3 of 5
3
Why other countries are not playing along with the US regarding Snowden.
Posted: 27 June 2013 08:45 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 31 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4615
Joined  2007-10-05
VYAZMA - 27 June 2013 06:14 PM

You’re presuming the govt. knew this but wanted to take advantage of the situation to take measures that they’ve wanted to do before? etc etc…
Aren’t there other Forums specifically designed for the hysterically paranoid?

Google “project for the new american century” and click the ...

Oh hell, I’ll save you the trouble.

Go here and read the articles about how the people who selected GW Bush and ran the government during his administration had plans to invade Iraq while Bill Clinton was in office.

 Signature 

“In the beginning, God created the universe. This has made many people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.”
Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Profile
 
 
Posted: 28 June 2013 08:41 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 32 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3789
Joined  2010-08-15
VYAZMA - 27 June 2013 06:14 PM

Scott-This, I believe, was all that was necessary to fix the problem rather than the extreme measures that the governments went through for security. I am presuming that the government knew this but wanted to take advantage of the situation to take the measures that they’ve wanted to do before: create a Homeland Security division accountable directly to the President, exaggerated security measures imposed on private industries to be provisional to individual’s tracking data, and a cause for war.

You’re presuming the govt. knew this but wanted to take advantage of the situation to take measures that they’ve wanted to do before? etc etc…
Aren’t there other Forums specifically designed for the hysterically paranoid?
It’s not even your Government…so what do you care? Why don’t you worry about your own govt.?
Campaign up there to further disconnect yourself from our security apparatus.
So they left the cockpit doors unlocked hoping they would get hijacked so then we could go to war?
Like I said earlier to you…take a break.  Take a vacation.  Quit immersing yourself in all these blogs and paranoid conspiracy forums.

Calling something “hysterically paranoid” when there is lots of down to earth evidence - is… is… is less than forthright.


Aren’t you forgetting that if justice for 9/11 was the goal…{ after ignoring the many concerns and warnings of a serious impending terrorist attack.}
Then our actions would have been limited to the perpetrators - and not expand into a madmen’s money making scheme(http://rense.com/general29/dbus.htm)... is that too harsh…

it wasn’t about war-bucks - it was personal - Saddam shit on the hand that had been feeding it - so USA’s hard on to invade Iraq was actually a history lesson Neocons decided needed to be taught - oh yea that makes it so much better - with the war profits just being a nice little dividend on the side.

~ ~ ~

‘Building momentum for regime change’: Rumsfeld’s secret memos
Michael Isikoff
9:27 AM on 02/16/2013
http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/02/16/building-momentum-for-regime-change-rumsfelds-secret-memos/

Declassified documents show that Bush administration officials wanted Saddam Hussein out of Iraq and were ready to start a war in order to achieve it.
Just hours after the 9/11 attacks, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld met in the Pentagon with Air Force General Richard Myers, then vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and other top aides. Notes taken by Rumsfeld aide Steve Cambone (and referred to pages 334 and 335 of the 9/11 Commission Report) show the secretary asked for the “best info fast..judge whether good enough [to] hit S.H. [Saddam Hussein] @ same time—not only UBL [Osama bin Laden].” Rumsfeld also tasked Jim Haynes, the Pentagon’s top lawyer, “to talk w/ PW [Paul Wolfowitz] for additional support [for the] connection w/ UBL.” Other comments from the notes: “Need to move swiftly…go massive–sweep it all up things related and not.”

Key Bush Intelligence Briefing Kept From Hill Panel
National Journal - By Murray Waas
Updated: May 29, 2013 | 10:06 p.m.
November 22, 2005 | 9:50 a.m.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/whitehouse/key-bush-intelligence-briefing-kept-from-hill-panel-20051122?mrefid=site_search&page=1

Ten days after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, President Bush was told in a highly classified briefing that the U.S. intelligence community had no evidence linking the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein to the attacks and that there was scant credible evidence that Iraq had any significant collaborative ties with Al Qaeda, according to government records and current and former officials with firsthand knowledge of the matter.
{...}
One of the more intriguing things that Bush was told during the briefing was that the few credible reports of contacts between Iraq and Al Qaeda involved attempts by Saddam Hussein to monitor the terrorist group. Saddam viewed Al Qaeda as well as other theocratic radical Islamist organizations as a potential threat to his secular regime. At one point, analysts believed, Saddam considered infiltrating the ranks of Al Qaeda with Iraqi nationals or even Iraqi intelligence operatives to learn more about its inner workings, according to records and sources.

