Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Revisionist History?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Revisionist History? Page: <<   < prev  3 4 5 [6] 7   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Revisionist History? - 3/3/2006 1:55:20 AM   
ArtCatDom


Posts: 478
Joined: 1/20/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: incognitoinmass

quote:

The fact that civil liberties are slowly disappearing from the USA is a disturbing trend. The really tragic thing is by the time we notice that all our rights are gone, it is already too late.


They are? Disappearing? Really? Name one. Or at least name one that you disagree with. For example, letting people search and scan your luggage at airports could be considered an infringement on your civil liberties but you might agree to the wisdom of it.


Can you say whatever you want on the radio or will the FCC fine you?

Can you carry a handgun in New York City?

Etc.

*meow*

(in reply to incognitoinmass)
Profile   Post #: 101
RE: Revisionist History? - 3/3/2006 1:56:48 AM   
ArtCatDom


Posts: 478
Joined: 1/20/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: incognitoinmass

quote:

The controversy over wiretaps is a good one because it is not absolutely clearly defined as to why to tap a phone in the first place. Under the guise of "foreign intelligence" what is stopping the government from tapping a call I make to England? Clearly nothing can stop them.

So, while you may laugh at me for my "conspiracy theories" I don't believe that is what I offered. I offered food for thought. Take it as you will.


Nothing is stopping the government from seizing your property and shooting you in the head either ----except that it is not legal.

The fallacy with your argument is that it assumes a premise that you can not support. i.e. that your government wants to and would do all these terrible bad things. You cannot show any instance where any of this bad stuff you fret about as actually happened. Just that it 'could.' Well, the moon 'could' be made out of green cheese, but it isn't.

That's why it is so easy to characterize this type of thinking as conspiracy mongering.


Wow, do you live in your own world or what?

Research ATF and DEA seizures practices and civil liberty violations.

Get back to me if giving the government more power to intrude is the GOOD answer.

*meow*

(in reply to incognitoinmass)
Profile   Post #: 102
RE: Revisionist History? - 3/3/2006 2:03:29 AM   
ArtCatDom


Posts: 478
Joined: 1/20/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Chaingang

quote:

ORIGINAL: ArtCatDom
I consistantly vote third party and make no apologies for it.


Has anyone you ever voted for won?



Yes.

*meow*

(in reply to Chaingang)
Profile   Post #: 103
RE: Revisionist History? - 3/3/2006 5:10:19 AM   
UtopianRanger


Posts: 3251
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: incognitoinmass

quote:

Well, I hope it works for you. Didn't work for Martin Nieomoeller.

He learned.


Yeah, this is Nazi Germany all over again. Please.

The last refuge of left wing drama queen: equate your political opponents with Nazis.

That's just lame.


While I concur with you that there is no comparison equivalent to the fascist state of 1933, I find it strangely odd that you are not the least bit concerned with negative/quasi police-state environment that has been fostered over the last six years.

Just for starters, let me point out to you a very troubling bill {Bill 742} that was both introduced and narrowly defeated before the Oregon legislature. { I am told this bill is going to be re-introduced with minor modifications}

http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2003/Terrorism-Life-OR-SB742-27feb03.htm

A Bill so draconian, that it sought to punish those guilty of ''Illegal downloading of music'' with life imprisonment. If you read the small print... it could essentially turn someone guilty of ''blocking traffic'' or ''passing a bad check'' into a ''terrorist'' a punish them with 25 years in a ''Forest labor camp''

I ask you… can you defend this type of mentality?

Next... you mention that the Patriot act is a tool really no different than those used by the FBI to fight organized crime.

I beg to differ with that assessment.

There are various subsections of section 802 of Patriot Act II that turn minuscule, misdemeanor crimes into acts ''terrorism'' and ''crimes against the state'' which can be prosecuted as such, henceforth.

Section 102 states clearly that any information gathering, regardless of whether or not those activities are illegal, can be considered to be clandestine intelligence activities for a foreign power. This makes news gathering illegal.

Section 109 allows secret Star Chamber courts to issue contempt charges against any individual or corporation who refuses to incriminate themselves or others. These sections annihilate the last vestiges of the Fifth Amendment.

Section 106 states that broad general warrants by the secret FSIA court (a panel of secret judges set up in a star chamber system that convenes in an undisclosed location) granted under the first Patriot Act are not good enough. It states that government agents must be given immunity for carrying out searches with no prior court approval. This section throws out the entire Fourth Amendment against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Section 126 grants the government the right to mine the entire spectrum of public and private sector information from bank records to educational and medical records. This is the enacting law to allow ECHELON and the Total Information Awareness Network to totally break down any and all walls of privacy.

