1828. Thanks.
Yikes On Jun 2, 2:08 pm, Jonathan Ashley <[email protected]> wrote: > Webster's dictionary - 1828. > > On 06/02/2011 10:31 AM, GregfromBoston wrote: > > > > > Where did you get those???? > > > On Jun 2, 1:21 pm, Jonathan Ashley<[email protected]> > > wrote: > >> You cannot have freedom if you rely on government. The two terms > >> contradict each other. > > >> FREEDOM, n. 1. A state of exemption from the power or control of > >> another; liberty; exemption from slavery, servitude or confinement. > > >> GOVERNMENT, n. 1. Control; restraint. > > >> On 06/02/2011 10:00 AM, GregfromBoston wrote: > > >>> Uhm, pretty much THE job description of the government > >>> "insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote > >>> the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves > >>> and our Posterity" > >>> On Jun 2, 12:41 pm, Jonathan Ashley<[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>>> You don't have freedom if you reply on government to protect you. > >>>> On 06/02/2011 09:10 AM, plainolamerican wrote: > >>>>> one day enough people will finally > >>>>> be fed up enough that we will take our freedom back > >>>>> --- > >>>>> you don't have freedoms that you can't protect > >>>>> On Jun 2, 11:00 am, Jonathan Ashley<[email protected]> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> *The Patriot Act, Fox News, the TSA and Feeling Less Free* > >>>>>> 1 June 2011 by Szandor Blestman > >>>>>> The Patriot Act, in my opinion, has been one of the most egregious, > >>>>>> liberty violating acts that has ever been passed by congress. It was a > >>>>>> knee jerk reaction to the 9/11 attacks. It is so huge and was passed so > >>>>>> quickly after that event that any thinking person must realize it had > >>>>>> to > >>>>>> be written well before the attacks took place, was waiting for just > >>>>>> such > >>>>>> an attack so it could be introduced, and could not have possibly been > >>>>>> read and its implications understood by anyone who voted for it. I > >>>>>> doubt > >>>>>> very much that any congress critter has yet to read it in its entirety. > >>>>>> Here it is almost ten years later and it still sullies the political > >>>>>> landscape of this once great republic. > >>>>>> It seems that most common folk don't fully understand what the Patriot > >>>>>> Act truly is. If the polls are to be believed (I personally don't trust > >>>>>> most polls) then they seem to think that the Patriot Act has somehow > >>>>>> made our nation more secure. They seem to believe the propaganda that > >>>>>> is > >>>>>> spewed forth from corporate establishment media giants that the Patriot > >>>>>> Act has done its job and protected us. Yet it wasn't the Patriot Act > >>>>>> that stopped the shoe bomber or the underwear bomber, it was the > >>>>>> passengers themselves. And every time a plot is reported foiled, it is > >>>>>> later determined that the plot only occurred because some federal > >>>>>> security agency or another helped it along. So one might wonder, if the > >>>>>> Patriot Act has been doing its job, will they finally get rid of it if > >>>>>> it fails and another terrorist event occurs? I doubt that very much. > >>>>>> That's too much like hoping that once Osama Bin Laden is finally and > >>>>>> officially killed in some special forces raid that the wars of > >>>>>> occupation will end and our troops will come home. > >>>>>> Recently, three of the most soviet like, Big Brother type provisions of > >>>>>> the Patriot Act were set to expire. Congress didn't want to deal with > >>>>>> them earlier in the year, likely because they were worried about > >>>>>> backlash. The Senate did what they so often do, put off the vote until > >>>>>> the last minute and then rushed the legislation through without proper > >>>>>> debate because they don't want the legislation scrutinized. They passed > >>>>>> a four year extension on this monstrosity complete with its most > >>>>>> controversial provisions because, in my humble opinion, they don't want > >>>>>> to give up power and they'd love to be able to arrest their political > >>>>>> adversaries should push come to shove. > >>>>>> Rand Paul, the freshman senator from Kentucky, was the only one who > >>>>>> stood up to this abuse of power. He was the only one who questioned the > >>>>>> power of the party leadership, on both sides of the aisle. He merely > >>>>>> asked for a debate on introducing amendments meant to protect freedoms > >>>>>> we as Americans are supposed to enjoy. For all his efforts he was > >>>>>> excoriated by the establishment for not following like a sheep instead > >>>>>> of applauded for his stand and his most American individualist ideals. > >>>>>> Now, I'm not one to watch corporate television news programs, but I > >>>>>> came > >>>>>> across a Fox program with a bunch of talking heads discussing this > >>>>>> issue. I was appalled to hear them more or less condoning a police > >>>>>> state > >>>>>> in our nation. They are taking a thousand years of struggle against > >>>>>> authoritarianism and throwing it away, defending a doctrine that allows > >>>>>> government agents to spy on people going about their daily business > >>>>>> without just cause. They are defending