This is still America right?

PHeller wrote: *stuff about backwoods people...or something*...I cant be sure, it doesnt make sense

whats youre agenda? Are you assuming those viewing the FBIs actions as illegal are unedjookatid eediots? I cant even tell what it is youre trying to say really...

I grew up in the burbs, with 2 mosques within walking distance of my house, in the 80s. I went to gradeschool with DOZENS of middle eastern people. I was in college when 9/11 happened...I saw, first hand, the pure terror that came across the faces of several middle eastern college students when they realized they were outnumbered about 50 or 60 to 1 in the hall we were watching the TV in, as the news reported it was a terrorist act carried out by middle eastern extremists. I never felt so terrible in all my life...for those 3 or 4 kids, or for my country. They were afraid of me, and my fellow Americans, for the perceived hate they assumed was in us. They assumed we would "get them" in retaliation.

Ive never hated on a race, or group, or belief structure, based on that character alone. I can hate a specific person all day long if I feel their personal actions deserve it. Dont paint me into some corner you think I belong in, because youve got some point youre trying to justify.

And dont try and undermine what we are proposing as unconstitutional because you think somehow what we are saying is unworthy or biased because we're some kind of hick or something. I cant even figure out what it is youre arguing for/against here anyway.

so again, I ask, whats your agenda Pheller?

This is just the tip of the iceberg folks. There are people I have talked to that are convinced there is a war coming and it would be against our own government. Some of these folks are the usual nutters and some are very level headed respectable folks.

How many here knew they are starting to use Predator drones in use air space and are even sending them to police across the country. The rumor mill on government ammo orders for non military departments recently has been over one BILLION rounds of ammunition. There are constant attempt to unarm the citizens of this country and if Obama is re elected I guarantee he will sign that UN small arms treaty allowing them to seize firearms and use UN troops to help in the effort.

Things have been getting bad for a long time. However the last few years it is like they are finally putting all their ducks in a row and stripping every last freedom we have. How many of you look for things like cameras when you go out to see how many are everywhere these days? How many read the EU agreements on services before hitting accept? How many realize that many of those services provide information directly to government agencies. It is getting to the point as shown by this article that we can be detained for our thoughts and what we say. It use to be you had to commit a crime before they could arrest you. Now we have the thought police coming in and we will be arrested because of the suspicion of what we might do. People are being encouraged to notify authorities about possible suspicious behavior of their neighbors and family members. Store owners are being sent pamphlets telling them what to watch out for and who to report.

Welcome to 1984 enjoy your stay.

Otto Maddox wrote:

914Driver wrote: Maybe not ...... snip

And that was just some nonpartisan thoughts off the top of his head, not cut and pasted right wing talking points.

Might be right wing talking points, but the point is still good and valid. Same as it was (or should have been) for Bush using more Executive Orders than all of the previous presidents combined (going back 5 years now to hearing this in a class... I could be mistaken). Bush (and Cheney) set the precedent that this was okay; it looks like Obama has taken it to a (slightly or hugely?) elevated level. Thankfully, they do not appear to have continued with the precedent of the VP having as much power as Cheney took.

I think Rebel's point is that we have the right to say abolutely batE36 M3 crazy tin foil hat stuff without getting arrested.

I don't have an agenda.

My main goal is to illustrate that "security" goes both ways, and that there is a BIG difference between sharing your opinion in a sensible, intellectual way (as most do on this forum) and just spouting off all kinds of threats towards society.

For all we know, this dude never threatened anyone, never mentioned violence, and was just a bit nutty, or there is a lot we don't know.

914Driver wrote: Maybe not ...... There have been over 900 Executive Orders put forth from Obama...

Where does this stuff come from?

Federal Register - Index of Executive Orders

The current President is at 133. The most recent President signed 290 over 8 years. FDR signed nearly 3500.

it happened before, it could happen again

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation....sacred honor

4cylndrfury wrote: so again, I ask, whats your agenda Pheller?

From what I gathered from other subject like this his agenda is the country is different than it was when formed and the rights established then are outdated and we should get rid of the lot of them.

Dude. There are plenty of places in the world that don't care what you do in their country. No need to rip ours apart to be like them.

Otto Maddox wrote: I think Rebel's point is that we have the right to say abolutely batE36 M3 crazy tin foil hat stuff without getting arrested.

Exactly.

Icidently...The penguin flies at midnight. Cats don't have money because they don't have pockets.

Pass it on.

Otto Maddox wrote: I think Rebel's point is that we have the right to say abolutely batE36 M3 crazy tin foil hat stuff without getting arrested.

Correct. I can equate it to suicide, as in, you have to certain elements to make it happen. Without one element, such as intent, means, or a plan, it's just hot air speculation until the other piece(s) of the puzzle comes into play. What was tinfoiler extraordinaire Tom Cruise's movie, Minority Report?, where you are arrested prematurely for crimes you might commit? Slippery slope here.....

Rebel,

I am a progressive. I believe in trial and error. The beauty of our country is that we can enact policies for a few years, then remove them if they don't work.

