Restoring Liberty

[DaGip]

Congress did the American people a great service. We should not depend on sacrificing our liberties for security. Let it be known that any such attack on the United States by terrorists is not the fault of Congress but lies soully at the foot of the terrorists. Bush is offering a I-told-you-so in the event America were to be attacked again. All this added infringement on privacy has done nothing to stop crazy people from going into classrooms and killing a bunch of students and teachers? In like manner, it would have little affect on a crazy Muslim sympathizer from launching some type of terrorist campaign inside American borders. The next thing Bush would have all Americans do is to have all our brains networked into the Global Mother Computer, that way they can just read our minds and every thought. Congress did the right thing here.

http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/ ... 6&src=news

[Frigidus]

Congress did the American people a great service. We should not depend on sacrificing our liberties for security. Let it be known that any such attack on the United States by terrorists is not the fault of Congress but lies soully at the foot of the terrorists. Bush is offering a I-told-you-so in the event America were to be attacked again. All this added infringement on privacy has done nothing to stop crazy people from going into classrooms and killing a bunch of students and teachers? In like manner, it would have little affect on a crazy Muslim sympathizer from launching some type of terrorist campaign inside American borders. The next thing Bush would have all Americans do is to have all our brains networked into the Global Mother Computer, that way they can just read our minds and every thought. Congress did the right thing here.

http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/ ... 6&src=news

The thing is that if anyone is blocking liberty it's Nancy Pelosi. She blocked the bill in the house because it was likely going to pass (despite being primarily Democratic, as is the Senate). Basically she, one person, overrode both the House and the Senate on a whim. The fact that that sort of move can be made horrifies me. No matter what the bill, if the majority feels it should be passed it should. No single person should be able to change that (at least an overwhelming majority can override the presidents veto).

[Colossus]

I think the balance between liberty and security is a very difficult one to manage. It is certainly not one or the other. I also think it is very funny that people say that the laws enacted in the US to broaden the ability of the security agencies to carry out surveillance have done no good. How many terrorist cells have been caught by US and UK authorities while planning potentially deadly attacks during the past few years? How many such attacks have been successfully carried out? I suspect that the efficacy of such laws that you argue violate our liberty and yet do no good will be truly shown once those laws no longer exist. We'll see if the expiration of this law produces greater opportunity for terrorists to do their thing. I sure hope it doesn't, but I won't be terribly surprised if it does.

[Colossus]

The thing is that if anyone is blocking liberty it's Nancy Pelosi. She blocked the bill in the house because it was likely going to pass (despite being primarily Democratic, as is the Senate). Basically she, one person, overrode both the House and the Senate on a whim. The fact that that sort of move can be made horrifies me. No matter what the bill, if the majority feels it should be passed it should. No single person should be able to change that (at least an overwhelming majority can override the presidents veto).

And she did it by pushing investigation of the president's executive authority over federal prosecutors. I watched part of yesterday's congressional session, and the filibustering was shameful.

[got tonkaed]

The thing is that if anyone is blocking liberty it's Nancy Pelosi. She blocked the bill in the house because it was likely going to pass (despite being primarily Democratic, as is the Senate). Basically she, one person, overrode both the House and the Senate on a whim. The fact that that sort of move can be made horrifies me. No matter what the bill, if the majority feels it should be passed it should. No single person should be able to change that (at least an overwhelming majority can override the presidents veto).

And she did it by pushing investigation of the president's executive authority over federal prosecutors. I watched part of yesterday's congressional session, and the filibustering was shameful.

eh in some respects though, as anyone with a conservative slant, pelosi might be doing you a bit of a good in order to start to limit the executive power of likely the most powerful president in us history in that regard either clinton or obama.

[Colossus]

yeah, I wasn't arguing that the general point around which the filibuster focused was an invalid one, so much as that it was one of the most contentious points our Congress is currently dealing with...i.e. not just a filibuster, but an 'eff you' to boot.

[got tonkaed]

yeah, I wasn't arguing that the general point around which the filibuster focused was an invalid one, so much as that it was one of the most contentious points our Congress is currently dealing with...i.e. not just a filibuster, but an 'eff you' to boot.

understandable. thats the neat thing about politics though. For everything thing that effs someone over theres a sneaky added bonus. For everything that seems like outwardly a good move, theres a sneaky eff you hidden behind it.

[DaGip]

The government has been wire tapping for a long time, it is only now that they have actually put it on paper and tried to get it passed. The Americans are being asked to reconsider their definition and stance on what is considered privacy. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wire ... veillance/
In the mean time, they keep illegally gathering information. AT&T is facing a number of legality issues over this, since they are the ones helping the government weed through masses of telephone records.

Anonymity is not the same as privacy? This is confusing to me? I own 9-11 conspiracy literature, does this make me a threat to the state? I don't particularly buy the whole government explanation of events, but I am yet to be convinced that they themselves perpetrated the whole ordeal.

And what of marijuana smokers? Are they aiding terrorists, and therefore should be considered terrorists? I always remember that Superbowl commercial after 9-11. They show Marijuana smokers saying that they helped terrorists get guns and bombs and stuff...LOL! I am still rolling on the floor over that little stint the government was trying to pull. I could not find the actual ad, I found a similar one that does not particularly focus on Marijuana, but I found a newspaper article about the ad I was talking about which specifically was targeting Marijuana smokers in general.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVQnbNspHsk

http://media.www.michigandaily.com/medi ... 4433.shtml

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43PEvMttwuA&NR=1