Homeland Security Pork

[sturm375]

I know yet another political thread. I just want you guys(non-gender specific) opinion about the 7 items tacked onto the Homland Security Department Bill. Let's see if I can remember all of them. BTW, I am against all of them, especially the invasion of priviacy one.

1) Instead of making in mandatory for all contracts issued by the DHS to be fufilled by US contractors, now the Dept. Head can approve foreign contractors, thus avoiding US taxation.

2) For the first couple of years, Texas A&M university gets all the research grants fro the DHS.

3) Pay Raise for some government employees.

4) Limited liability for Vaccene(sp?) preservative manufacturs. This one wipes clean all litagation pending on a manufacture whos product might cause childhood autism.

5) The DHS no longer has to adhear to the Freedom of Information Act.

6) Any government agency can track your internet activity (email and web); sometimes without a court warrent.

7) Limited liability for the 2 companies responisbile for baggage screening at the Boston airport on 9/11. This again means that they can't be sued, and all current litigation is discontinued.


Also, in addition to this, the Senate passed a bill the limits, if not removes the repayment responsibility of insurance companies in case of another terrorist attack. Instead, we the tax payers get to flip the bill, to some $90 Billion a pop. Why do we pay insurance premium again?:mad:

[wdlove]

We need research to protect us, alot of evil in this world.

There needs to be tort reform.

Without some protection Vaccine makers won't produce enough medication, there is no medication currently made that doesn't have side effects, some are fatal. We have to look at the greater good.

[sturm375]

Originally posted by wdlove
We need research to protect us, alot of evil in this world.

There needs to be tort reform.

Without some protection Vaccine makers won't produce enough medication, there is no medication currently made that doesn't have side effects, some are fatal. We have to look at the greater good.

Of course we need research, but wouldn't it be in all of our best intrests if the research grants were competitivly given out?

I'm a libriatarian at heart, which means less government involvment in civil/coporate matters. Let the Judges and juries do there jobs.

Again, if the public has no recourse against a coporation, through basic human greed, they will make money without concern toward the lives they may take. It was only through public outcries, with legal teeth, that we outlawed 12yr olds working in coal mines. We made it more expensive to continue practices, than to correct themselves. It is sad to say, but in the corporate world, money talks louder than lost lives.

Just because there is a "greater good" doesn't mean we should silence the minorities.

[e-coli]

I used to be very attentive and active in politics and civil service, but since Bush has massacred the constitution, I have decided that we're on a rocket sled to being a corporate interest dictatorship.

Now I don't even watch the news, or read about politics. Hell, I almost didn't vote in the mid-terms. What's the point, anyways. Bush is going to do whatever he wants, and Congress is stupid enough to be hoodwinked into playing out his agenda.

It's so sad. Truly heartbreaking. And the American people are too ignorant to see what's happening.

[Backtothemac]

Originally posted by e-coli
I used to be very attentive and active in politics and civil service, but since Bush has massacred the constitution, I have decided that we're on a rocket sled to being a corporate interest dictatorship.

Now I don't even watch the news, or read about politics. Hell, I almost didn't vote in the mid-terms. What's the point, anyways. Bush is going to do whatever he wants, and Congress is stupid enough to be hoodwinked into playing out his agenda.

It's so sad. Truly heartbreaking. And the American people are too ignorant to see what's happening.
How do you figure he has massacred the Constitution? Please enlighten me on this one.

[sturm375]

Originally posted by Backtothemac

How do you figure he has massacred the Constitution? Please enlighten me on this one.

I don't know if this is what e-coli was refering to, but: it's called the 6th amendment. The one where the government can't imprison people without due process. It's been almost a full year that Jose Padillia(sp?) aka "the Dirty Bomber" has been imprisoned in a navel brig off the coast of one of the Carolinas. By order of the President (that would be "W"), he was "decleared" an enemy combantant, and thus imprisoned without trial. The Constitution does not allow the executive branch to become Judge & Jury.

By the way, federal courts have repeatedly asked the Feds to return Jose, and the Feds have refused. Of course that is why he is on a Brig in the Atlantic. Federal courts don't have jurisdiction.

That's my major constitutional beef with "W," and why he will never receive a vote from me.