Here’s another look at the USA’s insanest undertaking eeva.  Born of neocon hubris and christian self-centered blindness and good’ol America Greed

By Brian Resnick | The First Days of the Iraq War, as Seen Through National Journal Correspondents
Updated: March 19, 2013 | 4:49 p.m.
March 19, 2013 | 4:08 p.m.

Here’s some more to chew on:

9/11: Possible Motives Of The Bush Administration

By David Ray Griffin
Global Research, December 02, 2005
http://www.globalresearch.ca/9-11-possible-motives-of-the-bush-administration/1391

It makes a thinking person wonder whether this information - that most American refuse to acknowledge with the dismissive label “hysterically paranoid” -
But, that is common knowledge to informed people throughout the world might also have a little something to do with the growing contempt with which America is viewed.

As for the world loving America for all it is - I got the feeling there’s a clear line between respect and admiration for the pre-9/11 America and the post-9/11 America.  Tragically, the president so many of us had so much hope for is turning out to be another clone.  Not that that’s all too surprising given the gauntlet candidates need to negotiate - still hope springs eternal only to get dashed just as often.  downer

 Signature 

How many times do lies need to be exposed
before we have permission to trash them?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 28 June 2013 10:39 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 33 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4140
Joined  2008-08-14

I’m not doubting that 9-11 wasn’t a pre-text for invading Iraq. Terrorist fears and WMD was a pre-text for invading Iraq. Everyone knows that.
But to suggest that anybody allowed those attacks to happen when they could have been prevented?
To suggest that cockpit doors were purposely left unlocked for terrorists?
That’s what I’m taking about.

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 28 June 2013 10:42 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 34 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4615
Joined  2007-10-05
VYAZMA - 28 June 2013 10:39 AM

I’m not doubting that 9-11 wasn’t a pre-text for invading Iraq. Terrorist fears and WMD was a pre-text for invading Iraq. Everyone knows that.
But to suggest that anybody allowed those attacks to happen when they could have been prevented?
To suggest that cockpit doors were purposely left unlocked for terrorists?
That’s what I’m taking about.

GW Bush and his advisors ignored a report stating Al Queda was preparing to launch an attack on U.S. soil.

 Signature 

“In the beginning, God created the universe. This has made many people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.”
Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Profile
 
 
Posted: 28 June 2013 11:01 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 35 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4140
Joined  2008-08-14
DarronS - 28 June 2013 10:42 AM
VYAZMA - 28 June 2013 10:39 AM

I’m not doubting that 9-11 wasn’t a pre-text for invading Iraq. Terrorist fears and WMD was a pre-text for invading Iraq. Everyone knows that.
But to suggest that anybody allowed those attacks to happen when they could have been prevented?
To suggest that cockpit doors were purposely left unlocked for terrorists?
That’s what I’m taking about.

GW Bush and his advisors ignored a report stating Al Queda was preparing to launch an attack on U.S. soil.

I’ve heard all this before.  The main point is what did they ignore?
What exactly was in the report? And how could they have prepared for any possible intelligence that was in the report?
Did they ignore the report?  Or did they just not take it seriously..which isn’t a crime.
The degree of negligence is in inverse proportion to the lack of details and lack of clear and present danger in the report.
Whatever the facts are, there are over-arching issues that were in play before and after all these events unfolded.
Obviously there was a strong desire to invade Iraq for oil. And for this I will start a new thread….

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 28 June 2013 11:07 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 36 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  582
Joined  2010-04-19
citizenschallenge.pm - 28 June 2013 08:41 AM

Tragically, the president so many of us had so much hope for is turning out to be another clone.

Finally! Someone with the guts to actually just say something like this for crying out loud!

