America's philosophical change since 1776

[wumpsdad]

I don't know which revolutionary it was [tho I am sure readers here would] that said:

"Give me liberty or give me death."

2 days ago I heard some bush regime spokesman speaking about the illegal wiretap scandal saying that regarding civil liberties, you don't have any if your dead.

so after 200 years, the "official" position in America is

"give up your liberty, or you'll get death"

a complete 180.
are more of y'all Americans seeing this irony?

peace

wumpsdad

Been saying it for at least 5 years now.
RR

[Hippie3]

one would hope
views might evolve a bit
in 230 years.

[maidenofiron]

this shows that weve come to a period of both comfort and apathy. weve taken our civil liberties for granted and people dont realize what it means to give them up, and many dont care to give them up. Its much easier just to sit back, crack open a beer and watch tv. why worry about what this means for us, or future generations? If those in power find that taking civil liberties away doesnt cause widespread opposition, whats going to keep them from taking away more in the future?

[shedthemonkey]

Originally Posted by Hippie3

one would hope
views might evolve a bit
in 230 years.

This is a bit more like the Island of Dr. Maroe (sp?) than evolultion. We have this two faced single party system that you get the devil you know vs. the devil you don't know, both of which are corrupt and out to line their pockets and grab as much power as possible.

I wish there was a way to take money out of politics. It truely is the root of the evil part of this USA gvt. IMHO. This makes my head hurt before I've had my coffee.

Hippie3? Do you think this evolution will continue in the vein of 1984 with half the population watching the other half and continual war to keep the economy from flopping? Are we doomed to a collapse soon? I read the Hamas thread too and here we seem to have a bunch of zealots working actively for the destruction of the world as we know it.

I hope Terrence McKenna was right and that the singularity he fortold at 2012 (December) is some kind of enlightenment where we finally GET the idea that we all are one and that this squabbling and weapon rattling is just a waste of lives and resources.

It's where Mycotopia goes mainstream, Baby, and mushrooms make us all happy shining people holding hands! Nice pipe dream. I fear it will be the bad kind of mushrooms: clouds.

Dammit. Now I'm all depressed and I gotta go to work.

Happy thoughts, Happy thoughts....

[Hippie3]

pretty tough to foretell the future with any confidence
but my guess is that we're in for a very tough 21st century.
i don't really expect total annihilation
but a collapse of the world economy seems fairly likely.
several factors are converging against us,
the weather, politics, religion, the environment, oil, nuclear proliferation, epidemics, etc.
i don't really believe that the savior-messiah is coming to save us any time soon.
and with 95% of humanity just a couple steps out of the trees evolution-wise,
i don't expect the politicians or the scientists or the priests to save us.
as a species
we are about to get our collective asses kicked hard.

[Hippie3]

Originally Posted by maidenofiron

this shows that weve come to a period of both comfort and apathy. weve taken our civil liberties for granted and people dont realize what it means to give them up, and many dont care to give them up. Its much easier just to sit back, crack open a beer and watch tv. why worry about what this means for us, or future generations? If those in power find that taking civil liberties away doesnt cause widespread opposition, whats going to keep them from taking away more in the future?

you need a better understanding of human nature.
i would never surrender my freedom
but i'd sacrifice your freedom in a heartbeat
to save the lives of my family and friends.
that is human
and the problem we face.

[mindovermycelia]

how can you give up my freedom? if you vote for these things or don't protest them, the freedom lost is everyones. unless you are somehow above the law, of course.

[Stenciler]

Originally Posted by mindovermycelia

how can you give up my freedom? if you vote for these things or don't protest them, the freedom lost is everyones. unless you are somehow above the law, of course.

politicians do it all the time, and I think that's partially Hip's point. If you've got stock in security you can pass a Patriot Act and pay for your own privacy with the profits. This comes from the indoctrination of most of the Bush administration by Leo Strauss, who believes the best government is an elitist government.

[Hippie3]

well, i am above the law
but that's another story.

what i actually meant though
is that people who are living
innocent civilian lives generally
do not think they have any reason to
fear scrutiny by their own government,
they know that even if they are wire-tapped
nothing bad will happen as they are
good honest god-fearing citizens.
and so they reason it's ok to strip legal protections away
as only bad people have anything to fear.

