Go to Why can't I sue the whole country?
- Add a comment
- Go to WHAT FREEDOMS HAVE I LOST?
cantey
How often were we hit before 9/11? Once, eight years before. Look at the actual pattern, not just one event. Pretending that the (Un)Patriotic Act has done anything at all to make us safer is just falling for the obvious illusion. If it took them eight years do achieve another successful attack without the (Un)Patriotic Act in effect, they would have a much harder time with a another. They will try something during this next year, since their pattern has been to use the confusion caused by the switching of administrations. And most likely they will succeed because the (Un)Patriotic Act in truth can do NOTHING to stop them, since it would not have prevented 9/11 from taking place. Just as it did not stop the anthrax scare of the one guy who went around shooting people out of the trunk of his car, both of which happened AFTER the (Un)Patriotic Act was in play.
I am looking a the historic patterns to make my predictions, since you have to look at more than just ONE event to be able to predict people's actions.
I could go into the psychology of wanting to believe that the (Un)Patriotic Act actually does something beneficial, but it is best said in an episode of the Simpsons where Homer busy a rock form Lisa after she tries to explain this kind of logic to him and tells him 'What if I told you this rock can keep tigers away?' and then points out how there are no tigers, so it must be working.
And while I also know of no one directly affected at this time by the (Un)Patriotic Act, although if they were watching you and getting ready to take you in you would most likely never know it, but that does not excess the fact that our liberties have been taken away and such a thing has historically been shown to open the door to more freedoms and such being taken away in the name of 'security' or 'protection' or 'the greater good'. If you don't stand up at this point to protect freedom, in only becomes harder as more and more gets taken away and we are forced to have less and less. One more reason to be glad Obama won and not McCain. If McCain won and kept following the Bush path, it would not take long for martial law to be declared (Right after we get attacked in this next year, since if the pattern holds true it would still happen even if McCain was to take office) and the rest of our liberties taken from us for 'our own good'.
As for your second question here:
"But is it not patriotic to put your own life on hold to a degree for the common cause of defense?"
You would have to first convince me that the (Un)Patriotic Act is for the 'common cause of defense' and has done any good at all for anyone. Then you would have to show as to why my loosing my liberties helps at all. For the bigger picture, yes I would be willing to make sacrifices, but those would be for me personally to make and not the government to tell me I have to make. But for the illusion that is the (Un)Patriotic Act, no.
What I find most interesting here is that the (Un)Patriotic Act is one piece of legislation that has basalt made Big Government bigger than ever, which is supposedly something conservatives are against. You really do not get much bigger than letting the government do as they please with no safeguards in place to hold them accountable for anything they do. The (Un)Patriotic Act allows them to arrest anyone they please with next to no evidence and hold them for as long as they like without a trial or any form of defense, and if they screw up they cannot be held accountable for their mistakes. That is sick and wrong and goes against everything this country was founded on. I do not feel safer knowing how easily we have let our freedoms be taken away fro us just for an illusion of safety.
posted by
kooka_lives
on November 24, 2008 at 2:28 PM
| link to this | reply
and the constitution does not define
what patriotism is of course. But is it not patriotic to put your own life on hold to a degree for the common cause of defense? Or does only your little world matter?
posted by
calmcantey75
on November 24, 2008 at 12:55 PM
| link to this | reply
My life
and the lives of all the people I know have not in any way been affected negatively by the Patriot Act, and we have not been hit since 9-11. That is the logic I am using. I seems to me you are using more biased logic.
posted by
calmcantey75
on November 24, 2008 at 12:33 PM
| link to this | reply
cantey
The (Un)Patriotic Act does NOTHING to protect us from the types of tactics employed by al Quaeda. All it does is stop the wanna-bes, who are no real threats as it is, and takes away our personal liberties.
And where in the Constitution does it say we are to 'temporarily' give up our rights and freedoms in times of war? It can't and does not need to work that way.
9/11 was a fluke and the sooner everyone comes to understand that and realize that Bush got us all to over react and allow him too much power the better. While we will most likely never see such an attack on that scale again, there is no doubt that there will be other attacks, with or without the (Un)Patriotic Act in effect. But you have to understand such attacks are few and far between. Looking at the pattern we are most likely going to get one during Obama's first year in office, and that would happen even if McCain had won. Both World Trade Center attacks happened right after a new administration took over. The terrorists will take advantage of the natural confusion caused by such a change. We have no way to stop this attack from happening and it won't be anything as intense as 9/11.
And where are you getting the idea we are 'temporarily' giving these rights up? If we are to follow the logic and allow the (Un)Patriotic Act to stay active until the 'War on Terror' is over, then those rights are gone forever. The 'War on Terror' has no end to it due to its nature.
Basically we have been asked to give up our liberties in order to create a false sense of security that some people are embracing because they have given into fear and are more concerned about terrorists attacking here on US soil, no matter how rare such an event is, above facing the facts that there are just something we can do nothing to prevent.
posted by
kooka_lives
on November 24, 2008 at 12:16 PM
| link to this | reply
I don't get it
what are you suggesting that we do to defend ourselves against the types of tactics employed by al Quaeda?
I understand your concern about to much power gradually creeping into the hands of governement, but war (and they have declared war on us) calls for governemnt to suspend personal liberties does it not? Is it not patriotic for citizens, when their country is attacked on the scale of 911, to temporarily give up certain measures of personal freedom for the common cause of national defense and soverignty?
