured out that all we have to do is get rid of the following terrorist organizations before the govt stops reading my email: EDIT--The previous list was inaccurate. It included "para-states". Here's one of terrorist orgs: Abu Nidal Organization (ANO) Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG) Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade Arab Revolutionary Brigades Armed Islamic Group 'Asbat al-Ansar Aum Shinrikyo Aum Supreme Truth (Aum) Basque Fatherland and Liberty (ETA) Black September Communist Party of Philippines (CPP/NPA) Dev Sol Devrimci Sol (Revolutionary Left) Egyptian Islamic Jihad Euzkadi Ta Askatasuna Fatah Revolutionary Council Al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya HAMAS (Islamic Resistance Movement) Harakat ul-Mujahidin (HUM) Hizballah (Party of God) The Islamic Group (IG) Islamic Jihad Islamic Jihad for the Liberation of Palestine Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) Jaish-e-Mohammed (JEM) (Army of Mohammed) Al-Jihad Jihad Group Jemaah Islamiya (JI) Kach and Kahane Chai Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) Lashkar-e-Tayyiba (LT) (Army of the Righteous) Lashkar I Jhangvi (LJ) The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) The Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK or MKO) Muslim Iranian Students Society National Council of Resistance National Liberation Army (ELN)--Colombia The National Liberation Army of Iran New People's Army (NPA) Organization of the Oppressed on Earth Palestine Islamic Jihad (PIJ) Palestine Liberation Front (PLF) The People's Mujahedin of Iran (PMOI) Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC) Al-Qaida Real IRA (RIRA) Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) Revolutionary Justice Organization Revolutionary Nuclei Revolutionary Organization 17 November (17 November) Revolutionary Organization of Socialist Muslims Revolutionary People's Liberation Party/Front (DHKP/C) Sangillan Force The Salafist Group for Call and Combat (GSPC) Sendero Luminoso (Shining Path, SL) Talaa'al-Fateh True IRA United Self-Defense Forces/Group of Colombia (AUC) World Tamil Association (WTA) World Tamil Movement (WTM) 3rd October Organization 15 May Organization Alex Boncayao Brigade (ABB) Algerian Terrorism Anti-Imperialist International Brigade (AIIB) Armenian Secret Army for the Liberation of Armenia (ASALA) Army for the Liberation of Rwanda (ALIR) Al-'Asifa Al-Fatah Chukaku-Ha (Nucleus or Middle Core Faction) Continuity Army Council Continuity Irish Republican Army (CIRA) Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP) Ellalan Force Federation of Associations of Canadian Tamils (FACT) First of October Antifascist Resistance Group (GRAPO) Force 17 Former Armed Forces (ex-FAR) Interahamwe Irish Republican Army (IRA) Jamaat ul-Fuqra Japanese Red Army (JRA) Khmer Rouge Lautaro Popular Rebel Forces (FRPL) Lautaro Youth Movement (MJL) Loyalist Volunteer Force (LVF) Manuel Rodriguez Patriotic Front (FPMR) Morazanist Patriotic Front (FPM) National Liberation Army (ELN) - Bolivia / Nestor Paz Zamora Commission (CNPZ) Orange Volunteers (OV) The Orly Group People Against Gangsterism and Drugs (PAGAD) Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Party of Democratic Kampuchea Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-Special Command (PFLP-SC) Popular Struggle Front (PSF) Provisional Irish Republican Army (PIRA) Provos Puka Inti (Sol Rojo, Red Sun) Red Army Faction (RAF) Red Brigades (BR) Red Hand Defenders (RHD) Revolutionary People's Struggle (ELA) Revolutionary United Front (RUF) Sikh Terrorism Sol Rojo Tupac Amaru Revolutionary Movement (MRTA) Tupac Katari Guerrilla Army (EGTK) Al Ummah United Popular Action Movement (MAPU/L) Zviadists Jon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 Vigorous Burmese Student Warriors (JARRING CHORD) "NO ONE expects the Vigorous Burmese Student Warriors!" "Our chief weapon is surprise... surprise and fear... fear and surprise... Our two weapons are fear and surprise... and ruthless efficiency... Our three weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency... and an almost fanatical devotion to General Bo Mya.... Our four... no... Amongst our weapons... Amongst our weaponry... are such elements as fear, surprise..." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 Pirates A baseball team is on the terrorist list? The "We are Family" baseball team? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMortensen Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 They must be a "para state" group... They got nixed from the updated list. Jon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Afshin Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 Thank you for the great list Jon. People have to realize the crucial distinction that war on terrorism is not like war with a country that has boundaries, a single regime, army.. that comes to an end. Terrorism can't end. So then how will the patriot act and it's descendants end? Talking about short memory, Time and other magazines showed the reports that all the info needed to stop 911 was available pre 9/11. This was without the lost of our constitutional rights. The problem was that no one was looking carefully enough. So the problem was not inability to access everyone's private life or to arrest someone without a warrant or the ability to imprison someone without defense or due process, but lack of intelligence or sheer stupidity. Unfortunately, winning a war on stupidity is as likely as winning the war on terrorism. We can certainly fight it, but it is naive to expect a definite victory and end point. Do you think that after bombing Iraq, occupying the country... you are decreasing terrorism. In case some are not awar, Iraq despite having the psycho Sadaam as a ruler, was not involved in international terrorism and was not linked with bin-laden. I will bet my Z that after now, many Iraqis will become involved in terrorism whom never would have before (indeed none of the previous terrorist were from Iraq). I wish I could have the same faith as you Mike. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMortensen Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 I don't agree that Iraq was not involved in terror. When Saddam pays the families of "martyrs" $25K for suicide bombings in Palestine, I'd say that's involvement. Jon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Afshin Posted January 24, 2004 Share Posted January 24, 2004 I was referring to non Middle Eastern activities from Iraq, which have been absent. Iraq had nothing to do with 911 (regardless if sadaam was evil). Furthermore, the issue of Palestine and Israel is very complicated. It is more of a war with different means and tactic for fighting. Right or wrong, fighting within your own territory (Palestine is not a defined self ruling country and is occupied) is completely unrelated to international terrorism. Many well meaning and reasonable people back either or neither Israel and Palestine's conflicting causes. Not too many reasonable people back 911. So please, don't include Palestinians whom understandably (I'm not saying it's correct or not) fight to death for their independence and freedom (as they see it) with the Israeli who fight with far more power and money for what they perceive as their fundamental right to the land that the Palestinians currently live in. Now please, I hope no one jumps on the Israel/Palestine issue (both have valid arguments and both commit many war crimes), it is even more of an endless argument. My point is that it is a very different situation. Apples to apples. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMortensen Posted January 24, 2004 Share Posted January 24, 2004 Noun 1. terrorism - the calculated use of violence (or threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimindation or coercion or instilling fear Although this is just one definition, I think it's a pretty good one. It fits, as you said, both Palestine and Israel. I don't care to open that can of worms either (the Palestine issue). Jon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moridin Posted January 24, 2004 Share Posted January 24, 2004 Honestly, I don't think you can attack terrorism head on. It's just not something you can do. A war on terrorism is a paradox in itself. People should be really looking into what makes these "terrorists" tick. Even then, you can attack the word terrorist. If bombing innocent people makes you one (which I very much think it does), then Clinton shouldv'e been tried and convicted many times over. The same things goes many times over for organizations and groups that our government supports. Look at the Iran-Contra affair and many others. First step to stopping terrorism is to quit supporting tyrannical regimes. Step two is to really try and find what makes these people tick. Find the root of the problem and kill it there. I believe it is more than just being evil. Propaganda and lack of knowledge may have a major part. Just think about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pop N Wood Posted January 24, 2004 Share Posted January 24, 2004 Simply put' date=' the Patriot and Patriot 2 Could be very dangerous if left unsupervised. However, The current administration is under no illusion. The slightest hint of abuses and officials are being removed form positions and put on admin investigations... Happening on a regular basis. They are watching this like hawks over on the hill... No, I rest my case... Are your freedoms currently being stepped on? Yes. Are they for the right reasons if used accirding to the design? Yes. I have faith... Mike[/quote'] You can put your faith in George W if you want. I'll put mine in the constitution. It is not