[Backtothemac]

The 5th ammendment guarantees due process. However, the 5th ammendment states that "no one shall be deprived of life liberty or property without Due Process, EXCEPT in cases rising in the land and naval militia and during times of war"

By declaring someone an enemy combatant, it falls into the 5th ammendments guidelines. He is doint what is necessary to protect the people of the US and that is the number 1 job of the President right now.

We will try these people, but it will be before a military court after they have gained all possible intel from them.

They are not picking up people off the street that haven't done anything, they are getting terrorists that would love nothing more than to kill us all.

[sturm375]

Originally posted by Backtothemac
The 5th ammendment guarantees due process. However, the 5th ammendment states that "no one shall be deprived of life liberty or property without Due Process, EXCEPT in cases rising in the land and naval militia and during times of war"

By declaring someone an enemy combatant, it falls into the 5th ammendments guidelines. He is doint what is necessary to protect the people of the US and that is the number 1 job of the President right now.

We will try these people, but it will be before a military court after they have gained all possible intel from them.

They are not picking up people off the street that haven't done anything, they are getting terrorists that would love nothing more than to kill us all.

If, he is an enemy combantant, that's fine. What I am saying is that the executive branch has no power to declear a US citizen an enemy combantant. That must go through a court system, because essentually they are declearing the citizen a traiter, without a trial.

Also, there is a provision in the constitution that says that if a civilian is in questionable status with the law, and there is a civilian court system in place, they must be tried in the civilian court system.

I am all for protecting America from terrorists, but not at the cost of our liberties which hundreds of thousands of soldiers have died for. I will not cheapen their sacrifice, so I can sleep a little better. [/Rant off]

[sturm375]

Parts of all of these apply:


Amendment IV

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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[diorio]

Originally posted by e-coli
I used to be very attentive and active in politics and civil service, but since Bush has massacred the constitution, I have decided that we're on a rocket sled to being a corporate interest dictatorship.

Now I don't even watch the news, or read about politics. Hell, I almost didn't vote in the mid-terms. What's the point, anyways. Bush is going to do whatever he wants, and Congress is stupid enough to be hoodwinked into playing out his agenda.

It's so sad. Truly heartbreaking. And the American people are too ignorant to see what's happening.

Just wondering, but why is your font so small? I can barely read it and I have to squint to do so. Are you trying to be different or what?

[atomwork]

Originally posted by wdlove
We need research to protect us, alot of evil in this world.

There needs to be tort reform.

Without some protection Vaccine makers won't produce enough medication, there is no medication currently made that doesn't have side effects, some are fatal. We have to look at the greater good.

Actually its not quite right. Protecting means for me being afraid against something what occurs thru our action. Why not swifting US foreign policy torwards peace and well being in the middle east and stop only supporting Israel. It would make greate sense to "help" both parties, no matter what they did. And there is a big grey area. The USA media not necessary tells it how it's really is. Ever noticed that!!!! Watch more Europe TV and you get the bigger picture.

You can also read it up what the USA things its in their best interest by reading the current annual report from the Pentagon to the Congress:

expanding terretory and picking up natual resorces, like OIL IN IRAK!

I don't mean by this now that terrorism is legitim, no its not, but there are better ways to deal with it that that crazy madmen from the white house does it.



Just my 2 cents;)

[MrMacMan]

Well the homeland security department will be the hugest disaster since the fall of the roman empire.
I swear there are like 100 Gov't agencys in 1.
I was like WTF can they DO THAT, FBI, CIA, and like everything else dealing with immigration to planes to ships to the everything.
EVERYTHING WILL Be taken No Gov't OFFICE WILL SURVIVE! :(
This deparment is gonna collapse really baddly.

It is really bad that the gov't can now without me or any judge knowing easily take information off my computer or through the internet. Well now they can legally look at my e-mails (if I am looking at these articles right).
YAY Lack of Privacy! ;) :D

[alex_ant]

Originally posted by Backtothemac
The 5th ammendment guarantees due process. However, the 5th ammendment states that "no one shall be deprived of life liberty or property without Due Process, EXCEPT in cases rising in the land and naval militia and during times of war"

By declaring someone an enemy combatant, it falls into the 5th ammendments guidelines. He is doint what is necessary to protect the people of the US and that is the number 1 job of the President right now.
Just wondering... when does it end? (The War on Terrorism)

Certainly the government can't expect that their efforts will result in the worldwide elimination of all terrorism? Which means that if the US doesn't surrender, the "war" will continue indefinitely. Which means an indefinite suspension of the 5th Amendment.