On a national level, Ideology must not supercede the common instinct of survival.
posted by
calmcantey75
on November 23, 2008 at 7:09 PM
| link to this | reply
Gomedome
In truth nothing can be done to stop such terrorist acts. That is just a simple fact we have to live with. If a groups of terrorists really want to hit us, they will find a way to do. I would feel better knowing that I have not given up my freedoms just because one small group of people had been able to succeed in their attack on us. Seriously, the idea of giving up freedoms in order to feel safe is a dangerous one that has no true end to it. The (Un)Patriotic Act is just one step closer to declaring martial law and letting the USA become a police state, where you are not allowed to question the powers that be because that would be Unpatriotic and be siding against your country.
There are no laws that would work to stop terrorism. We have to face that fact. We are not going to make ourselves safer by giving up our rights, mostly because such things work in favor of the terrorists not against.
What should have been done is that we should have handled Afghanistan correctly, taken down the al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden an used the state of pause the world was in after 9/11 to get the leaders of the hostile countries in the Middle East to come together and find better solutions. After 9/11 there was no doubt at all there was a great opening for some real changes to get made if Bush has acted correctly and done the right thing at that time. The world really was ready to work with us if we were to put some real effort towards focusing our efforts correctly and showing we wanted to deal with the actual problems. But Bush basically let bin Laden run free as he refocused on Iraq and set things up to get worse.
Taking away the liberties of the people here on American soil does nothing to make us safer and everything to allow for the possibilities of too strong of a Government. I know I am not going to feel safer until Obama is in office and we see our liberties restored to us.
posted by
kooka_lives
on November 23, 2008 at 1:32 PM
| link to this | reply
kooka_lives - judging by your response, a better question might be:
How would you suggest an administration deal with the aftermath of 911 to insure that this type of thing doesn't happen again?
When looking at potential solutions and a means of dealing with the covert infiltration of terrorists, it inevitably points to eliminating some of the barriers utilized to insure personal liberties. If there is a better way, I'd like to hear it.
posted by
gomedome
on November 23, 2008 at 12:27 PM
| link to this | reply
Gomedome
There is no evidence that here is any correlation between these measures and that fact.
There have only been TWO such attacks, eight years apart. During that eight years with no attacks we did not have The (Un)Patriotic Act. So if there is suppose to be a correlation there, then it should not have taken eight years for a second attack during a time with no such laws in effect.
You are trying to say that once the war is over, we won't need these always any more and so we should all just back down and accept that during this time we need to live with less rights than normal. Okay, when does the War on Terror end then? It is really an indefinable war on any group that can be labeled 'terrorists'. Basically it is one we cannot win and will never see an end to.
Such laws and their very vague wording that allows for all manner of abuse have been historically shown to be harmful to countries and the liberties of that country's people. It has also been shown historically that once people start to give up even a few freedom out of fear to their government, it is more like that they will start to lose more and more without noticing it.
We have already seen the (Un)Patriotic Act not doing what it should do and we have had innocent men locked up for years with no trial and basically as weak as it gets evidence that no honest court in the world would view as credible.
I am positive that The (Un)Patriotic Act makes me no safer than I was before 9/11. If anything it makes it more likely that terrorist will attack us, since it give them more of a reason to hate us and helps them to be able to recruit better. Even then, I am still more afraid of what the Christian fundamentalist down the street might do to me or my family if he cracks than any terrorists. Statistically speaking my neighbor is more likely to harm me and my family than the terrorists are, and yet I am not about to allow my neighbor to be treated as badly and inhuman as The (Un)Patriotic Act say we should treat people.
posted by
kooka_lives
on November 23, 2008 at 12:17 PM
| link to this | reply
Corbin, you just don't understand how freedom needs to work to be real
I have been attacked by Christians for my beliefs. Physically attacked. I have been in situations where I know that if I wanted to be treated fairly I had better not let anyone know my personal religious ideas. I have not felt free way too many times to count all because people like you are unable to grasp how freedom is suppose to work.
It is very relevant to my actual rights. If our societies has laws that create fear in people because they are not sure where the 'line' is that they better not cross, then their rights are being taken away. The (Un)Patriotic Act creates a line that really is hard, if not next to impossible, to figure out. They have arrested people for saying less than what I have said here on Blogit in the past. If someone really had no integrity at all, people like me could easily be arrested under the (Un)Patriotic Act right now. If the people in power want to start a witch hunt and basically turn this country in the next Nazi Germany, it will be actions such as the (Un)Patriotic Act which will lead the way. Since I have no desire to risk loosing my freedoms directly, I have toned down what I wanted to say. The American Conservatives really do wish to rule by fear and Bush has been great at creating that fear. I will be writing a future post on that when I have the time.
posted by
kooka_lives
on November 23, 2008 at 11:55 AM
| link to this | reply
kooka_lives - I read this list of loss of freedoms and say "yeah, so?"
Your county is at war with an enemy that has attacked more than once on your own soil. Just about everything you list is a war measure. It would be quite different if war were not at the root of these actions, or if this were simply steps taken by a power hungry administration but the reality is that some freedoms are lost during times of war. It is a necessary trade off for security and argue as you might, there has not been an attack on American soil since 911.
Surely there is a correlation between these measures and that fact.
posted by
gomedome
on November 23, 2008 at 11:20 AM
| link to this | reply
You forgot to type "Reprise" or "Repost"
There's nothing new here......it's still your ramblings about what you perceive as a loss now it even sounds like you see it as more of a threat.....you're writing based on your emotions, feelings, and opinions........
In spite of what your paranoia may tell you.........you have the right to literally say or write whatever you feel like without any censoring. Obviously if you defame, slander, or threat bodily harm you could be subject to law enforcement......but what you claim is a fantasy.
Just because you feel you can't do it is a personal problem you have.........but it is irrelevant when it comes to your actual rights.......
This is my only comment on this post.......I am giving you way to much attention and time.
I really am trying to keep a line of communication with you.....but I don't know.....
posted by
Corbin_Dallas
on November 23, 2008 at 10:53 AM
| link to this | reply