kujo Posted July 8, 2011 Posted July 8, 2011 [quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1310140442' post='2264472'] The problem with accepting violations of rights because your government is at war is that the government may then remain at war and continue thereby to violate your rights. [/quote] Right. And since we're "scaling down" the war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, shouldn't that necessitate the end of the need for the Patriot Act?
Lil Red Posted July 8, 2011 Posted July 8, 2011 [quote name='kujo' timestamp='1310143223' post='2264495'] Right. And since we're "scaling down" the war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, shouldn't that necessitate the end of the need for the Patriot Act? [/quote] umm, i thought we just declared war on Somalia?
kujo Posted July 8, 2011 Posted July 8, 2011 [quote name='Lil Red' timestamp='1310145982' post='2264512'] umm, i thought we just declared war on Somalia? [/quote] Libya, Somalia, Yemen, Pakistan...all the countries with brown people....
kamiller42 Posted July 8, 2011 Posted July 8, 2011 [quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1310140442' post='2264472'] The problem with accepting violations of rights because your government is at war is that the government may then remain at war and continue thereby to violate your rights. [/quote] This explains how pro-abortionists won their "rights" near the end of the Vietnam war. It was the wars keeping them down. ;-)
Nihil Obstat Posted July 8, 2011 Posted July 8, 2011 [quote name='kamiller42' timestamp='1310149269' post='2264546'] This explains how [s]pro-abortionists won their "rights"[/s] [i]unborn children lost all their rights[/i] near the end of the Vietnam war. It was the wars keeping them down. ;-) [/quote] Fixed for you.
MIKolbe Posted July 8, 2011 Posted July 8, 2011 [quote name='kujo' timestamp='1310146052' post='2264513'] Libya, Somalia, Yemen, Pakistan...all the countries with brown people.... [/quote] [img]http://images1.dailykos.com/i/user/2722/TMW2011-06-29colorKOS.png[/img]
Winchester Posted July 10, 2011 Posted July 10, 2011 [quote name='kujo' timestamp='1310143223' post='2264495'] Right. And since we're "scaling down" the war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, shouldn't that necessitate the end of the need for the Patriot Act? [/quote] We are still at war with terror, so obviously we need to keep giving up those rights. Duh, [i]subject[/i].
kujo Posted July 10, 2011 Posted July 10, 2011 [quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1310324681' post='2265379'] We are still at war with terror, so obviously we need to keep giving up those rights. Duh, [i]subject[/i]. [/quote] Ah. The war on political violence...right...forgot about that one.
infinitelord1 Posted July 11, 2011 Posted July 11, 2011 [quote name='Jesus_lol' timestamp='1309673564' post='2262526'] by no means the definitive info on it, but http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_PATRIOT_Act should be enough for people not familiar with the law and its history. what do you all guys think about this? it doesnt come up much here, but its been a big concern of mine since it was first enacted. First it was enacted by a Republican government and then shamefully prolonged by a Democrat government, and it seems what used to be a one sided support for the bill has become nearly unilateral, with only a few dissenting politicians. [/quote] I think its intent is to prevent terrorism, but I think it can also be used in bad ways. For example, possibly getting dirt on people in order to manipulate and black mail them.
kujo Posted July 11, 2011 Posted July 11, 2011 [quote name='infinitelord1' timestamp='1310343902' post='2265499'] I think its intent is to prevent terrorism, but I think it can also be used in bad ways. For example, possibly getting dirt on people in order to manipulate and black mail them. [/quote] You can't prevent terrorism. You can only demystify, thwart and prepare for it.
infinitelord1 Posted July 11, 2011 Posted July 11, 2011 [quote name='kujo' timestamp='1310344264' post='2265500'] You can't prevent terrorism. You can only demystify, thwart and prepare for it. [/quote] So yeah. Isn't that the purpose of the Patriot Act?
cmotherofpirl Posted July 11, 2011 Posted July 11, 2011 [quote name='kujo' timestamp='1310344264' post='2265500'] You can't prevent terrorism. You can only demystify, thwart and prepare for it. [/quote] Thwarting it is preventing it, but we will never get all of them before they get some of us.
Jesus_lol Posted July 11, 2011 Author Posted July 11, 2011 Its like the TSA. their purpose now is to "prevent terrorism" but all they really do is inconvenience normal people and violate their rights. it has been shown countless times that the security measures that they use are useless for actually preventing an attack, all they are really capable of doing is screwing regular citizens.