a doctrine that claims everyone > >>>>>> is guilty until they can prove themselves innocent. It was this kind of > >>>>>> tyranny that the founding fathers fought against. This kind of tyranny > >>>>>> led to the writing of the Declaration of Independence. This kind of > >>>>>> tyranny was the reason they included the Bill of Rights in the > >>>>>> constitution. The Patriot Act is as un-American, fascist, soviet-esque > >>>>>> and unpatriotic as it gets. It violates the natural rights of > >>>>>> individuals in almost every way they can be violated and yet these men > >>>>>> continue to support it without so much as batting an eye, and then they > >>>>>> call Rand Paul extreme. To them, the senator from Kentucky is extreme > >>>>>> because he values the principles America was founded upon. One can only > >>>>>> assume they consider all individualists, constitutionalists, > >>>>>> libertarians and anyone who wants a smaller, more accountable federal > >>>>>> government as extreme. To them, an extremist is one who challenges the > >>>>>> supremacy of their corporate masters. > >>>>>> One of the most remarkable statements came from Charles Krauthammer. He > >>>>>> claimed that all those warnings about America becoming a police state > >>>>>> didn't pan out. Has he been living under a rock for the last ten years? > >>>>>> He asked something along the line of is their anyone who thinks their > >>>>>> freedoms have been curtailed? He suggested that he hadn't heard of > >>>>>> anyone who felt that way. Well, I for one feel that way, Mr. > >>>>>> Krauthammer, so now you have heard of someone. > >>>>>> How about all those people who are subjected to naked body scanners at > >>>>>> the airports and TSA gropings? Do you think they might feel a little > >>>>>> less free? I know that I'd like to feel like I could fly places, but I > >>>>>> don't want to subject myself to their intrusions. I seem to recall that > >>>>>> others have even protested against such measures. How could you call > >>>>>> that anything but a police state provision? It is the Patriot Act that > >>>>>> has given us the TSA, and now they're coming out of the airports and > >>>>>> are > >>>>>> soon to be seen on a street, in a mall, or at a prom dance near you. > >>>>>> They needed to do more than just debate amendments to the Patriot Act, > >>>>>> they need to repeal the entire bill. > >>>>>> How about the checkpoints that are popping up, especially in border > >>>>>> states? Do you think that the people who have to pass through them feel > >>>>>> less free? Do you think that they might start to have an inkling that > >>>>>> something has gone wrong and this is no longer the free nation it has > >>>>>> been claimed to be? How about all those people who want to drink raw > >>>>>> milk? Do you think they feel less free when the Feds tell them they > >>>>>> can't decide for themselves what to put in their own bodies? How about > >>>>>> the peaceful Amish, do you think they might feel less free when their > >>>>>> farms are raided by SWAT teams for selling the milk others ask for? How > >>>>>> about the dancers at the Jefferson Memorial? Do you think they might > >>>>>> feel a little less free as they were handcuffed for prancing around a > >>>>>> little or gently swaying in place? These are things that have all been > >>>>>> normalized because of the Patriot Act and similar legislation. It is > >>>>>> the > >>>>>> federal government that has become extreme. It is they who are cracking > >>>>>> down on peaceful individuals and restricting normal human activity they > >>>>>> should have no business even caring about. > >>>>>> Do you like the fact that FBI agents can now write their own warrants > >>>>>> without having to so much as show a judge probable cause, just like the > >>>>>> king's men were able to do in the 1700s? Do you like the fact that they > >>>>>> can break into anyone's home they want when no one's home and steal > >>>>>> whatever they wish without a warrant, simply on a suspicion, and not > >>>>>> have to be accountable to anyone? Do you think it's ok that they can > >>>>>> proclaim someone an enemy combatant at anytime they wish and hold them > >>>>>> indefinitely without a trial? Do you believe that I'm a little extreme > >>>>>> for mentioning such provisions and that your government would never do > >>>>>> such things? The Patriot Act grants government agents the legal > >>>>>> authority to take such actions, and when someone has such power it is > >>>>>> only a matter of time before that power is abused and some innocent > >>>>>> individuals suffer because of that abuse. Besides, just because you may > >>>>>> not have heard about such things happening doesn't mean such events > >>>>>> haven't already occurred. You certainly can't count on the corporate > >>>>>> media to inform you of such abuses when they do happen. > >>>>>> There are plenty of people that feel their freedoms have been > >>>>>> curtailed. > >>>>>> There are plenty of people who feel less safe because of government > >>>>>> intrusion, not more secure. Everyday more and more people become > >>>>>> victims > >>>>>> of state agents. Everyday new police brutality > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