something that can be put on the shelf in times of trouble. And this notion that you shouldn't have to worry about government intrusion if you aren't doing anything wrong has always pissed me off. The constitution wasn't written to protect criminals. It was written to protect people who "aren't doing anything wrong" from a criminal government. Which is exactly what our government will become should it start playing the fast and the furious with the bill of rights. You know I raised the fact that civil liberties get abused in times of war as a warning, not as justification for it happening again. If we allow our fears to compromise our ideals then the terrorist will have won. In all honesty I don't know if the Patriot Act has gone too far or not. But I do think our "built in checks-and-balances" have good reason to start flexing some muscle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
denny411 Posted January 24, 2004 Share Posted January 24, 2004 The constitution wasn't written to protect criminals. It was written to protect people who "aren't doing anything wrong" from a criminal government. Someone needs to let the ACLU in on this little secret. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMortensen Posted January 24, 2004 Share Posted January 24, 2004 Here's a little something from someone we like to call the Father of the Constitution: In 1795, Madison wrote "Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other." War required armies which lead to debt and taxes, all three of which "are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few." Jon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikelly Posted January 24, 2004 Share Posted January 24, 2004 Moridin, it isn't as simple as that. Every conflict we've been involved in, we have had to side with one side or the other... Not sure how Clinton should have been put in jail for that, but there are plenty of other reasons to put him under the jail. Unfortunately we often have to side with one of the "CURRENT" lesser evils... Hussein was just an example... You have to remember that we were aligned AGAINST Iran and its dictator leadership. Saddam, at the time, was a lesser evil. So we backed him. At the time his political views were a little more tame than (And more hidden) those of the Iranians. Things change, and a friend quickly can become a foe. The world changes and our list of friends and enemies is as fluid as an Ocean's tide. Pop-in-woods, You wrongfully assume that I'm a republican, based on the comments I've made... I place my faith in our US government based on the work I do, based on the information I have access to, and based on what I know to be true. I do NOT watch political talk shows. Our media reports things with such distortion that getting the facts from them often is an exercise in futility. You keep reading the papers, and buying into their big lie... I'll continue getting up at 4:00AM and driving an hour and ten minutes to work, in a government building, with senior executives from EVERY BRANCH of the government's intelligence community. I get my warm security blanket handed to me through my knowledge of the fact that what is reported by a mostly liberal press is as good a fiction as any Steve King has inked. I get my warm and fuzzy from the horses mouth, and won't play into the media machine that controls and drives popular opinion. Jon, The constitution is a wonderfull document. It was written by people who had a good vision... It was also written by a people who were much different from those in politics today... You seem to forget that those forefathers were GODS of the day. They were at the top of their game in every level of life... Politicians now days go to Washington because they can't cut it in the real world... Private industry would eat most of them alive, so this assumption that those we elect are the cream of the crop is a JOKE. Look at the current democratic primary... Come ON! This is THE BEST they have to offer up against GW???? There is not a single politician in Washington that I would EVER place my faith in. They are politicians who are looking for the easy life in Washington DC, and who will mostly lie and promise you the sun, the moon, the stars, and anything else to get elected.... There is no respect in that work, by and large... and they are not the types of statesmen our forefathers had in mind. GW Bush will go down as a great president for the way he handled himself in the days after 9/11/01. Had those attacks not happened, I have no idea how things would have turned out, but I'm now certain of this... He will go down in history as one of the greatest Presidents ever. Before you get your blood presure up, read what I said... I didn't SAY I THOUGHT GW was anything... You still do NOT know my opinion of him, or my political affiliation... Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.