145 replies to this topic

[DieChecker]

OverSword, on 10 December 2012 - 04:50 PM, said:

There was a time (that time  is still here for me) when American's would be upset that the police or the government were keeping an eye on them for no reason.  The fact that so many of you (pardon the expression) drones don't care really shows that the media has created through fear and propaganda, a new breed of americans that don't value thier privacy.  Amazing.

There was a time when the town sheriff could just shoot down anyone that caused trouble, and lynching was recognized as pubic execution. There was a time when people were upset that they had ANY taxes. There was a time when everyone was looking for communists everywhere.

The laws and legalities of yesteryear are not always applicable to the present.

Hell, let's go back to the days of whatever happens in the slums and dark alleys stays there. (Sarcasm)

[The New Richard Nixon]

The media has not created fear, its the people who created fear

[Babe Ruth]

Richard Nixon speaks from the grave.  Not much has changed in his way of 'thinking'.

[OverSword]

DieChecker, on 11 December 2012 - 06:45 AM, said:

There was a time when the town sheriff could just shoot down anyone that caused trouble, and lynching was recognized as pubic execution. There was a time when people were upset that they had ANY taxes. There was a time when everyone was looking for communists everywhere.

The laws and legalities of yesteryear are not always applicable to the present.

Hell, let's go back to the days of whatever happens in the slums and dark alleys stays there. (Sarcasm)

Legit point DieChecker, It's nice to know that the military keeping track of your movements won't bother you at all.  Obviously in todays world we need them to constantly protect us from ourselves.  After all we can make explosive devices out of any number of common household items so we should all be viewed as potential terrorist and dangerous and not to be trusted.  Good thinking.  What's the difference between looking for communists everywhere and looking for terrorists everywhere?  And it seems to me that the local constabulary still do shoot people down in the street ususally with little consequence to the department after an investigation.  90 year old ladies and 10 year old kids get tazed, skateboarding teens get thie asses kicked.  Yeah we've come a long way.  Wake up.

[OverSword]

The New Richard Nixon, on 11 December 2012 - 09:43 AM, said:

The media has not created fear, its the people who created fear

Pull your head out.

[The New Richard Nixon]

OverSword, on 11 December 2012 - 05:19 PM, said:

Pull your head out.

You pull your head out, you really think that will happen? if you don't like whats happening then do something about it. You really don't know anything do you?

[and then]

Taun, on 10 December 2012 - 04:11 PM, said:

I don't believe anyone claimed they were armed...

Personally... if this is for training i wish they would conduct that training over military air space... For saftey and command/control issues alone...

Imagine the legal issues and general uproar if one of these mechanical devices did what mechanical devices have a tendency to do and failed, crashing into a home or office park?

[OverSword]

Really?  The media doesn't create fear?  Do you realize that people are actually concerned that chemical weapons from Syria may be used in the USA?????  Laughable, but the seed of that fear was planted by the media.  And of course is being used as a lever to get people to think it will be fine and dandy to put US troops into Syria to 'save the world' yet one more time.  pull it dude, pull it.

[DieChecker]

OverSword, on 11 December 2012 - 05:07 PM, said:

Legit point DieChecker, It's nice to know that the military keeping track of your movements won't bother you at all.  Obviously in todays world we need them to constantly protect us from ourselves.  After all we can make explosive devices out of any number of common household items so we should all be viewed as potential terrorist and dangerous and not to be trusted.  Good thinking.  What's the difference between looking for communists everywhere and looking for terrorists everywhere?  And it seems to me that the local constabulary still do shoot people down in the street ususally with little consequence to the department after an investigation.  90 year old ladies and 10 year old kids get tazed, skateboarding teens get thie asses kicked.  Yeah we've come a long way.  Wake up.

So how would you propose watch only the actual "suspected terrorists" and not the averge public? By what method can we keep track of only those who are criminal or dangerous, and leave the privacy of everyone else alone. That technology simply does not exist. To find the terrorists, we have to violate some of the publics privacy. Myself, I would rather a drone flys over my house, or all my email goes through a filter somewhere, then face one successfull terrorist attack after another on my homeland. Just last year there was the Christmas Tree Bomber here in Portland who was desprate for some why to blow up hundreds of people. Should we simply wait till these people are successful, then track them down and catch them?

You think more Timothy McVeigh's or Unibombers are better then an occational drone flying overhead??

[DieChecker]

and then, on 11 December 2012 - 06:00 PM, said:

Imagine the legal issues and general uproar if one of these mechanical devices did what mechanical devices have a tendency to do and failed, crashing into a home or office park?

Yes, like all the thousands of commuter and privately owned small airplanes that are constantly falling onto cities everywhere. (Sarcasm... again)

[and then]

DieChecker, on 11 December 2012 - 08:18 PM, said:

Yes, like all the thousands of commuter and privately owned small airplanes that are constantly falling onto cities everywhere. (Sarcasm... again)

Obviously it isn't something that would be common.  But people already hate the idea of these things snooping so they'd jump all over any incident.  And as to your prior point about the occasional drone vs a terror attack I would take the terror attack and I'll tell you why.  The FBI would uncover who did it in very short order and then the military could deal with them.  Eventually, when the terror masters decide to go all in, they will strike here much more often no matter what we do or how many freedoms we surrender.  The only reason air travel hasn't been crippled already is primarily because they haven't yet chosen to attack that infrastructure.  It's impossible to screen, check or otherwise "sniff" every bag that goes in the hold of an aircraft.  The only real safety measure is that every bag has to have a traveler associated with it on board the aircraft.  All I'm saying is that governments by their nature tend toward abuse of power and our's already has way too much.

