NationStates Jolt Archive


Has the US government gotten too powerful?

Stone Bridges
14-01-2006, 07:32
You know, ever since 9/11 happened. The Bush administration has done everything to step on our rights as citizens. First, he created the TSA. Anyone in the aviation field (such as myself) will tell you that the TSA SUCKS! The TSA offical title is "Transportation Safety Administration". However it's unoffical title is "Thousands Standing Around". Thanks to the TSA, people in wheelchair and old ladies with oxygen tanks will be searched and groped by TSA agents you would find in a lesbian prison movie. But nooo, it didn't stop there. Next up was the closure of Meigs Field. For those of you who don't know what Meigs Field is. It used to be an GA airport in Chicago. Until Mayor Daley thought it was a national security threat and decide to carve big X's in the Runway, in the middle of the freakin night! Ok, let me tell you something. There are these things called NOTAMs (Notice To Air Mens). They tell pilots like me what is going on at an airport, or at a specific area. There was no NOTAMs for this "closure" of Meigs Field. So, any pilot that wanted to land at Meigs Field that night didn't know that there was no useable runway. I shouldn't say this, but I really wished an accident did happen that involved a pilot trying to land on a carved out runway. Of course, the AOPA tried to fight this and get Meigs Field runway restored. However, it didn't go through. So we lost Meigs Field because it was a "Security threat". The end result, Mayor Daley got a slap on the wrist, he got his stupid park, and Chicago TRACON got their workload increased. However, more was to come as TFR (temp. Flight Restriction) started popping up everywhere. I swear you could be flying alone, be the most up to date pilot, and a TFR can pop up and soon you're greeted by F-16s. Yea, what a way to dick us Bush.

But enough about the aviation field. Ever since the War on Terror has begun, the Bush administration has increased spending, never vetoed a spending measure, he violated our right to not be survillanced by our own government. He came up with the color code system which is not even good enough to wipe my ass with. Then comes the stupid laws with makes trains and planes spotters (people who hobby is taking pictures of trains and planes) suspected terrorist. Hey, idiots, if the guy is black, or white, I doubt he's a terrorist. Stop attacking John Smith and go harrass Ackhmand over there! Then theres the Internet Annoyance law. What the hell is that suspose to improve? What the hell is that stupid law suspose to do? What, are people getting their feelings hurt over the internet? Well too bad, either shut off your computer or grow thicker skin. Jeez, who's the crybaby that wrote up that stupid law?

Let me tell you something, when your government is not afraid to spy on you, when your government is not afraid to pull excuses of out it's ass to close airports, or to grop you in the security line. When your government is not afraid to classified born and raised countrymen as terrorist. Then your government is too big, it's too powerful. The government is not afraid of you anymore. It's now stepping all over you and having an evil laugh. I think it's time we show our government that it should be afraid of us, it should fear us and it should think twice before trying to screw us over.

That's my rant.
Neu Leonstein
14-01-2006, 07:34
Hey, idiots, if the guy is black, or white, I doubt he's a terrorist. Stop attacking John Smith and go harrass Ackhmand over there!
You lost me right there.
The South Islands
14-01-2006, 07:37
Yup. They've been kind of ignoring the 10th Amendment for a while now...
Stone Bridges
14-01-2006, 07:37
You lost me right there.

What? Let me tell ya something, did the US have home grown terrorist. Yes, Timothy Mc. Veigh was one of them. So were the people that was involved in the Waco Cult. But those are far and few in between. Most terrorist attack against the US were done by people that were from the Middle East! I hate to say it, but it's the truth!
Neu Leonstein
14-01-2006, 07:43
Most terrorist attack against the US were done by people that were from the Middle East! I hate to say it, but it's the truth!
They were done by people who lived in the place you "visited". That just so happened to be the Middle East.

Nothing to suggest a course of "Don't harrass my race, segregate and mistreat another race I don't belong to!"
The South Islands
14-01-2006, 07:44
What? Let me tell ya something, did the US have home grown terrorist. Yes, Timothy Mc. Veigh was one of them. So were the people that was involved in the Waco Cult. But those are far and few in between. Most terrorist attack against the US were done by people that were from the Middle East! I hate to say it, but it's the truth!

Oh god...
Stone Bridges
14-01-2006, 07:47
They were done by people who lived in the place you "visited". That just so happened to be the Middle East.

Nothing to suggest a course of "Don't harrass my race, segregate and mistreat another race I don't belong to!"