I don't understand why the detainees in Guantanemo haven't been declared POWs. If this is indeed a war on terrorism, then it makes sense that these guys should be treated as POWs. It's like the government is taking advantage of these nebulous parts of the legal system and using them to its advantage. The US says it's at war when it's convenient, and it says it isn't when it's not.

As for doing what's necessary to protect the citizens of the US... I'm sure this could have been accomplished without rubber-stamping Big Brother, no?

[alex_ant]

I'm against the Homeland Security Act, and generally against the Bush administration, which means I could be classified by the government as a dissenter. I'm criticising the government, and the way the follow-the-herd thought process of those in power goes right now, it's:

Alex_ant criticises the government.
Terrorists criticize the government
Therefore, alex_ant is a terrorist.

I could have my e-mail read. Anything I say in my e-mail critical of the government could be used against me. I could have all the files on my hard drive searched. This Department of Homeland Security, if it wanted to, could root through all my IM logs. Including the most private ones with my girlfriend. (And delete/destroy whatever it wanted, of course.) It could tap my phone, and ditto with that. It could do all this without even telling me. I could be arrested and detained indefinitely without the right to trial or even the right to speak to a lawyer. All because I'm critical of the government --> and therefore a terrorist sympathizer.

As a matter of fact, it's not even important that one is critical of the government. You could be the best Republican lapdog in the world, who just happened to unknowingly brush shoulders with a suspected associate of a suspected associate of a suspected terrorist sympathizer while walking down the sizewalk the other day. Hope you have a good lawyer, because you're going to jail until the DHS deems you no longer a suspect. If it does. Wait - it doesn't matter whether or not you have a lawyer, because you won't be allowed one. (Because you're a terrorist animal you see, and the Constitution only applies to real people, not animals.)

The only thing that's keeping the government from doing this to me is that there are too many others like me. Actually, the only thing that's keeping me from believing that the government IS NOT doing this is my resistance to paranoia. (Because they could very well be without me knowing it.) Echelon... the who-knows-how-many square miles of underground NSA supercomputers... the consolidation of power of the PATRIOT act... it's all very scary. Didn't Ben Franklin warn us against this?

[wdlove]

Originally posted by MrMacman
Well the homeland security department will be the hugest disaster since the fall of the roman empire.
I swear there are like 100 Gov't agencys in 1.
I was like WTF can they DO THAT, FBI, CIA, and like everything else dealing with immigration to planes to ships to the everything.
EVERYTHING WILL Be taken No Gov't OFFICE WILL SURVIVE! :(
This deparment is gonna collapse really baddly.

It is really bad that the gov't can now without me or any judge knowing easily take information off my computer or through the internet. Well now they can legally look at my e-mails (if I am looking at these articles right).
YAY Lack of Privacy! ;) :D

I strongly disagree! I have faith in George Bush, Dick Cheney, & their staff.
Need to get rid of duplication, waste, & abuse.

[SPG]

Originally posted by wdlove


I strongly disagree! I have faith in George Bush, Dick Cheney, & their staff.
Need to get rid of duplication, waste, & abuse.

Why? What do you base that faith in? The fact that they are Republicans? And that you're a Republican? There has been far too much evidence of political and corporate influences in this legislation that people, even the people who believe that we need more protection, would be able to back this.
The price of freedom is eternal vigilence, and America is asleep at the wheel.

edit: link added:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,842997,00.html
Heeeee's baaaack! The guy who was supposed to go to jail for the Iran Contra affair is now heading the most Big Brother of the Big Brother positions.

[sturm375]

Originally posted by alex_ant
I'm against the Homeland Security Act, and generally against the Bush administration, which means I could be classified by the government as a dissenter. I'm criticising the government, and the way the follow-the-herd thought process of those in power goes right now, it's:

Alex_ant criticises the government.
Terrorists criticize the government
Therefore, alex_ant is a terrorist.