We don't need a flippin revolution everytime things get a little caddiwompus.

PHeller wrote: I don't have an agenda. My main goal is to illustrate that "security" goes both ways, and that there is a BIG difference between sharing your opinion in a sensible, intellectual way (as most do on this forum) and just spouting off all kinds of threats towards society. For all we know, this dude never threatened anyone, never mentioned violence, and was just a bit nutty, or there is a lot we don't know.

ok, maybe theres a lot of backstory we dont know...we are not arguing backstory...we are arguing the facts:

He was never charged. He was never accused, he WAS placed into handcuffs, and he WAS held against his will. No warrant was issued for this. He was never mirandized. No Trial has been scheduled.

So we see several violations of his civil liberties, based on whats been reported. That is what we are arguing. Maybe hes crazy as a bag of hornets. Maybe he is an angry man. Neither of those things are illegal. Did he do other illegal things? Maybe, but then why wouldnt he have been charged and arrested for those things?

Security is something YOU brought up. No one here was talking about security. Id rather a crazy jackass that committed no crime be free on the streets. Arrest the guys breaking the laws - leave the rest of us alone.

4cylndrfury wrote: ok, maybe theres a lot of backstory we dont know... we are arguing...

Welcome to the internet.

Margie

PHeller wrote: Rebel, I am a progressive. I believe in trial and error. The beauty of our country is that we can enact policies for a few years, then remove them if they don't work. We don't need a flippin revolution everytime things get a little caddiwompus.

the problem is, they dont get repealed. The guys who give themselves all the power are the guys who get to say whether or not its working. If they were on our side, and did what was best for us, then I would be ok, but its relatively obvious the few in charge care very little about whats right for the rest of us.

In indiana, its ok for officers to enter your home, without a warrant, and take your possessions, and arrest you. It is illegal for you to resist in any way. Their justification? Its better to just let the police have their way, without any tussle. You can go to the courts if you think there was any wrong doing on the officers part.

So, you wnat me to allow an officer to enter my home without probable cause, and take my stuff, or arrest me, or both, without putting up a fight, and then rely on the "sanctity" of the judicial system, who provided the officer that authority, to repremand him if I can successfully prove that he was in the wrong, which is now infinitely more difficult to prove, since there isnt a standard for "wrong" (probable cause/warrant) anymore? And this sort of security by any means necessary jive is ok in your book? WTF man?!?

I brought up the security thing because everyone brings up "government spying on citizens" whenever topics like this are posted.

Is it bad the dude was detained? Yes.

But the majority of these threads are dominated by "government spying on us" type stuff. I was just expanding that on that topic.

In reply to 4cylndrfury:

But it is just so damn hard to catch those criminals commiting crimes and so much easier to catch those not worried about being arrested because they are only spouting off and not expecting their door to be kicked in.

93EXCivic wrote: In reply to PHeller: I don't want to live in your America.

+1

In reply to Marjorie Suddard:

I might get patioed for this, but whatever...

your "its ok to take away his civil liberties because he sounds a little off" mantra is very disturbing.

Please see the bit where Im upset because there was no due course of law...yadda yadda bill of rights...so on and so forth constitution etc...I could care less about what the crackpot said

Fury, I have in no way stated that anything is ok. I am merely stating, then restating, that I do not have all the facts, nor do you. Therefore arguing about it is pointless. (Also quite annoying, but hey, again, it is the internet.)

I'm going to go get some work done now, then come back and lock this thread when you guys inevitably cross the line from annoying into downright off-putting. Enjoy.

Margie

I'm not advocating for that at all. I think you have me wrong.

I'm saying if the dude is talking violence on a mass scale, and he's obviously trained to kill people, that law enforcement has reason to be concerned.

If he's threatening in a violent manner, than no worries, if he is:

Should they detain him? No. Should they watch his every move? Probably.

In reply to Marjorie Suddard:

I thought we were headed for a lockdown pretty quickly, but things took a turn for the better. The poop streams seem ebb and flow around here.

Youre right, you didnt...fair enough, I retract my previous statement. I guess I read into your simple remark regarding the pointlessness of an internet argument as you disregarding our points as invalid.

Apologies are in order.

4cylndrfury wrote: ok, maybe theres a lot of backstory we dont know...we are not arguing backstory...we are arguing the facts:

You - and others - are arguing from a very limited set of facts from one perspective - the plaintiff's lawyer. He's obviously an impartial source, eh? It's just amazing to me how certain people can get of things when the "facts" presented fill in maybe 10% of the picture. When I'm presented with 10% of a picture I don't then fill in the lush rich detail of everything else that I'm 100% certain is there. I think, "Maybe I should wait until the rest of the picture is there so I can know what's in it."

But then, I don't have an agenda.

Fury, accepted

Let's give each other a little credit here. We're all trying to figure out what's right, which is pretty potent proof that people's default setting is probably not "suck." So let's relax into that knowledge and lighten it up.

Margie