Hey, did I say it was fair, no. But, the sad fact is, racial profiling have been used to catch terrorist/criminals, etc. Is it right, no, but it's done. All I'm saying is that harrasing people just because they take pictures of airplanes, trains etc. is wrong and is in violation of civil rights.
The Black Hand of Nod
14-01-2006, 07:50
If everyone would shut up about the racist comment and read about what the REST of the message is? If you attack the evidence then you have no way to reply. All who drew the race card please depart the thread.
Stone Bridges
14-01-2006, 07:51
If everyone would shut up about the racist comment and read about what the REST of the message is? If you attack the evidence then you have no way to reply. All who drew the race card please depart the thread.

Thank you, and please, tell me what you think about my rant.
5iam
14-01-2006, 07:56
I agree about the TSA. The best things we could've done have already been done to defend against another 9/11: Air marshalls, bullet proof cockpits, and now people know to fight back at all costs against any hijackers. The screenings are just too much.

With the wiretapping now.

Who the heck do you thing they are wiretapping/listening to?
They have phone numbers of Al-Qaeda members. Those are the numbers they are listening to. Ya, I'm sorry, if you're talking to someone who has Zarqowi on his frickin' speed dial I have no problem with them listening in on you, I don't care if you're an American.
Stone Bridges
14-01-2006, 08:00
I agree about the TSA. The best things we could've done have already been done to defend against another 9/11: Air marshalls, bullet proof cockpits, and now people know to fight back at all costs against any hijackers. The screenings are just too much.

I don't have a problem with Air Marshalls, BP cockpits. I even advocate that pilots carry sidearms. But the airport screeners, the checkpoints, the random bag search is just too much.


With the wiretapping now.

Who the heck do you thing they are wiretapping/listening to?
They have phone numbers of Al-Qaeda members. Those are the numbers they are listening to. Ya, I'm sorry, if you're talking to someone who has Zarqowi on his frickin' speed dial I have no problem with them listening in on you, I don't care if you're an American.

Wiretapping is illegal because it's an invasion of privacy. See, we used to have this nice little system where if you wanted to search someone home, listen in on their convo, or anything like that. You would have to gather up evidence, present them to the courts for a warrent. As far as I can tell the Bush Admin has done none of that, and since they bypass all of that, then that means nothing can stop them from wiretapping anyone! The Bush admin are getting wayyy too cocky.
Liverbreath
14-01-2006, 08:00
What? Let me tell ya something, did the US have home grown terrorist. Yes, Timothy Mc. Veigh was one of them. So were the people that was involved in the Waco Cult. But those are far and few in between. Most terrorist attack against the US were done by people that were from the Middle East! I hate to say it, but it's the truth!

Hold on just one second here. Lets get something straight. While McVeigh should certainly be considered a terrorist, the only terrorists involved in Waco were those of the Clinton administration giving orders to their muscle at the ATF. Their crime - purchasing legal weapons and wanting to be left alone. Religious nuts maybe, but that is not yet a crime despite the leftist efforts.
Stone Bridges
14-01-2006, 08:02
Hold on just one second here. Lets get something straight. While McVeigh should certainly be considered a terrorist, the only terrorists involved in Waco were those of the Clinton administration giving orders to their muscle at the ATF. Their crime - purchasing legal weapons and wanting to be left alone. Religious nuts maybe, but that is not yet a crime despite the leftist efforts.

Well I was just trying to think of at least two examples of home grown terrorist, and Timonthy Mc. Veigh and Waco were the first two names that popped into my head.
5iam
14-01-2006, 08:03
Oh, I also agree with you about the profiling, color codes, and spending/lack of vetoing.
The Nazz
14-01-2006, 08:05
I agree about the TSA. The best things we could've done have already been done to defend against another 9/11: Air marshalls, bullet proof cockpits, and now people know to fight back at all costs against any hijackers. The screenings are just too much.

With the wiretapping now.

Who the heck do you thing they are wiretapping/listening to?
They have phone numbers of Al-Qaeda members. Those are the numbers they are listening to. Ya, I'm sorry, if you're talking to someone who has Zarqowi on his frickin' speed dial I have no problem with them listening in on you, I don't care if you're an American.
With these ass clowns? There's no telling who they're listening in on. Andrea Mitchell, an NBC reporter, asked the person she was interviewing the other day if the NSA had been bugging Christiane Amanpour, the CNN reporter. Amanpour's husband was a consultant to the Kerry campaign. Any chance the Bush campaign was listening in on non-NSA stuff? Would you honestly put it past them?