Many people are starting to realize that Obama is actually a much more effective evil than Bush was. There are even African Americans that are starting to say this. The fact is: Obama’s the slickest package that the establishment has every introduced to us. Most of us fell for it. Perhaps he started out sincere, and really meant all of the promises he made. Whatever happened along the way, we don’t know, but he is NOT the guy who campaigned for the presidential election in 2008. Either he changed, or he was a shill from the beginning. Either way, he’s our Bush, and we have to be able to say that, otherwise we WILL fall for this again.

Real change starts with having the testicular fortitude to just admit it.

 Signature 

Don’t get set into one form, adapt it and build your own, and let it grow, be like water. Empty your mind, be formless, shapeless — like water. Now you put water in a cup, it becomes the cup; You put water into a bottle it becomes the bottle; You put it in a teapot it becomes the teapot. Now water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend.

- Bruce Lee -

Profile
 
 
Posted: 28 June 2013 03:17 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 37 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3789
Joined  2010-08-15
VYAZMA - 28 June 2013 10:39 AM

I’m not doubting that 9-11 wasn’t a pre-text for invading Iraq. Terrorist fears and WMD was a pre-text for invading Iraq. Everyone knows that.
But to suggest that anybody allowed those attacks to happen when they could have been prevented?
To suggest that cockpit doors were purposely left unlocked for terrorists?
That’s what I’m taking about.

Well yes, I am suggesting that the evidence points to the pre-9/11 Bush Administration not having the slightest interest in preventing terrorist attacks on US property.

I’m also suggesting they had no idea of what that attack was actually going to be and in their hubris couldn’t see past an embassy or warship “incident”.

oops


and yes I take Richard A. Clarke’s word over the draft-dodging Prez, VP and rest of the neocon cast.

 Signature 

How many times do lies need to be exposed
before we have permission to trash them?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 28 June 2013 09:34 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 38 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1396
Joined  2010-04-22

Maybe it’s just me, but whenever I see the word “neocon” I am strongly inclined to note a similarity to the Nazis of Godwin’s Law.

 Signature 

“All musicians are subconsciously mathematicians.”

- Thelonious Monk

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 June 2013 03:14 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 39 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2239
Joined  2012-10-27
Cloak - 26 June 2013 06:04 PM
VYAZMA - 26 June 2013 05:10 PM
Scott Mayers - 26 June 2013 04:45 PM

Like I said elsewhere in actual sincerity: Let’s require all government representatives and major officials to have their lives recorded live everywhere they go for their terms in office. This would assure us the democratic accountability that is lacking and make them respect their beliefs to evade privacy rights for others.

What kind of privacy do you really think you need to protect?
Most govt officials and reps do have their lives recorded everywhere they go while in office.
That’s why many of them get caught having affairs, smoking crack in bathrooms, embezzling money, taking favors.
That’s why they are on the news and TV all the time.  That’s why you know about their daughters graduations or their sons new braces.
Did you forget that they are looking for terrorists?  Did it ever occur to you that they might want to prevent another 9-11 type disaster?
Did you know that that is what govts do to protect their citizens?
What privacy do you really want to protect. Do you think anyone gives a crap what you do in your private time? Do you?

No, I don’t care what they do in the bathroom. I care about the private deals they make behind the American people’s backs. I care about the secret meetings where we get screwed without our consent, where the so-called “democratic process” gets circumvented. I care about the fact that our so called “representatives” can read all of our letters, see all of our emails, take all of our calls, yet still do the very opposite of what the people want, simply because the guy with the most money and direct-access asked him to. I care about the fact that legislation can be passed without the people being alerted about it.

I don’t care about the fact that Anthony Weiner wants to show random women his little dingy. I care about the fact that people in the same position as Weiner can easily, with very little impunity betray those who put them office in the first place.

I don’t want to see the guy taking a crap at home in his bathroom. What I want is full disclosure of every single deal that is made, every single donation (including full disclosure of the (donors), and every single deliberation prior to voting on the legislation.

And give me the freedom to remove a portion of the politician’s income and deposit it back into my bank account, every single time I feel that I have been deceived or misrepresented.