Nihil Obstat Posted July 11, 2011 Posted July 11, 2011 [quote name='Jesus_lol' timestamp='1310357866' post='2265619'] Its like the TSA. their purpose now is to "prevent terrorism" but all they really do is inconvenience normal people and violate their rights. it has been shown countless times that the security measures that they use are useless for actually preventing an attack, all they are really capable of doing is screwing regular citizens. [/quote] Incidentally, I read a really interesting paper that outlined why the author thinks that the TSA is the first stages of an American secret police.
Laudate_Dominum Posted July 11, 2011 Posted July 11, 2011 They shouldn't have called it The Patriot Act. So is one not patriotic if they oppose it? Something less charged would have been in better taste. Maybe something suggestive the other way such as The Senator Palpatine Act.
infinitelord1 Posted July 11, 2011 Posted July 11, 2011 [quote name='Jesus_lol' timestamp='1310357866' post='2265619'] Its like the TSA. their purpose now is to "prevent terrorism" but all they really do is inconvenience normal people and violate their rights. it has been shown countless times that the security measures that they use are useless for actually preventing an attack, all they are really capable of doing is screwing regular citizens. [/quote] Agreed. And they probably do too.
cmotherofpirl Posted July 11, 2011 Posted July 11, 2011 [quote name='Jesus_lol' timestamp='1310357866' post='2265619'] Its like the TSA. their purpose now is to "prevent terrorism" but all they really do is inconvenience normal people and violate their rights. it has been shown countless times that the security measures that they use are useless for actually preventing an attack, all they are really capable of doing is screwing regular citizens. [/quote] What is your proof that all their security measures are useless?
Jesus_lol Posted July 11, 2011 Author Posted July 11, 2011 (edited) [quote name='cmotherofpirl' timestamp='1310409289' post='2265819'] What is your proof that all their security measures are useless? [/quote] well, for one they have never prevented an attack. hundreds people have snuck dangerous things through there, on purpose or by accident. one guy even bringing a pack of 15inch long razor blades in the bottom of his bag. or more famously, some idiot managed to sneak a bomb in his underpants through the TSA. and its not like that was some new tactic, the earlier Shoebomber was basically the exact same. I remember something about them being tested, and out of 21 fake "bombs", all 21 made it through perfectly easily. they also manage to bunch people up in gigantic lineups, perfect for a bombing. you wouldnt even need to get through their security to set off a bomb, just wait in line and you are likely to take out at least a plane load of people. If a terrorist group wanted to kill hundreds of americans, they wouldnt even need to get on the plane to do it with the queing system in place. Israel's airport security is much less invasive and much more practical. so considering they have never prevented an attack, compared to the thousands and millions of people they have violated rights of, the toddlers put on the no-fly list, etc im gonna say they are pretty much useless. The only thing that has really improved airline security since 9/11 is the sealed bulkhead between the passenger compartment and the pilots cabin. and all of that is not including the option they now give you, either being molested or being zapped with the pornoscanner. Btw, that pornoscanner can be easily defeated and bypassed, and as an added bonus, it appears the operators of the scanner are starting to develop cancer at an increased rate. Edited July 11, 2011 by Jesus_lol
kujo Posted July 11, 2011 Posted July 11, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Jesus_lol' timestamp='1310423964' post='2265945'] so considering they have never prevented an attack, compared to the thousands and millions of people they have violated rights of, the toddlers put on the no-fly list, etc im gonna say they are pretty much useless. The only thing that has really improved airline security since 9/11 is the sealed bulkhead between the passenger compartment and the pilots cabin. [/quote] This is a tough case to make because there's no proof that they either prevent or [i]don't prevent[/i] attacks. We don't know because we [i]don't know[/i]. Edited July 11, 2011 by kujo
Jesus_lol Posted July 11, 2011 Author Posted July 11, 2011 [quote name='kujo' timestamp='1310424074' post='2265948'] This is a tough case to make because there's no proof that they either prevent or [i]don't prevent[/i] attacks. We don't know because we [i]don't know[/i]. [/quote] well, a bodyguard company that has never prevented an assassination attempt or kidnapping, in a decade in which several occurred, would not be getting hired by anybody. especially if those bodyguards were molesting the people they are supposed to protect.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now