Section 128 allows the Federal government to place gag orders on Federal and State Grand Juries and to take over the proceedings. It also disallows individuals or organizations to even try to quash a Federal subpoena. So now defending yourself will be a terrorist action.


Section 129 destroys any remaining whistleblower protection for Federal agents.

section 202 allows corporations to keep secret their activities with toxic biological, chemical or radiological materials.

Section 312 gives immunity to law enforcement engaging in spying operations against the American people and would place substantial restrictions on court injunctions against Federal violations of civil rights across the board.

Section 322 removes Congress from the extradition process and allows officers of the Homeland Security complex to extradite American citizens anywhere they wish. It also allows Homeland Security to secretly take individuals out of foreign countries.


Section 403 expands the definition of weapons of mass destruction to include any activity that affects interstate or foreign commerce.

Section 501 a US citizen engaging in lawful activities can be grabbed off the street and thrown into a van never to be seen again. The Justice Department states that they can do this because the person “had inferred from conduct” that they were not a US citizen.


Just a sampling

You know as well as I do, that these new powers as granted under the new Patriot act, are in no way the same tools afforded to the FBI to fight organized crime. At the very least, what you have written is a huge and parroted exaggeration.

And, I am looking for article written by Bruce Cutler {The Attorney who won John Gotti two acquittals} the rips apart an argument that seeks to equivocate the Patriot Act to the investigative powers of the FBI for the purpose of organized crime - It's canned propaganda and a totally false argument.

Now... before you attempt to answer my this, please tell me why any governmental administration would seek to impugn its citizenry with such intrusive and draconian dictatorial powers, in the name of terrorism, while not first closing it's borders to stop the free-flow of potential terrorists?

And if you want to get back to organized crime.... the Salvadorian gang known as MS-13, has committed more crime and done far more to hurt this country both economically and terror wise than the Italians ever did, yet we are just letting them walk through our front door.

What gives?

Now let me throw out a few others things just for the hell of it....

In the last six years we have been encumbered by such intrusive acts as:

Video Surveillance on a mass scale


With over eight-thousand surveillance camera's in the city of London, and still hardly a dent in crime, haven't we learned a lesson - They don't work.

If they sat down and really thought about it….the overwhelming majority of American people wouldn’t want all this spying and video surveillance on their own populace.

And the one’s who do, well…. their ideological state has been perpetuated by the constant deluge of propaganda, coming from scary stories – i.e. Bin Laden tapes- Zawaheri tapes {drip drip drip}, Fox news and the fascist parrots {The Limbaugh’s, Hannity’s and Savage}.

False Propaganda, Censorship and Global News Management - See both Animal farm and 1984

Let me preface this part by reminding you about Iran Contra and the Church hearings – False propaganda on a massive scale.
http://pw1.netcom.com/~ncoic/cia_info.htm {See propaganda}

Just since 2003 the current GAO {again, admitted} spent over 1.6 billion on False propaganda, fake newscasts and buying-off reporters.
http://www.wdsu.com/helenthomas/4334085/detail.html

http://www.ipsnews.net/interna.asp?idnews=28063

The other thing they do is implant phony news stories that are designed to scare people and keep them from speaking out.

For instance :The drum up a phony story on the national news that’s says something in the order of ‘’School teacher watched by Pentagon because she protested Halliburton’’ People see it, and then think twice the next time they want speak out or openly condemn the government.

And then we read what’s been happening with both Google and Yahoo in regards to China.
http://news.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2006/01/26/do2602.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/01/26/ixnewstop.html
And hell, just last week google censored and blocked {admittedly} the web site
Spacewars.com {On the leading edge for reporting on space based weapons, etc.}
This type of intrusion is just precursor to what’s coming in the future
http://www.spacewar.com/Google_Bans_Australian_Based_Military_Space_News_Website.html

Mandatory implementation of transponders and RFID tags in all new automobiles, new toll roads and controlled travel.

Yes... both the state of Texas an Oregon are in the process of trying to implement ''pilot'' programs where transponders and RFID tags are used to control you and track your movements.

If your insurance expirers, you to fast, or try and avoid any of the new taxes, you'll be ticketed via the remote transponder in your car.

