Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

Kratom Eye
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Myyco.com Isolated Cubensis Liquid Culture For Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 |  [ show all ]
security vs. liberty
    #2319230 -

what is security if not security in your liberties?

it is impossible to exchange liberty for security.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: ]
    #2319686 -

it is impossible to exchange liberty for security

sorry to break it to you but this is precisely what our government has done.
and the sad thing is, we're not even that secure
so I would say it was a raw deal. we all lose

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: infidelGOD]
    #2320509 -

:thumbup:


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: ]
    #2320758 -

for some, security means something completely
different.

too many people that I talk to have absolutly no
worries that the judiciary is being weakened, checks
and balances thrown out the window and personal
privacy and security lost.

all they care about is metal detectors at the airports
and bulletproof cabin doors.

this is what's wrong with america, nobody is a fucking
american anymore. nobody seems to care to stand
up for the principles and ideals that this nation was
founded on.

they just want to go to walmart and not have to worry
about anthrax in the air vents.


--------------------
All I know is The Growery is a place where losers who get banned here go.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: afoaf]
    #2320878 -

afoaf writes:

this is what's wrong with america, nobody is a fucking
american anymore. nobody seems to care to stand
up for the principles and ideals that this nation was
founded on.

That's twice in the last minute I've read a post of yours decrying the lack of understanding by modern day Americans of the principles and ideals on which America the nation was founded over two centuries ago.

Which of those principles and ideals (in your opinion) have modern day Americans renounced or ignored or never learned or what have you?

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: Phred]
    #2320934 -

the premise of this nation was one of plurality and
equality. personal responsibility and accountability,
but also liberty.

limited government governing only with the consent
of the governed.

more and more today I see complete disregard for
Jefferson's intended "wall of separation between
church and state" with more and more overt attempts
by christian fundamentalists to turn this country into
the christian flagship nation.

further, the overwhelming obesity of our government
with it's ghastly tax system, social programs, overreaching
regulatory bodies and overall wastefullness is completely
out of control and out of the hands of the citizens whom
granted this body the privilege to exist in the first place.

this is our government, but we no longer control the
beast, the beast controls us now and that doesn't seem
to upset anybody.

I guess that's what bothers me most...the complacency.

the complacent consumerism.

it's not informed debate on the matters at hand, but
instead voting along party lines based on image and
media savvy.

it used to be that only landowners could vote.

now, any man or woman of any race or creed has that
right, but to me it still seems like the landowners are
the ones with a real voice.

The AOL/TimeWarners, Clear Channels, Halliburtons,
Enrons and Carlysle Groups...

all that money will continue to slow justice, taint politics
and blur our view.

how many generations pass before the idea that was
America is lost completely and we become something
altogether different?


--------------------
All I know is The Growery is a place where losers who get banned here go.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: infidelGOD]
    #2321149 -

Quote:
sorry to break it to you but this is precisely what our government has done.
and the sad thing is, we're not even that secure
so I would say it was a raw deal. we all lose



I think what mushmaster is saying is that, regardless of whether or not the government has made us secure in the sense they propose, they've made us less secure in terms of our own freedom.

It's kind of a rock and a hard place. The measures that really would protect us from these kinds of threats--e.g. a single person with explosives strapped to their chest, or a letter laced with ricin--could very easily also infringe on certain freedoms we take seriously. You might be right--we all lose. It's lame. I don't like the Patriot Act either, but what do we do?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: hongomon]
    #2321359 -

it's not surprising at all that the government would use fear of terrorism as an excuse to grab more power - that's to be expected. what's really upsetting to me is the lack of any kind of response from the general public. I would have thought there would be massive protests and outrage (against the patriot act for example), but people are willingly giving up their liberties for a little more security. I almost feel like we're the only ones who really care. most of the populace has been thoroughly sedated by mass media and popular consumer culture. like afoaf said complacency is the problem. that and mass ignorance. the situation is hopeless.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: hongomon]
    #2321365 -

excluding the strong possibility that 9/11 was a deliberate product of the bush junta...the fact remains that it was the US govt..and not al-Q..that imposed the "choice" of freedom vs. safety on the both the american ppl and the rest of the world...in doing so..they effectively declared the end of both freedom and safety for all persons outside their circles..making us all fair game to be exploited...the US became an empire in the moment that "choice" was pronounced...


--------------------


"anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: hongomon]
    #2321431 -

hongomon writes:

The measures that really would protect us from these kinds of threats--e.g. a single person with explosives strapped to their chest, or a letter laced with ricin--could very easily also infringe on certain freedoms we take seriously.