I could have my e-mail read. Anything I say in my e-mail critical of the government could be used against me. I could have all the files on my hard drive searched. This Department of Homeland Security, if it wanted to, could root through all my IM logs. Including the most private ones with my girlfriend. (And delete/destroy whatever it wanted, of course.) It could tap my phone, and ditto with that. It could do all this without even telling me. I could be arrested and detained indefinitely without the right to trial or even the right to speak to a lawyer. All because I'm critical of the government --> and therefore a terrorist sympathizer.

As a matter of fact, it's not even important that one is critical of the government. You could be the best Republican lapdog in the world, who just happened to unknowingly brush shoulders with a suspected associate of a suspected associate of a suspected terrorist sympathizer while walking down the sizewalk the other day. Hope you have a good lawyer, because you're going to jail until the DHS deems you no longer a suspect. If it does. Wait - it doesn't matter whether or not you have a lawyer, because you won't be allowed one. (Because you're a terrorist animal you see, and the Constitution only applies to real people, not animals.)

The only thing that's keeping the government from doing this to me is that there are too many others like me. Actually, the only thing that's keeping me from believing that the government IS NOT doing this is my resistance to paranoia. (Because they could very well be without me knowing it.) Echelon... the who-knows-how-many square miles of underground NSA supercomputers... the consolidation of power of the PATRIOT act... it's all very scary. Didn't Ben Franklin warn us against this?

It's not just the DHS, any government agency can now servail your email/internet usage. They cannot access your computer without a warrent, nor can they tap your phones without a warrent, just email/internet activities.

To those who think the DHS will get rid of govt. duplication & abuse, here is in a nutshell what the DHS will do:

1) Only the INS will be dismanteled, from which at least 3 new agencies within the DHS will be formed.

2) Coast Guard is now under the control of the DHS.

3) Some departments from the FBI, CIA, NSA, EPA, DEA, ATF, FCC, FAA, FTC will be incorporated in the DHS. None of these agencies will be dismanteled. They will continue to function much like they currently do.

4) All reports will go to the DHS, who will determine which other agencies will receive these reports. If this were not run by the government, I'd give it a 50/50 chance of working. Since it is run by the government, I give it 0 chance of working.

5) Last, but not least, this give the executive brance unprecedented power over us, the people.

[Backtothemac]

Originally posted by alex_ant

I don't understand why the detainees in Guantanemo haven't been declared POWs.

Because we are not in a declared war. See Democrats gave away our right to delcare war when they joined the precious United Nations. :)

Furthermore, you are all acting like this is a slippery slope. that all of our freedoms are going to the side, and that Bush is the anti-Christ. Jesus people, grow up. They are not going to monitor and follow your Grand Mother's e-mail. They are going to look at Mohammad, and Siek, and etc. Get the point. Racial profiling. Nope. Covering the asses of 285 million people yep.

Anyone that thinks otherwise is just way too mislead.

[e-coli]

Originally posted by Backtothemac

How do you figure he has massacred the Constitution? Please enlighten me on this one.

Since Sept. 11th, we have seen a dissolution of the attorney client privilege, we are no longer entitled to protection against wiretapping, and unwarranted search and seizure, anyone can be imprisoned for any amount of time and denied due process, the Congressional War Powers Act (not part of the constitution) has been annulled...All under the guise of protecting us from "terrorism" (which the government...ANY government...has yet to define because it is a subjective concept).

Now, the "Dept. of Homeland Security" (Big Brother, to you and me), will now begin collecting a vast database of all of your web surfing, spending, medical records, phone records etc. etc. And they're exempt from the Freedom of Information Act (which doesn't mean anything anyways because the Bush administration has put Lock and Key on boatloads of previously public info anyways). How convenient. :rolleyes:

These facts are undeniable. This, to me, is an outrage. All lumped into one, it's an atrocity. The people have been hoodwinked while the Bush administration uses fear as a tool to impose their agenda.

Disgusting.

Harumph.

[sturm375]

Originally posted by Backtothemac


Because we are not in a declared war. See Democrats gave away our right to delcare war when they joined the precious United Nations. :)

Furthermore, you are all acting like this is a slippery slope. that all of our freedoms are going to the side, and that Bush is the anti-Christ. Jesus people, grow up. They are not going to monitor and follow your Grand Mother's e-mail. They are going to look at Mohammad, and Siek, and etc. Get the point. Racial profiling. Nope. Covering the asses of 285 million people yep.