Forgive me for not being as trusting as you are, but when a group of people who claim to represent us takes trillions of our dollars and gives it to Wall Street criminals, Goldman Sachs, and Monsanto, it’s a bit difficult for me to adopt such a position. Call me crazy, but I tend to feel like our government and their corporate bosses are a bigger problem than this “ever-present threat” of terrorism that they keep trying to shove down our throats.

You’re absolutely right.

Lois

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 June 2013 03:22 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 40 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2239
Joined  2012-10-27
DarronS - 28 June 2013 10:42 AM
VYAZMA - 28 June 2013 10:39 AM

I’m not doubting that 9-11 wasn’t a pre-text for invading Iraq. Terrorist fears and WMD was a pre-text for invading Iraq. Everyone knows that.
But to suggest that anybody allowed those attacks to happen when they could have been prevented?
To suggest that cockpit doors were purposely left unlocked for terrorists?
That’s what I’m taking about.

GW Bush and his advisors ignored a report stating Al Queda was preparing to launch an attack on U.S. soil.

That may be tRue, and, believe me, I have no love or respect for GWB or his henchmen, but there were and are hundreds of such reports, 99% of them hoaxes or diversionary tactics.  If US security forces or any US agency were to investigate and prepare a defense against even half of them the government would grind to a standstill and nobody would be protected from anything. That may well have been their intention.

Lois

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 June 2013 10:34 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 41 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  514
Joined  2010-11-21
VYAZMA - 28 June 2013 10:39 AM

I’m not doubting that 9-11 wasn’t a pre-text for invading Iraq. Terrorist fears and WMD was a pre-text for invading Iraq. Everyone knows that.
But to suggest that anybody allowed those attacks to happen when they could have been prevented?
To suggest that cockpit doors were purposely left unlocked for terrorists?
That’s what I’m taking about.

I certainly didn’t imply any of these things. Citizens presented what I’m referring to. As to the cockpit doors being unlocked, know one could have prevented anything because something like it never happened before to this degree. In fact, as a kid, I loved being invited to the cockpit and feel bad that kids won’t be welcome to do it anymore. My point was to say that locking the cockpit doors afterwards was all that was necessary because I don’t think that the terrorists in this act had to use much intelligence to pull the plan through. I think that the security measures were already sufficient otherwise and all the hype to amp up security and go to war was unnecessary. I apologize, Vyazma, if you got the wrong impression.

 Signature 

I eat without fear of certain Death from The Tree of Knowledge because with wisdom, we may one day break free from its mortal curse.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 June 2013 11:50 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 42 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4140
Joined  2008-08-14
DarronS - 27 June 2013 08:45 PM
VYAZMA - 27 June 2013 06:14 PM

You’re presuming the govt. knew this but wanted to take advantage of the situation to take measures that they’ve wanted to do before? etc etc…
Aren’t there other Forums specifically designed for the hysterically paranoid?

Google “project for the new american century” and click the ...

Oh hell, I’ll save you the trouble.

Go here and read the articles about how the people who selected GW Bush and ran the government during his administration had plans to invade Iraq while Bill Clinton was in office.

I didn’t click the link. But I’m sure most of it is on par with what I agree with.
The only issue I have here is an acute point:
The attacks of 9-11 weren’t orchestrated or allowed to happen by any internal entities within the US.
Were they a good excuse and most likely an excellent coincidental opportunity….yes. Yes.
The notion that anyone in the US would allow those attacks to be carried out is ludicrous.

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 June 2013 12:00 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 43 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4140
Joined  2008-08-14
Scott Mayers - 29 June 2013 10:34 AM
VYAZMA - 28 June 2013 10:39 AM

I’m not doubting that 9-11 wasn’t a pre-text for invading Iraq. Terrorist fears and WMD was a pre-text for invading Iraq. Everyone knows that.
But to suggest that anybody allowed those attacks to happen when they could have been prevented?
To suggest that cockpit doors were purposely left unlocked for terrorists?
That’s what I’m taking about.