The problem surrounding this is that no one--no one short of the actual people involved know exactly who was being listened to. If you're dumb enough to take the Bush administration at their word, go ahead. I'd rather be skeptical.
5iam
14-01-2006, 08:09
Um....

Right. With the warrants. I'm surprised how little people actually know.

There have been ~120 cases where there was no warrant. Look at the sheer order of magnatude of this (or lack thereof).

I mean, how can you not believe that there can be 120 people in the US that might be a threat?
Oh but there was no warrant. Boo freaking hoo.

A case can be made that a warrant isn't even needed for wiretapping. Look at the Bill of Rights.
5iam
14-01-2006, 08:11
W

The problem surrounding this is that no one--no one short of the actual people involved know exactly who was being listened to.
Lol when you're dealing with Al Qaeda that's kinda the point, right?

The NYT seemed to have a better idea than most.
Stone Bridges
14-01-2006, 08:13
Um....

Right. With the warrants. I'm surprised how little people actually know.

There have been ~120 cases where there was no warrant. Look at the sheer order of magnatude of this (or lack thereof).

I mean, how can you not believe that there can be 120 people in the US that might be a threat?
Oh but there was no warrant. Boo freaking hoo.

A case can be made that a warrant isn't even needed for wiretapping. Look at the Bill of Rights.

How do you know they are just concetrating on those 120 people? How do you know they aren't wiretapping someone in the Dems. camp? They have no restriction, and that's a problem. When a government can just go willy nilly with something like wiretapping, it should be a cause for concern.
The Nazz
14-01-2006, 08:15
Um....

Right. With the warrants. I'm surprised how little people actually know.

There have been ~120 cases where there was no warrant. Look at the sheer order of magnatude of this (or lack thereof).

I mean, how can you not believe that there can be 120 people in the US that might be a threat?
Oh but there was no warrant. Boo freaking hoo.

A case can be made that a warrant isn't even needed for wiretapping. Look at the Bill of Rights.
I'd like to know where you got tha number from, because the last article I read that noted a number had a remarkably higher number of people being listened in on--as in over 500 per every 45 days.
5iam
14-01-2006, 08:31
I'd like to know where you got tha number from, because the last article I read that noted a number had a remarkably higher number of people being listened in on--as in over 500 per every 45 days.
With no warrant.
The Nazz
14-01-2006, 08:33
With no warrant.
Yeah--the higher number was with no warrant. So where's your indication that the number was lower?
Kossackja
14-01-2006, 08:58
the government has taken to much power, put not in regard to wiretapping or something like it. an abuse of their power are for example anti gun laws, social security, income tax etc.
Dragons with Guns
14-01-2006, 09:14
What I find comical is that people argue FOR the Patriot Act stating that it is an effective anti-terrorism law and doesn't violate the 4th amendment. Why? They state that all these measures require court approval.

Then, what do you know?! Ohh yes! Do they get court approval? No! They wiretap without getting a warrant. Who would have thought that?
Candelar
14-01-2006, 09:29
What? Let me tell ya something, did the US have home grown terrorist. Yes, Timothy Mc. Veigh was one of them. So were the people that was involved in the Waco Cult. But those are far and few in between. Most terrorist attack against the US were done by people that were from the Middle East! I hate to say it, but it's the truth!
And all the worst terrorist attacks in the Middle East are carried out by the USA or US-sponsored Israel, but their governments don't call those attacks "terrorist", of course.
Megadine_Inc
14-01-2006, 10:31
This is an important debate. What should the goverment be able to do in order to protect the people, and when does this infringe on our rights? I believe this balancing act is very complex, and is beyond most who are elected to deal with issues like this. There are many things to consider, not the least of which are:

1. Murphy's Law.
2. The people must never completely trust the government.
3. Politics often interfers with common sense.
4. Power corrupts.
5. War is a great distraction.
6. Personal responsibility.
7. Extremism will never die.
8. Blame is used as a crutch.
9. Money talks.
10. Religion complicates everything.
11. Self defense is not a crime.
12. Perception is reality.
13. Everyone has an agenda.

Thomas Jefferson once said. "Those who would sacrifice freedom for security, deserve neither."
Benjamin Franklin once said. "The tree of liberty must on occasion be watered with the blood of patriots, and tyrants."

Security can only be achieved when freedom and liberty are had by all, and blood will have to pay for this.