Anyone that thinks otherwise is just way too mislead.

There is no provision in the US Constitution allowing only the "good" guys get the rights granted by God. That's key, the government is not there to provide rights, just protect the ones given to us by God. They are also not given power to take rights away, period. Imagine that, people who don't see things your way, or even the current administration's way, Have Rights!

As a matter of fact, it could be interpruted to mean that all people, regardless of whether or not they are US citizens, are entilted by the Creator, to these rights.

Have we decleared war, YES! It's not an official declearation, because there is no nation to attack. The Constitutional Declearation of War must specify a nation, we don't have a nation to put in that blank. Congress gave Bush Carte Blanch to do whatever he deems necessary to fight the War on Terrorism. That sounds like a declearation of war to me.

[e-coli]

Originally posted by sturm375
Some departments from the FBI, CIA,

The CIA and FBI have no representation in the new DHS.

[sturm375]

Originally posted by e-coli


The CIA and FBI have no representation in the new DHS.

No, but some of the "sub-departments" of the FBI, and CIA, among other, will be transfered to DHS, departments. So the FBI will still be an entity unto itself, however I think the counter-terrorism department of the FBI will now be under the DHS umbrella.

[wdlove]

The Constitution is for American citizens!

[sturm375]

Originally posted by wdlove
The Constitution is for American citizens!

I said it Could be interpurted that way. Not that it should be, nor that it is.


Yes! My first thread with the "Ugly" seal of approval! I feel so... Honored, or maybe dirty.:D

[Backtothemac]

Originally posted by sturm375


There is no provision in the US Constitution allowing only the "good" guys get the rights granted by God. That's key, the government is not there to provide rights, just protect the ones given to us by God. They are also not given power to take rights away, period. Imagine that, people who don't see things your way, or even the current administration's way, Have Rights!

As a matter of fact, it could be interpruted to mean that all people, regardless of whether or not they are US citizens, are entilted by the Creator, to these rights.

Have we decleared war, YES! It's not an official declearation, because there is no nation to attack. The Constitutional Declearation of War must specify a nation, we don't have a nation to put in that blank. Congress gave Bush Carte Blanch to do whatever he deems necessary to fight the War on Terrorism. That sounds like a declearation of war to me.

What a load of crap! No Right is absolute. You are going to give a foriegn national an absolute right to conduct activites that can take the lives of American citizens. And no, we haven't declared war because there is not a country, but because under our being part of the UN we cannot declare war. We declared war on the Barbary Pirates, and the last time I checked they did not have a country!

[Backtothemac]

Originally posted by e-coli

These facts are undeniable. This, to me, is an outrage. All lumped into one, it's an atrocity. The people have been hoodwinked while the Bush administration uses fear as a tool to impose their agenda.

Disgusting.

Harumph.

To me, the only disgusting, outrage that is an atrocity, is the blindness, and lack of common sense that is being shown by some American Citizens over this.

Look, I have worked in Government, I know the way that terrorist organizations operate, and if you open the laws to make it easier to get them, then they tend to slow their operations. By having a system that allows them to flurish under our own noses, is insane. This will not be big brother, and besides, who really cares what they do as long as you have nothing to hide right!

[sturm375]

Originally posted by Backtothemac


What a load of crap! No Right is absolute. You are going to give a foriegn national an absolute right to conduct activites that can take the lives of American citizens.

Which right allows someone to harm someone else?

Originally posted by Backtothemac
And no, we haven't declared war because there is not a country, but because under our being part of the UN we cannot declare war. We declared war on the Barbary Pirates, and the last time I checked they did not have a country!