I certainly didn’t imply any of these things. Citizens presented what I’m referring to. As to the cockpit doors being unlocked, know one could have prevented anything because something like it never happened before to this degree. In fact, as a kid, I loved being invited to the cockpit and feel bad that kids won’t be welcome to do it anymore. My point was to say that locking the cockpit doors afterwards was all that was necessary because I don’t think that the terrorists in this act had to use much intelligence to pull the plan through. I think that the security measures were already sufficient otherwise and all the hype to amp up security and go to war was unnecessary. I apologize, Vyazma, if you got the wrong impression.

There’s no need to apologize, if there’s anybody who should apologize it’s me. I get spun out quickly.
I mistook your comments. Your statement here even further clarifies your stance.  And it makes sense to a point.
And that leads to one of the main points in this discussion.
The people, the economy and the government did everything and are doing everything they feel to protect against another attack.
The extra security, the phone monitoring, the airport patdowns and scans..all of it.
Can’t you see that for what it is?  Is 12 years enough time to erase the horrors of 9-11?
That’s the govts job.  People are held accountable for security. They are damned if they do and damned if they don’t.
You have to see this. Their ultimate responsibility is to prevent another terrorist attack…that’s it!
They don’t want to form an Orwellian Police state. “They” is us!  Unfortunately, Snowden is a good example. And critics like yourself and Cloak..and many others.
There is no “they”!  We the people of the US are responsible for protecting ourselves.
But critics like yourself are not seeing the picture.
They aren’t monitoring your phone to listen to you and your girlfriend. They aren’t patting you down at the airport so you will miss your flight.
As for going to war…I explained that in the other thread. As you can see that is up for debate as well.

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 June 2013 07:45 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 44 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  582
Joined  2010-04-19
VYAZMA - 29 June 2013 12:00 PM

There’s no need to apologize, if there’s anybody who should apologize it’s me. I get spun out quickly.
I mistook your comments. Your statement here even further clarifies your stance.  And it makes sense to a point.
And that leads to one of the main points in this discussion.
The people, the economy and the government did everything and are doing everything they feel to protect against another attack.
The extra security, the phone monitoring, the airport patdowns and scans..all of it.
Can’t you see that for what it is?  Is 12 years enough time to erase the horrors of 9-11?
That’s the govts job.  People are held accountable for security. They are damned if they do and damned if they don’t.
You have to see this. Their ultimate responsibility is to prevent another terrorist attack…that’s it!
They don’t want to form an Orwellian Police state. “They” is us!  Unfortunately, Snowden is a good example. And critics like yourself and Cloak..and many others.
There is no “they”!  We the people of the US are responsible for protecting ourselves.
But critics like yourself are not seeing the picture.
They aren’t monitoring your phone to listen to you and your girlfriend. They aren’t patting you down at the airport so you will miss your flight.
As for going to war…I explained that in the other thread. As you can see that is up for debate as well.

I have no idea what really happened with 9/11. Evidence seems to lend more toward it being a straightforward terrorist attack that could have been easily prevented if so many different parties didn’t’ screw up along the way. There are some suspicious things here and there, but if I was backed into a corner and forced to give my assessment, I would have to say that it probably wasn’t an inside job. There are a lot of problems with the conspiracy version. Could they have known about it beforehand? Maybe, but there’s very little concrete evidence available to draw a conclusion on.

I just did a quick search online, and I found a really good 6 1/2 minute video by Chomsky that basically sums up my stance on the 9/11 event.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwZ-vIaW6Bc

Aside from all of that, when it comes to my perspective towards government, we have to start with the fact that our leaders (nearly all of them) have demonstrated, almost consistently, that they are VERY difficult to trust. This includes Obama.

Please keep in mind that I used to defend Obama’s actions vehemently. Some of my older comments on this forum clearly demonstrate that. Since my wife’s side of the family are mostly of the tea-party conservative variety, including my mother-in-law, I had to spend ALOT of time fighting people off.  But it finally got to the point where I had to take a look at the accumulation of the evidence presented by both radicals on the left and on the right to come to the conclusion that Obama is not so different from Bush. In fact, he comes across as a slicker, more polished version of Bush. It’s like they took the best of Clinton and the worst of Bush, mixed it together, made him black, gave him the language of the left, and presented him to the public. I don’t think that he was always this way. In fact, I believe that he really believed in the things he campaigned for. That guy is dead though.

