dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
7
share rss forum feed


NOCTech75
Premium
join:2009-06-29
Marietta, GA

1 recommendation

reply to Rob

Re: Freedom vs. Security

And what terrorism attacks are we stopping? We sure as hell didn't stop the one in Libya.



FFH
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5

said by NOCTech75:

And what terrorism attacks are we stopping? We sure as hell didn't stop the one in Libya.

That had nothing to do with getting or having the needed info. That was just the usual government political operatives failing to act on info for political reasons.
--
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasury.


NOCTech75
Premium
join:2009-06-29
Marietta, GA
Reviews:
·Comcast

1 recommendation

said by FFH:

said by NOCTech75:

And what terrorism attacks are we stopping? We sure as hell didn't stop the one in Libya.

That had nothing to do with getting or having the needed info. That was just the usual government political operatives failing to act on info for political reasons.

Right, which means they need none of this information since they won't act based on the political wind blowing.


Dominokat
"Hi"
Premium
join:2002-08-06
Boothbay, ME
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable

1 recommendation

reply to NOCTech75

They are using "terrorism" as a cover up for the excuse to take away our freedoms and spy on us. Heaven forbid we use the wrong combination of words and then BANG! Have the NSA or Secret Service on your door.

Welcome to America, land of the (kind of) free.

I never felt this way before, but the more I keep reading about what is going on with our online information being more and more hand delivered to the NSA, etc... I can't help but feel this way.

We ARE free (for now) as long as we don't post anything on the internet, email, Facebook, Twitter..... all the stuff people are now using.



pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
reply to FFH

said by FFH:

That had nothing to do with getting or having the needed info. That was just the usual government political operatives failing to act on info for political reasons.

If government cannot even be bothered to do its expected job correctly with the powers that it has then it should absolutely not be entrusted with expanded powers.

The government can do what anyone else must if they wish to read someone's private correspondence, go to a judge and make the case for needing to do so.
--
USA 2012 - the mooches won.


pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
reply to Dominokat

said by Dominokat:

They are using "terrorism" as a cover up for the excuse to take away our freedoms and spy on us. Heaven forbid we use the wrong combination of words and then BANG! Have the NSA or Secret Service on your door.

Exactly.

There will be absolutely no good that comes out of this bill.

How many terrorists you think will use email in the open as a means of communications once this gets in? Zero. There are plenty of far more secure ways to communicate.

Like with nearly every other tactic used in homefront on the War on Terror, only the innocent people are the ones inconvenienced by these things.
--
USA 2012 - the mooches won.

Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:1
reply to pnh102

The government would have to actually present a case then. I get the feeling that letter agencies like to work behind closed doors with maximum privacy and freedom erosion in place.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports


osravens

join:2011-01-26
Cumberland, MD
reply to pnh102

While I agree, your Republicans started this mess.

The only way you start fixing the problem is voting against both of the entrenched parties.



pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

said by osravens:

While I agree, your Republicans started this mess.

If you are talking about the USA PATRIOT Act, then please consider that the core of it was proposed by Joe Biden after the OKC Bombing in 1995.

»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_···security

I agree that neither party is a saint on personal freedom issues, but to blame one and ignore the other is wrong to do.
--
USA 2012 - the mooches won.

osravens

join:2011-01-26
Cumberland, MD

And the Patriot Act received 1 vote against it in the Senate (from Russ Feingold of Wisconsin). Vote them all out.

I'm saying it's inconsistent to support personal freedom and vote for either of them. You had a line about Mitt Romney in your signature. I'm proud to say I voted for neither of the major candidates, and this was a major reason.



NOCTech75
Premium
join:2009-06-29
Marietta, GA
Reviews:
·Comcast

1 recommendation

reply to osravens

said by osravens:

While I agree, your Republicans started this mess.

And your Democrats have done nothing to change this mess and in fact have made it increase in scope just as much.


pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
reply to osravens

said by osravens:

I'm saying it's inconsistent to support personal freedom and vote for either of them. You had a line about Mitt Romney in your signature. I'm proud to say I voted for neither of the major candidates, and this was a major reason.

The reason of course was because voting for an idealistic third party candidate who agrees 100% with my views but who has absolutely no chance of winning has the same net effect as voting for the candidate with whom I disagree with on 99.9999999% of the issues.

If you find my argument specious, then please ask all the people who voted for Ross Perot in 1992 and 1996 how they felt about Bill Clinton winning in those elections. Or look at Florida in 2000. 98k people in that election voted for Ralph Nader. How do you think they felt about Bush winning that state and the Presidency by 537 votes? Even if you blame that on fraud, had all (or even half of) 98k of those people voted for Al Gore, he would have won that state by a comfortable margin.

I'm not going to blame people who voted for third party candidates for Romney losing (3 million or so fewer GOP voters showed up in 2012 than in 2008). But I am simply presenting to you the mathematical reasoning behind my consistently voting the way I do. Perhaps we should change things to allow for instant run-off voting and requiring that the winner of such a contest receive a majority of the votes. But until that happens, I have to accept voting for third party candidates for what it is, a vote for the guy i disagree with the most.
--
USA 2012 - the mooches won.


pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
reply to NOCTech75

said by NOCTech75:

said by osravens:

While I agree, your Republicans started this mess.

And your Democrats have done nothing to change this mess and in fact have made it increase in scope just as much.

And not only that... this is another Democrat proposing this.

Where's the freedom?
--
USA 2012 - the mooches won.


fatness
subtle
Premium,ex-mod 01-13
join:2000-11-17
fishing
kudos:14

1 recommendation

reply to pnh102

said by pnh102:

If government cannot even be bothered to do its expected job correctly with the powers that it has then it should absolutely not be entrusted with expanded powers.

The government can do what anyone else must if they wish to read someone's private correspondence, go to a judge and make the case for needing to do so.

I can't figure out why, for the last 10 years, the federal government has decided that judges, warrants, due process, etc. are an enemy to be circumvented. And I can't figure out why people support it, or put up with it without whimper.

If some foreign leaders began making speeches in the US saying they rejected the US system of justice as an inconvenient hindrance to the exercise of benevolent government power, there would be howls all over the country about it. If our own government does it though, well, it must be OK because terrorism, you know, and why bother, you know, and piracy and the children and oh yeah, terrorism.

You can't uphold the rule of law and a way of life by taking it apart, but that's what's happening. Through 2 administrations now, and the next one will be doing it too.


Hagar

join:2004-10-31
Sunnyvale, CA
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·T-Mobile US
reply to pnh102

pnh102 do you live in one of the swing states?

Your signature says Maryland which is a solid blue state. I think your vote did not matter, Obama was going to win the state no matter what. You could safely vote for the candidate you agree most with.

I am in California also a solid blue state, I did safely vote for the 3rd party candidate I agreed most with. I would not have done so if I lived in Florida, to close to call.

A vote for a candidate is never wasted in my book, a vote against a candidate is only valid if there is a close election otherwise it is just a empty gesture (assumption winner get all electoral votes).

/edit added assumption



meeeeeeeeee

join:2003-07-13
Newburgh, NY
reply to Dominokat

said by Dominokat:

Welcome to America, land of the (kind of) free.

It's Amerika. AmeriCa hasn't existed for several decades. You live in a country whose government is run by self serving bureaucrats whose only objective is to enrich themselves and protect all the schemes they've developed for parting the rest of us from our money. I guess most sheeple still don't get it. The "Terrorists" they are worried about are YOU.
--
Isn't it sad that those that raise their right hand and swear "to support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America" are usually the ones most likely to trash it.