The only thing stopping us from declearing war is our word as a nation. If we so choose, we can nullify our membership in the UN, and declear war on whomever we want. Also, since Al Quada(sp?) isn't a member of the UN, the UN Charter doesn't come into play. The UN Charter prevents us from using force, or the threat of force without UN sanction.
[edit]That is force against another UN member.[/]
http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/

[alex_ant]

Originally posted by Backtothemac
Because we are not in a declared war. See Democrats gave away our right to delcare war when they joined the precious United Nations. :)
So we're in a war on terrorism... but it's not a DECLARED war. It's just, you know, a normal war, with an asterisk, that makes it more convenient for us to hold our enemies as enemy combatants without having to give them any of the rights due POWs (because that would be incovenient for us). This is what I was talking about when I mentioned the government exploiting loopholes. (And yes, this could have happened just as easily under a Democrat or indepenent administration, and that doesn't make what the Republicans are doing right or okay.)
Furthermore, you are all acting like this is a slippery slope. that all of our freedoms are going to the side, and that Bush is the anti-Christ. Jesus people, grow up. They are not going to monitor and follow your Grand Mother's e-mail. They are going to look at Mohammad, and Siek, and etc. Get the point. Racial profiling. Nope. Covering the asses of 285 million people yep.
This is all very good. Now I only have one question:

If the DHS wanted to monitor my grandmother's email, what would stop them?

This is why checks & balances are such a good thing and why the DHS not having enough creates a big problem.

[alex_ant]

Originally posted by Backtothemac
This will not be big brother, and besides, who really cares what they do as long as you have nothing to hide right!
This WAS a joke. Please tell me it was.

[job]

Hmmm people lets look at the historial context for a moment:

Lets count how many times habeus corpus has been taken away..

1. Civil War - Abraham Lincoln and Jefferson Davis both restricted it.

2. First World War - Woodrow Wilson also prevented habeus corpus.

Also recall the so-called Espionage Act and the Sedition Act which passed into legislation during the First World War.

Do we argue about those injustices as well? Nope. Why? Simple.

As Americans we cannot stand to see our personal rights violated. Historically speaking, however, these restrictive acts were removed as legislature soon after the threat was gone.

My point is that our government has restricted personal and civil liberties many times before, only to restore those rights after the storm has passed.

I don't really see the new department as some 1984, Orwellian Gestapo agency.

[DakotaGuy]

I would just recommend that everyone is very careful about how they use their computer anymore and what they discuss with friends and family on email and the phone. This new agency will be spending a lot of time monitoring everyone. Bush and his friends say they are just doing this for our protection, but I am sure it will be a nifty new way to track people in the future. Very scary...we are living in a free country and our freedom is at stake.

[Backtothemac]

Ok, there is an article in the UN charter that forbids any country from declaring war on another, and that by itself makes our membership unconstitutional.

Furthermore, no Alex, it wasn't a joke, and if they want to monitor my email, that is fine. I have nothing to hide. I don't care. For the greater good, they can do that and I don't care.

alex....that makes it more convenient for us to hold our enemies as enemy combatants without having to give them any of the rights due POWs

um, you know what. screw their rights as POW's. Remember these people plotted to murder the 3,200 people that died on 9/11. Remember that they want to kill my wife and kid because they are American. Remember that they want to slit your throat. Screw their friggin rights. As soon as they respect our basic right of the right to life, then I will respect their right to POW rights.

[alex_ant]

Originally posted by Backtothemac
Ok, there is an article in the UN charter that forbids any country from declaring war on another, and that by itself makes our membership unconstitutional.
All I want to know is: Is the War on Terrorism a war, or isn't it. It sounds like it's a war to me, just because of the word "war" in the title. But I could be wrong. In which case it should be called the "Prolonged Battle on Terrorism" or something.
Furthermore, no Alex, it wasn't a joke, and if they want to monitor my email, that is fine. I have nothing to hide. I don't care. For the greater good, they can do that and I don't care.
You don't care, eh?

Would you care if Bill Clinton were president and Tom Ridge were a Democrat?

I suppose you would be willing to be incarcerated and interrogated without being given any explanation or any access to a lawyer for the greater good, as well?

There are rights we have as Americans that we're pissing away without thinking, in order to assuage our short-term fears. Somehow we've managed to convince ourselves that this is necessary to combat terrorism effectively.