Not just could -- would. There is no way to prevent that kind of thing from occurring without a massive police state, and even then there is no way to stop all of it.

Unfortunately, the only way to prevent the would-be bomber or anthrax letter sender is to capture or kill them before they carry out their plan. Since this is patently impossible (some will always evade capture long enough to carry through) we must all come to the realization that there will always be terrorists -- just as there will always be burglars and rapists and murderers.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: infidelGOD]
    #2321463 -

infidelGod writes:

it's not surprising at all that the government would use fear of terrorism as an excuse to grab more power - that's to be expected.

And what new power over you has the US government seized? What can you not do in the US today that you could do pre September 11? Which actions of yours which you used to exercise freely three years ago do you miss the most?

Next --

Why are those in government eager to strip these (as yet unspecified) freedoms you used to have from you? What personal benefit do they receive from so doing? Do they gain financially or is it a mere psychological thing?

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: Phred]
    #2321485 -

there will only always be terrorists if the conditions
exist that drive people to commit these acts.


--------------------
All I know is The Growery is a place where losers who get banned here go.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: Annapurna1]
    #2321488 -

Annapurna1 writes:

the fact remains that it was the US govt..and not al-Q..that imposed the "choice" of freedom vs. safety on the both the american ppl and the rest of the world...

So your preferred response to the attacks of September 11 would have been....

...what?

Do nothing at all?

Or immediately denounce Saudi Arabia, cancel all their oil contracts, cease all aid to Egypt, Israel, Russia and every other country where the Islamists of that country feel they have grievances with the current rulers of that country?

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: afoaf]
    #2321506 -

afoaf writes:

there will only always be terrorists if the conditions
exist that drive people to commit these acts.

Nonsense.

That's like saying there will only be murderers and rapists as long as conditions exist driving them to murder and rape.

The fact of the matter is that there is a certain irreducible percentage of people in this world who get off on violence. For those people, any "cause" will do.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: Phred]
    #2321550 -

So your preferred response to the attacks of September 11 would have been....

Quote:
The terrorist attack on the United States could have been treated as a crime against humanity rather than an act of war. Treating it as a crime would have been more appropriate. Crimes require police work, not military action. Protection against terrorism requires precautionary measures, awareness, and intelligence gathering?all of which ultimately depend on the support of the populations among which the terrorists operate. Imagine for a moment that September 11 had been treated as a crime. We would not have invaded Iraq, and we would not have our military struggling to perform police work and getting shot at.

Declaring war on terrorism better suited the purposes of the Bush Administration, because it invoked military might; but this is the wrong way to deal with the problem. Military action requires an identifiable target, preferably a state. As a result the war on terrorism has been directed primarily against states harboring terrorists. Yet terrorists are by definition non-state actors, even if they are often sponsored by states. [george soros]



--------------------


"anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: afoaf]
    #2321574 -

afoaf writes:

more and more today I see complete disregard for
Jefferson's intended "wall of separation between
church and state" with more and more overt attempts
by christian fundamentalists to turn this country into
the christian flagship nation.

We can run around the mulberry bush all day about Jefferson's intentions, but the fact of the matter remains that there is no such phrase as "separation of church and state" in the Constitution or Bill of Rights.

And I don't know what news you watch, but all I read these days is the reverse. Judges forced to remove monuments with the Ten Commandmants inscribed on it, the whole "Pledge of Allegiance" business, gay marriages, the overt persecution of Christian college groups and more.

Just so you understand my perspective, I am as big an atheist as you will ever find, and have been since my early teens. But my personal lack of religious beliefs doesn't blind me to the constant persecution of Christians in the US these days. It's the current fashion.

As for "attempts" by Christian fundamentalists to spread their view of how people should behave -- news flash for ya -- the US was founded on freedom of speech. Those fundamentalists have the right to try to persuade others their way is best.

now, any man or woman of any race or creed has that
right, but to me it still seems like the landowners are
the ones with a real voice.

I must admit I still get confused when I see this claim, and it's one that appears over and over and over again in this forum. I don't understand how this works. I mean, the CEO of Time Warner gets one vote. So does Bill Gates. So does Warren Buffett.

How is it that Bill Gates's vote for candidate A outweighs afoaf's vote for candidate B? Besides, if the economy is as shot to pieces as Bush's opponents say it is, the millions of votes from people who are out of work or living in poverty and all that will trump the thousands of votes of the uber-rich. There's only 1 per cent of the US population with incomes over 300k per year after all.