And you think that letting strategic assets like our ''ports'' be managed by foreign governments is bad, how bout the roads and transportation corridors also being managed by such entities?

http://www.newswithviews.com/Spivey/phyllis3.htm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/11/AR2005121101368_pf.html

And heck... I'm not even going to get into the Cashless monetary system - Real ID card Act; I posted on that here on this site six months ago.

Why are all these intrusive controls needed, when we have no border security or immigration policy?

Isn't that akin purchasing the most expensive burglar alarm for your house that money can buy, and then leaving the front door to your house open all night?




- The Ranger


< Message edited by UtopianRanger -- 3/3/2006 5:36:33 AM >


_____________________________

"If you are going to win any battle, you have to do one thing. You have to make the mind run the body. Never let the body tell the mind what to do... the body is never tired if the mind is not tired."

-General George S. Patton


(in reply to incognitoinmass)
Profile   Post #: 104
RE: Revisionist History? - 3/6/2006 11:55:12 AM   
Lordandmaster


Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline
The South Dakota abortion ban has now been signed into law:

http://www.comcast.net/news/index.jsp?cat=GENERAL&fn=/2006/03/06/339379.html&cvqh=itn_abortion

Funny, I remember some know-it-all recently claiming that this was never going to happen.

(in reply to UtopianRanger)
Profile   Post #: 105
RE: Revisionist History? - 3/6/2006 12:22:51 PM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
L&M,
Name calling is really below you. Debate the issue. Attacking the debater gives the impression that the substance behind your argument is weak. This self professed non "know it all" expected this result. I think we are in agreement as to the reason behind the action. From the source document you linked: (http://www.comcast.net/news/index.jsp?cat=GENERAL&fn=/2006/03/06/339384.html)

quote:

Planned Parenthood, which operates the state's only abortion clinic, in Sioux Falls, has pledged to challenge the measure in court.

Rounds issued a written statement saying he expects the law will be tied up in court for years and will not take effect unless the U.S. Supreme Court upholds it.

South Dakota's abortion ban is to take effect July 1, but a federal judge is likely to suspend it during a legal challenge.


What I didn't know is that South Dakota had only one clinic. It's also a meaningless act unto itself because no one disagrees that until this decision ultimately makes it to the Supreme Court it will make no difference to the good people of South Dakota.

The debate could and should address "States Rights" as much as the availability of abortions within South Dakota state lines. Less than 25 miles away from the Planned Parenthood location are the borders of Iowa and Minnesota. I don't believe there is a "travel permit" requirement to make the trip. I guess "Not yet!" would be the reply from the conspiracy theorists.

(in reply to Lordandmaster)
Profile   Post #: 106
RE: Revisionist History? - 3/6/2006 12:49:58 PM   
Gauge


Posts: 5689
Joined: 6/17/2005
Status: offline
quote:

Less than 25 miles away from the Planned Parenthood location are the borders of Iowa and Minnesota. I don't believe there is a "travel permit" requirement to make the trip. I guess "Not yet!" would be the reply from the conspiracy theorists


Yeah... I am a known "conspiracy monger" and I would have said that eventually.

_____________________________

"For there is no folly of the beast of the earth which is not infinitely outdone by the madness of men." Herman Melville - Moby Dick

I'm wearing my chicken suit and humming La Marseillaise.

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 107
RE: Revisionist History? - 3/6/2006 5:09:06 PM   
Lordandmaster


Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline
Uhh, Merc, you weren't the know-it-all I was referring to.

Anyway, I don't understand the point of this comment:

quote:

Less than 25 miles away from the Planned Parenthood location are the borders of Iowa and Minnesota. I don't believe there is a "travel permit" requirement to make the trip. I guess "Not yet!" would be the reply from the conspiracy theorists.


It's OK for abortions to be illegal in South Dakota because they're legal in Iowa and Minnesota? By the same logic, you could say it's OK for abortions to be illegal in the United States because they're legal in Canada in Mexico.

The legal situation in Iowa and Minnesota has nothing whatsoever to do with the question of whether this is a good law in South Dakota. Look, either you support this law or you don't. If you don't, the fact that abortions are (still) legal in Iowa and Minnesota doesn't make this anything other than a bad law. And if you DO support this law, reminding people that abortions are (still) legal in Iowa and Minnesota is disingenuous--because in that case you don't believe Americans have a Constitutional right to abortions and wouldn't mind if they were banned in Iowa and Minnesota too.

< Message edited by Lordandmaster -- 3/6/2006 5:54:32 PM >

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 108
RE: Revisionist History? - 3/6/2006 7:30:11 PM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
L&M,
Regarding the comment, I don't know if I'm becoming more attuned to it or mellowing with age. Regardless of how tame, name calling distracts and detracts from good debate. But it was not my place to address it in open forum. I regretted noting it in my post, and the edit time elapsed before I could delete it. It's not important or relevant - My apologies.