Here's that Ben Franklin quote I was looking for: Those who give up liberty for the sake of security deserve neither liberty nor security. I'll bet if the government forced every US citizen to install a surveillance camera and microphone in every room of their home, it would go a long way towards curtailing terrorism. But I'm not sure that's the kind of society I'd want to live in. Surely we could have come up with a better idea than the Homeland Security Act: a knee-jerk political move that was hardly debated at all. Universally supported amongst Democrats and Republicans because none of our congresspeople (except for a handful) want to be seen as "soft on terror." (Even if that means "hard on personal liberties.")
um, you know what. screw their rights as POW's. Remember these people plotted to murder the 3,200 people that died on 9/11. Remember that they want to kill my wife and kid because they are American. Remember that they want to slit your throat. Screw their friggin rights. As soon as they respect our basic right of the right to life, then I will respect their right to POW rights.
Of course they want to kill us! They're our enemies. That's how wars work. And in wars, if our enemies are wearing uniforms and not working as spies, then we call them "lawful combatants" and are then obliged under international law to treat them as prisoners of war. As are all other countries.

Being a prisoner of war doesn't mean they get plush velvet sofas to sit on and big-screen TVs and room service. It just means they are charged with a crime (not held for an indeterminate amount of time) and offered legal representation.

[e-coli]

Originally posted by Backtothemac
Furthermore, no Alex, it wasn't a joke, and if they want to monitor my email, that is fine. I have nothing to hide. I don't care. For the greater good, they can do that and I don't care.

Yes, fine. But I DO care. And I don't want ANY of my information tracked, recorded, disributed or otherwise feel like I have a big cow bell around my neck everywhere I go. It's MY business, not George Bush's.

And I have nothing to hide as well. It's a matter of principle, and what you hold as sacred and personal.

It amazes me that someone could have the approach that you have. If you want to speak for yourself, that's fine. But don't assume that rest of us are so willing to throw our constitutional rights to privacy to the wind. The potential for governamental abuse is staggering.

[vniow]

Originally posted by Backtothemac
Furthermore, no Alex, it wasn't a joke, and if they want to monitor my email, that is fine. I have nothing to hide. I don't care. For the greater good, they can do that and I don't care.



I don't have anything to say to that.


But Ben Franklin does. (look down)

[cubist]

That is just TOO STUPID a statement to let stand.

Read the constitution and the bill of rights. The bill of rights is intended to protect the population against infringement of their rights by an expansive federal government. That is to say, it is to PROTECT US FROM THE GOVERNMENT. That is a key understanding.

Pay special attention to the 10th amendment. The Federal Government is explicltly prohibited from doing anything beyond what is specified by the constitution.

Now think about the EPA. The Department of Education. The Department of Health, Education and Welfare. The Department of Energy. The Department of Homeland Security. ALL are in blatant violation of the 10th Amendment. And who is the one who started all of this brazen violation of the 10th Amendment?

Most historians point to Franklin D. Roosevelt as the most egregious violator.

NOTHING in the constitution or bill of rights is there to protect you against greedy corporations. That's what courts are there for. The constitution and bill of rights exists to protect YOU from the Federal Government. And because voters are stupid and elected politicians who swore to uphold the constitution and then took actions that broke that oath, we now have a Federal Government which thinks nothing of invading any communication between citizens. Why, they massacred 85 citizens at Waco, Texas, and nothing was done about it at all. They bulldozed the evidence the next day. There was no investigation, it was swept under the rug.

That is the government that Americans apparently want. Don't blame Bush, he's just the latest in a long string of politicians...

[Choppaface]

Originally posted by Backtothemac


To me, the only disgusting, outrage that is an atrocity, is the blindness, and lack of common sense that is being shown by some American Citizens over this.

common sense is extremely objective, especially in a society as diverse as america. I do not claim that americans do not have a general sense of what society accepts and does not; however, censuring those who do not, or perhaps cannot, conform or support your ideals does not justify them in any frame of reference but your own.


Originally posted by Backtothemac
Furthermore, no Alex, it wasn't a joke, and if they want to monitor my email, that is fine. I have nothing to hide. I don't care. For the greater good, they can do that and I don't care.

perhaps such monitoring of your correspondence would indeed be relatively insignificant; however, the government is not composed of machines but humans that are just as partial as you or I. I would argue that the issue is not necessarily a matter of rights, but a matter of the quality of judgement that a monitored individual will receive. Do these officials have extremely concise and relatively clear agendas, or are they supposed to build 'profiles' that could have questionable accuracy?


does anybody know exactly to what extent that the gov can monitor people? is this something that record companies could use to their benefit (replacing the RIAA's hacking bill)?