But I agree with most of your other points in your post. The best thing government can do for us is to get out of our way.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: Annapurna1]
    #2321605 -

Annapurna1 replies with a cut and paste blurb of stunning idiocy from Soros.

You are saying the attack on September 11 should have been treated as a police matter?

Let me understand this -- you think the correct course of action would have been for the US Justice Department to deliver a subpoena to the Taliban requesting that armed US DOJ personnel be allowed to enter Afghanistan and search for bin Laden and other Al Qaeda operatives in order to capture him and extradite him back to the US for trial?

News flash, Anna -- to all intents and purposes that is exactly what took place. The Taliban claimed they didn't know where he was and even if they did it was not their place to capture him and hand him over, but no so sorry not a single armed American could set foot on Afghan soil to capture him either or Afghanistan would declare war on the US.

Soros may be a brilliant arbitrageur, but his grasp of reality is tenuous at best.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: Phred]
    #2321699 -

Annapurna1 replies with a cut and paste blurb of stunning idiocy from Soros.

i find it quite amusing..how right-wingers consistently equate bank accounts with IQs..and then dismiss it as "stunning idiocy" when it doesnt jive with the neocon feces-turds...

Quote:
You are saying the attack on September 11 should have been treated as a police matter?

Let me understand this -- you think the correct course of action would have been for the US Justice Department to deliver a subpoena to the Taliban requesting that armed US DOJ personnel be allowed to enter Afghanistan and search for bin Laden and other Al Qaeda operatives in order to capture him and extradite him back to the US for trial?



or better yet..turn it over to the NYPD..and i'll bet they would have found that no trip to afghanistan was necessary to catch the culprits...and for that matter..so would any jerkwater local PD...

in any case..closed society is far more dangerous than terrorism...


--------------------


"anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: Phred]
    #2321818 -

Quote:
Which of those principles and ideals (in your opinion) have modern day Americans renounced or ignored or never learned or what have you?




Most Americans don't care about the broader concept of freedom. They only care about their own freedom, not other people's freedom.

Today in America, freedom is synonymous with selfishness.


--------------------
https://www.gofundme.com/f/support-for-renee-goods-wife-and-son

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: security vs. liberty [Re: Phred]
    #2321886 -

one vote, sure.

but unlike Ken Lay, I don't get private
sit downs with the V.P. and his energy
commission.

Further, Bill Gates and his bottomless
pit of cash can greatly affect the strength
of his chosen candidate's campaign through
cash donations whereas my paypal'd $50
to my candidate probably won't.

And what you see as the persecution of christians
I see as the proper defeat of christian activism
in both the private and public sector.

The monument was removed because an activist
judge overstepped his bounds.

The battle over gay marriage is not an attack on
christians, it is a fight for equal protection under
the law for same sex couples who seek an equally
fruitful legal union. A concept fought vehemently
by our own american religious fundamentalists.

'Under God' was added to the pledge of allegiance
during the height of McCarthyism...personally, like
with all else, I prefer to keep God out of it.

In short, I disagree with you on both points.


--------------------
All I know is The Growery is a place where losers who get banned here go.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 |  [ show all ]

Shop: Myyco.com Isolated Cubensis Liquid Culture For Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Why we may never regain the liberties that we've lost RadioActiveSlug 824 7 04/11/03 10:11 AM
by PsiloKitten
* Positive & Negative Liberties in Three Dimensions lonestar2004 1,186 5 06/20/05 11:32 PM
by Phred
* The Founding Fathers and Christianity TheOneYouKnow 1,156 9 03/15/04 01:09 PM
by afoaf
* Confidential Passenger Data Used for Air Security Project daussaulit 778 1 01/21/04 08:50 PM
by Annapurna1
* Hitler V Saddam
( 1 2 all )		 germin8tionn8ion 4,490 28 07/03/04 11:20 AM
by Ed1
* Cato Policy Analysis - Bush's National Security Strategy afoaf 694 5 11/05/03 05:02 PM
by Rono
* The September 11 X-Files wingnutx 1,591 9 08/17/03 03:34 AM
by BleaK
* Christians And Conservatives Can Go Back To Sleep Now, Because The Boogey Man Is Gone
( 1 2 all )		 ekomstop 2,064 22 11/09/04 08:26 PM
by Great_Satan

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
1,813 topic views. 1 members, 19 guests and 7 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.03 seconds spending 0.006 seconds on 16 queries.