I think this supports John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton’s perspective, when he coined the famous phrase: “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men.”

When people try to convince me that what the government is doing is for my best interest, I have to admit that it is EXTREMELY difficult to accept that sometimes. Sure, there are some times when they do help us, but my assessment of the situation is that it is becoming less and less the norm.

 Signature 

Don’t get set into one form, adapt it and build your own, and let it grow, be like water. Empty your mind, be formless, shapeless — like water. Now you put water in a cup, it becomes the cup; You put water into a bottle it becomes the bottle; You put it in a teapot it becomes the teapot. Now water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend.

- Bruce Lee -

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 June 2013 09:39 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 45 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  9280
Joined  2006-08-29
Cloak - 29 June 2013 07:45 PM
VYAZMA - 29 June 2013 12:00 PM

There’s no need to apologize, if there’s anybody who should apologize it’s me. I get spun out quickly.
I mistook your comments. Your statement here even further clarifies your stance.  And it makes sense to a point.
And that leads to one of the main points in this discussion.
The people, the economy and the government did everything and are doing everything they feel to protect against another attack.
The extra security, the phone monitoring, the airport patdowns and scans..all of it.
Can’t you see that for what it is?  Is 12 years enough time to erase the horrors of 9-11?
That’s the govts job.  People are held accountable for security. They are damned if they do and damned if they don’t.
You have to see this. Their ultimate responsibility is to prevent another terrorist attack…that’s it!
They don’t want to form an Orwellian Police state. “They” is us!  Unfortunately, Snowden is a good example. And critics like yourself and Cloak..and many others.
There is no “they”!  We the people of the US are responsible for protecting ourselves.
But critics like yourself are not seeing the picture.
They aren’t monitoring your phone to listen to you and your girlfriend. They aren’t patting you down at the airport so you will miss your flight.
As for going to war…I explained that in the other thread. As you can see that is up for debate as well.

I have no idea what really happened with 9/11. Evidence seems to lend more toward it being a straightforward terrorist attack that could have been easily prevented if so many different parties didn’t’ screw up along the way. There are some suspicious things here and there, but if I was backed into a corner and forced to give my assessment, I would have to say that it probably wasn’t an inside job. There are a lot of problems with the conspiracy version. Could they have known about it beforehand? Maybe, but there’s very little concrete evidence available to draw a conclusion on.

I just did a quick search online, and I found a really good 6 1/2 minute video by Chomsky that basically sums up my stance on the 9/11 event.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwZ-vIaW6Bc

Aside from all of that, when it comes to my perspective towards government, we have to start with the fact that our leaders (nearly all of them) have demonstrated, almost consistently, that they are VERY difficult to trust. This includes Obama.

Please keep in mind that I used to defend Obama’s actions vehemently. Some of my older comments on this forum clearly demonstrate that. Since my wife’s side of the family are mostly of the tea-party conservative variety, including my mother-in-law, I had to spend ALOT of time fighting people off.  But it finally got to the point where I had to take a look at the accumulation of the evidence presented by both radicals on the left and on the right to come to the conclusion that Obama is not so different from Bush. In fact, he comes across as a slicker, more polished version of Bush. It’s like they took the best of Clinton and the worst of Bush, mixed it together, made him black, gave him the language of the left, and presented him to the public. I don’t think that he was always this way. In fact, I believe that he really believed in the things he campaigned for. That guy is dead though.

I think this supports John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton’s perspective, when he coined the famous phrase: “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men.”

When people try to convince me that what the government is doing is for my best interest, I have to admit that it is EXTREMELY difficult to accept that sometimes. Sure, there are some times when they do help us, but my assessment of the situation is that it is becoming less and less the norm.

Just like Chosky, you seem to understand policits—which probably doens’t account for much, except for politics. But I guess it’s fun.

[ Edited: 29 June 2013 09:42 PM by George ]
Profile
 
 
   
3 of 5
3