[sturm375]

Originally posted by Backtothemac
um, you know what. screw their rights as POW's. Remember these people plotted to murder the 3,200 people that died on 9/11. Remember that they want to kill my wife and kid because they are American. Remember that they want to slit your throat. Screw their friggin rights. As soon as they respect our basic right of the right to life, then I will respect their right to POW rights.

Look ladies and gentelmen, this is a classic start to a hate-monger. I don't care if you are extreme left, or right, if you have this askewed point of view, you are evil.

This is the real evidence there is evil in this world.

I really hate to pick on anyone, but this attitude disgusts me. I pray for you.

As soon as you, a proclaimed Christian I believe, get back on the path, I will listen to you again. There are 2 basic rules Chirst taught us:

1) Love God before all else
2) Do unto others, as you'd have done to you.

In other words, as a Christian, it starts with you, and me. They will never respect you, until you repect them. And no amount of force/torture will change that.

Put me on your ignore list if you want, I'll still be praying for you.

Peace:)

[wdlove]

I'm a Christian, pray for President Bush every day that during this time of war that he & his advisors will have the wisdom, courage, & knowledge to do what is right in your eyes. That God will defeat those enemies that we have in the government, media, this country, & around the World.

[jefhatfield]

Originally posted by Backtothemac


To me, the only disgusting, outrage that is an atrocity, is the blindness, and lack of common sense that is being shown by some American Citizens over this.

Look, I have worked in Government, I know the way that terrorist organizations operate, and if you open the laws to make it easier to get them, then they tend to slow their operations. By having a system that allows them to flurish under our own noses, is insane. This will not be big brother, and besides, who really cares what they do as long as you have nothing to hide right!

if the gop can make some moolah and get some pootang over this, why not...it's a free country???

morally and ethically, it is wrong but this is politics

look at the arkansas/southern people bill c and georgia people/southern people jimmy c brough along...and jfk putting his bro in as attorney general...and the man never even tried a case in his life

btw...i am a democrat but a realist
pork, like sex and taxes, goes both ways

[wdlove]

Sen. Shelby, R SC on "Meet the Press" when ask "Will terroism strike the US again?" Shelby said "Absolutely" "We need to be prepared"

Department of Homeland Security became law today as George Bush, 43 signed it into law at the White House. The largest re-organization in 50 years! It will be the 2nd largest department by size after the Department of Defense. Wiil transfer 177,000 employees from 22 agenices into one department with a budget of $35b/y. It will take ~1 year to complete.

Tom Ridge will be the 1st Secretary of Homeland Security.

I think that all people should pray, no matter your religious belief, that our leaders will be given wisdom.

[SPG]

Originally posted by wdlove

I think that all people should pray, no matter your religious belief, that our leaders will be given wisdom.
That's right, since they sure don't have much of any now!

Seriously though, the DHS and it's massive surveilance is unsettling not so much for what it will actually do to the average citizen, but what it threatens to do. Watch everything you do and then have the ability and power to round you up and imprison you indefinitely without telling anyone and not even tell you?
The side effect of this is that people will be less inclined to speak out against the policies of the government, one of the very principles that this democracy is founded on.

[jefhatfield]

Originally posted by wdlove
Sen. Shelby, R SC on "Meet the Press" when ask "Will terroism strike the US again?" Shelby said "Absolutely" "We need to be prepared"

Department of Homeland Security became law today as George Bush, 43 signed it into law at the White House. The largest re-organization in 50 years! It will be the 2nd largest department by size after the Department of Defense. Wiil transfer 177,000 employees from 22 agenices into one department with a budget of $35b/y. It will take ~1 year to complete.

Tom Ridge will be the 1st Secretary of Homeland Security.

I think that all people should pray, no matter your religious belief, that our leaders will be given wisdom.

as former dod person, as you probably know by now, i tell you to be careful with the word biggest...the nsa, much more secret than any organization, has seven times the budget of the cia and wields more power than dod

but back to topic, i see homeland security as an overall bipartisan effort which is much needed and will prevent further attacks which may have slipped by if we hadn't combined a lot of forces like the homeland security will do for us

[SPG]

Oh this is good...
http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/itgic/1097/ijge/gj-7.htm

For those who refuse to link, it's a story written in 1997 against eavesdropping on the internet by the government. The funny part is who wrote it...Ashcroft!