I support any and all groups that are against reducing a person's right to do anything. Including this most difficult decision made by woman. The reason for being "pro-abortion" (I don't agree with the semantic of pro-choice) is just because of the difficult decision that woman have to make. I think that decision is difficult enough. Laws shouldn't be imposed to make it any more difficult.

My point of pointing out the proximity of nearby state options is that bottom line, very few, if any would be deterred by the closing of one clinic. Inconvenienced maybe, but there is still access. I wouldn't equate it to US/Mexico access. Assuming everyone in South Dakota had to go to Sioux Fall prior to the law, it was only 25 miles more across, no passport needed, state lines. Not the same as a separate country.

Even being against the implementation of a law I can be pragmatic about the consequences of the law just passed. Again, we're in agreement this was done only to get the Supreme Court to re-rule on the Abortion issue. I'll stand by my opinion that it will end up being a State's rights decision. If that occurs the power will revert to where it belongs - to the people voting in the individual State. Then, although I'll still be against it happening, I'll honor the decision of the constituency. As if I need ANOTHER reason NOT to live in South Dakota!

(in reply to Lordandmaster)
Profile   Post #: 109
RE: Revisionist History? - 3/7/2006 11:44:05 AM   
UtopianRanger


Posts: 3251
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

The South Dakota abortion ban has now been signed into law:

http://www.comcast.net/news/index.jsp?cat=GENERAL&fn=/2006/03/06/339379.html&cvqh=itn_abortion

Funny, I remember some know-it-all recently claiming that this was never going to happen.


HAR! Yup... I knew it would pass too and knew you weren’t referring to Merc.

The worst part about it passing for me, is not the fact that it actually passed, but how it's been taking air time away from foreign entities controlling strategic interests here in the United States.

Think about it... with the exception of Limbagh and a few others... both the left-wing and right-wing talk show hosts have been hammering this idiotic nonsense as proposed by the oligarchy. Now this abortion issue {Which will never go anywhere} will detract {at least some} attention away from it.

Sharpton was in rare rare form and said it best last night {paraphrasing} ''You can‘t run for reelection on a platform that tells everybody to look out for the bogeyman. And then go behind the nations back and make secret deals with the boogeyman’’


- The Ranger


P.S. For all you news junkies....

Keep your eyes open from March 20th to April 5th! During this time frame is when Iran will open up it's own mercantile exchange {they’re calling it an oil ‘’borse’’} and stop accepting dollars as the currency of choice for purchasing oil on the spot market{ the Euro will take precedence} Ironically.... this is the same time when our government will stop publishing M-1 money supply -- That means you will no longer be able to find out how many dollars are circulation -- So when these spot markets switch from the dollar to euro as the currency of choice, the Federal Reserve {Bernanke} will be able to print more money and the people of this country will never know it. {Inflation in disguise}





< Message edited by UtopianRanger -- 3/7/2006 11:48:22 AM >


_____________________________

"If you are going to win any battle, you have to do one thing. You have to make the mind run the body. Never let the body tell the mind what to do... the body is never tired if the mind is not tired."

-General George S. Patton


(in reply to Lordandmaster)
Profile   Post #: 110
RE: Revisionist History? - 3/14/2006 12:10:43 PM   
incognitoinmass


Posts: 428
Joined: 10/8/2005
From: Massachusetts
Status: offline
quote:

Funny, I remember some know-it-all recently claiming that this was never going to happen.


An injunction has already been filed, barring the law from going into effect.



_____________________________

But if, baby, I'm the bottom,
You're the top!

(in reply to Lordandmaster)
Profile   Post #: 111
RE: Revisionist History? - 3/14/2006 12:17:33 PM   
incognitoinmass


Posts: 428
Joined: 10/8/2005
From: Massachusetts
Status: offline
quote:

The debate could and should address "States Rights" as much as the availability of abortions within South Dakota state lines.


Yes, I believe the whole purpose of this largely symbolic legislation was to refocus the debate from pro-abortion vs pro-choice to judicial vs legislative perogatives.

_____________________________

But if, baby, I'm the bottom,
You're the top!

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 112
RE: Revisionist History? - 3/14/2006 3:32:31 PM   
Lordandmaster


Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline
Right, we elect representatives to our state government so they can pass largely symbolic legislation.