[OverSword]

DieChecker, on 11 December 2012 - 08:16 PM, said:

So how would you propose watch only the actual "suspected terrorists" and not the averge public? By what method can we keep track of only those who are criminal or dangerous, and leave the privacy of everyone else alone. That technology simply does not exist. To find the terrorists, we have to violate some of the publics privacy. Myself, I would rather a drone flys over my house, or all my email goes through a filter somewhere, then face one successfull terrorist attack after another on my homeland. Just last year there was the Christmas Tree Bomber here in Portland who was desprate for some why to blow up hundreds of people. Should we simply wait till these people are successful, then track them down and catch them?

You think more Timothy McVeigh's or Unibombers are better then an occational drone flying overhead??

That whole christmas tree bomber fiasco was the FBI encouraging a nutjob so bad example.  My personal feeling is that I'm not afraid of terrorists, I'm more afraid of an overpowerful government grabbing ever more power all in the name of making me safer.  You are a victim of control through fear and don't even know it.

edited to add I don't believe terrorism can be effectively fought.  Much like the war on drugs, the freedoms surrended outwiegh the terrorists stopped by far.  Just how many terror attacks are stopped each year?  Do you think they don't report them?  They do.  None.  Except of course the (guffaw) chrstmas tree bomber which they created or the underwear bomber which they also, evidence would indicate, were behind.(no pun intended)  The NYPD recently confirmed that thier racial profiling and spying on of muslims, at the cost of millions of tax-payer dollars, resulted in not one terrorist attack being foiled.

Wake up people.  You're already plenty safe.  The biggest threat to you rights is your own government.

Edited by OverSword, 11 December 2012 - 08:55 PM.

[Babe Ruth]

DieChecker, on 11 December 2012 - 08:16 PM, said:

So how would you propose watch only the actual "suspected terrorists" and not the averge public? By what method can we keep track of only those who are criminal or dangerous, and leave the privacy of everyone else alone. That technology simply does not exist. To find the terrorists, we have to violate some of the publics privacy. Myself, I would rather a drone flys over my house, or all my email goes through a filter somewhere, then face one successfull terrorist attack after another on my homeland. Just last year there was the Christmas Tree Bomber here in Portland who was desprate for some why to blow up hundreds of people. Should we simply wait till these people are successful, then track them down and catch them?

You think more Timothy McVeigh's or Unibombers are better then an occational drone flying overhead??

The fears you embrace regarding "terrorists" reminds me very much of H.L. Mencken's observations last century: "The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."

You have clearly bought into the fraud that is the Global War On Terror, a hobgoblin in whose cause our rights have been taken by legislation such as the Unpatriot Act and the NDAA.  Pity.

[DieChecker]

and then, on 11 December 2012 - 08:30 PM, said:

And as to your prior point about the occasional drone vs a terror attack I would take the terror attack and I'll tell you why.  The FBI would uncover who did it in very short order and then the military could deal with them.  Eventually, when the terror masters decide to go all in, they will strike here much more often no matter what we do or how many freedoms we surrender.  

So you would rather have 3% greater (or whatever percentage), and have the occational couple thousand Americans get snuffed out by terrorist attacks?

Quote

All I'm saying is that governments by their nature tend toward abuse of power and our's already has way too much.

While that might be true, such attitudes often run into paranoia, and unsubstatiated claims of government abuse of civilians. Like the whole FEMA camp conspiricy theory. And the claims that George Bush, or Obama, or whoever are going to set themselves up as dictator.

I'd rather catch the terrorists ahead of time then have even one person die from a car bomb, or IED, on American soil.

[DieChecker]

Babe Ruth, on 11 December 2012 - 08:54 PM, said:

The fears you embrace regarding "terrorists" reminds me very much of H.L. Mencken's observations last century: "The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."

You have clearly bought into the fraud that is the Global War On Terror, a hobgoblin in whose cause our rights have been taken by legislation such as the Unpatriot Act and the NDAA.  Pity.

Except that the FBI, NSA and CSI, along with Homeland Security (and the TSA) have uncovered and prevented dozens, maybe hundreds of planned terrorist actions. When these things are really happening it is not the promotion of Fear for fear itself, it is actually stopping bad guys.

If your city asks for more police officers are they really just trying to build an army to take over the civlians or are they trying to protect the populace better? Obviously with an army of cops the police would have a better chance of establishing martial law, but what the hell would be the motivation?

The hobgoblin is that civilian (police) operated drones are an actual threat to anyone.

I'm not buying to any conspiricy theory of Fraud or Fear. I'm simply thinking for myself, and using common sense and logic. Which both tell me that the Ultra-Privacy people are trying to say they are protecting something that does not exist. What real privacy do you have??