(in reply to incognitoinmass)
Profile   Post #: 113
RE: Revisionist History? - 3/14/2006 4:43:24 PM   
Level


Posts: 25145
Joined: 3/3/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JohnWarren


quote:

ORIGINAL: Moloch

Nope most people I know voted liberitarian.


Oh, so they voted for Bush.

We owe them and the Greens so much... someday we'll get a chance to pay it back.




The Democrats will never pay anyone back until they get better canidates than John Kerry and Al Gore. And Hillary Clinton isn't the answer either. Maybe Russ Feingold, maybe Barack Obama down the road some day.

Level

(in reply to JohnWarren)
Profile   Post #: 114
RE: Revisionist History? - 3/14/2006 5:13:51 PM   
Level


Posts: 25145
Joined: 3/3/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: incognitoinmass


quote:

Without 9-11, how could you rationalize what's going on in GITMO? How could you rationalize the US policy of rendition and Abu Gharib?


This is just silly. Without 9/11 there would be no detainees in on Cuba except Cuban dissidents [you know, folks who have anything bad to say about Castro]. Without 9/11 Iraq probably would not have happened. What are you trying to say, that the big bad GOP caused 9/11?

As to Abu Ghrarib, well, alot of the people here can't wait to find someone to lead them around at the end of leash. Hardly Auchwitz.

quote:



Big difference of course is that "a lot of people here" want that leash, while the people in Abu Gharib did not. It isn't Auschwitz, but it isn't "Collarme" east over there, either.

Level

(in reply to incognitoinmass)
Profile   Post #: 115
RE: Revisionist History? - 3/14/2006 6:55:55 PM   
Lordandmaster


Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline
Not really. If every single Green vote had gone to Gore instead, he still would have lost the election. This has been carefully studied.

And if Gore hadn't abandoned his soi-disant environmentalist principles, no one would have voted Green in the first place.

quote:

ORIGINAL: JohnWarren

We owe them and the Greens so much

(in reply to JohnWarren)
Profile   Post #: 116
RE: Revisionist History? - 3/15/2006 6:51:10 AM   
incognitoinmass


Posts: 428
Joined: 10/8/2005
From: Massachusetts
Status: offline
quote:

And if Gore hadn't abandoned his soi-disant environmentalist principles, no one would have voted Green in the first place.


In 2000 Al Gore, Jr. abandoned in the Greens. In 2006 he has simply abandoned his mind.

_____________________________

But if, baby, I'm the bottom,
You're the top!

(in reply to Lordandmaster)
Profile   Post #: 117
RE: Revisionist History? - 3/15/2006 6:54:11 AM   
incognitoinmass


Posts: 428
Joined: 10/8/2005
From: Massachusetts
Status: offline
quote:

Big difference of course is that "a lot of people here" want that leash, while the people in Abu Gharib did not. It isn't Auschwitz, but it isn't "Collarme" east over there, either.


Maybe so, but that didn't [and doesn't] prevent the drama queens from pretending that the soldiers were Nazis redux.

_____________________________

But if, baby, I'm the bottom,
You're the top!

(in reply to Level)
Profile   Post #: 118
RE: Revisionist History? - 3/15/2006 11:08:16 AM   
incognitoinmass


Posts: 428
Joined: 10/8/2005
From: Massachusetts
Status: offline
quote:

Right, we elect representatives to our state government so they can pass largely symbolic legislation.


Well, if you support a pro-choice position and elect representatives of a similar sentiment then you probably approve what the legislature has done here. And I doubt that the politicians who voted for this would have done so had they not been confident that a majority of their constituents supported them.

_____________________________

But if, baby, I'm the bottom,
You're the top!

(in reply to Lordandmaster)
Profile   Post #: 119
RE: Revisionist History? - 3/15/2006 11:11:56 AM   
incognitoinmass


Posts: 428
Joined: 10/8/2005
From: Massachusetts
Status: offline
quote:

The Democrats will never pay anyone back until they get better canidates than John Kerry and Al Gore.


True enough.

quote:

And Hillary Clinton isn't the answer either. Maybe Russ Feingold, maybe Barack Obama down the road some day.


If electability is the issue, then Hillary is out and Feingold is probably out too. Besides, Senators struggle to get elected President. A more electable candidate will almost certainly be found outside the beltway.


_____________________________

But if, baby, I'm the bottom,
You're the top!

(in reply to Level)
Profile   Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 5 [6] 7   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Revisionist History? Page: <<   < prev  3 4 5 [6] 7   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109