[Venice]

speaking about the illegal wiretap scandal

are you a parrot repeating words you heard on NBC or are you a lawyer specializing in constitutional law? I hate to disrupt this little liberal love in but I think you have the facts turned for mass media consumption.

These wiretaps are on calls that have one end connected where they shouldn't be overseas. President Clinton conducted searches without warrants on spies in the U.S In case you weren't aware, it's the presidents job to protect us taxpayers from foreign threats and both presidents are operating within the law and their authority.

Don't you all see that you have become the establishment with all your hate U.S. government, hate Bush opinions? You are on the same page with the big newspapers, talk show hosts, morning news, evening news, Newsweek,and most other mainstream, establishment voices. Get with it. Your brothers and sisters are over there now with camo on fighting the bad guys to end terrorism.

Why not do some reading and get some facts straight instead of sounding like broken records so you can impress your friends on how "informed" you are?

[DJTetsu]

Originally Posted by Venice

are you a parrot repeating words you heard on NBC or are you a lawyer specializing in constitutional law? I hate to disrupt this little liberal love in but I think you have the facts turned for mass media consumption.

You're right we should spend more time trying to convince people with your opinions.

Originally Posted by Venice

Don't you all see that you have become the establishment with all your hate U.S. government, hate Bush opinions? You are on the same page with the big newspapers, talk show hosts, morning news, evening news, Newsweek,and most other mainstream, establishment voices. Get with it. Your brothers and sisters are over there now with camo on fighting the bad guys to end terrorism.

We're sorry to have irritated you for repeating our messages, but please do more and challenge their contexes. Ever wonder why all the people are yelling the anti-Bush message?

And I'm sure the camo guys are finding more WMDs that could of caused more horrific 9-11s I'm sure. I hope that comment was sarcastic!

Originally Posted by Venice

Why not do some reading and get some facts straight instead of sounding like broken records so you can impress your friends on how "informed" you are?

Then help us with some information supporting your case.

[Venice]

Then help us with some information supporting your case.

You know as well as I what the arguments are. There's no way it's all going to be repeated here. And I certainly have no hope of convincing anyone of anything in this thread. You guys have your opinions and I'll assume your sticking to them. I do admit that it never ceases to amaze me how there exists such a clear and well defined enemy and you guys will still rail on the U.S. and the president.

I'm thankful for the two million or so that disagree with you all enough to put on a uniform and the other 75% or so of Americans who don't care if the president does his job with legal wiretaps.

[Hippie3]

speaking of wmd-
iraqi airforce general on cnn the other night
testifies that he witnessed
2 large cargo planes being loaded up full
of saddam's wmd arsenal
which was flown out of iraq
a few days before the invasion
to damascus, syria.

he further claims that it was part of that wmd arsenal
that terrorists tried to use to kill 20,000 jordanians
in an attack that was foiled by jordanian security.

of course
the already-made-up-my-mind crowd will utterly ignore
this iraqi airforce general,
a man who was on the ground in iraq
and in a position to know the facts.
instead they will rely on the likes
of senators kennedy and kerry, &
george soros and nancy pelosi for their opinions.

[pskovinsky]

There is no reason whatsoever for Saddam to kick the UN inspectors out if he didn't have WMD, no doubt there in my mind, he had 'em.


What cracks me up though, is the general belief that what we're doing in Iraq is fighting terrorism.

In afganistan, yes, we were deffinitely fighting terrorism, directly, army V terrorist bases, and the regime that actively supported them.

In iraq, it's not nearly that clear cut, we could be fighting terrorism, though there weren't any large terrorist bases in iraq last time i checked, we might be fighting for freedom (other countries could have used it more, but that doesn't mean thats not what we're doing there), we could be fighting a serious thread to the US (i suppose... Attacking shipping lanes is bad news for the US as well as everybody else), we could be going after WMD (though Iran having them worries me a hell of a lot more, and ditto for North Korea, and really any other extremist nation with nukes, Israel included), or we could just be over there because the dude in charge there tried to kill our leaders Dad (which is a decent reason i guess, a bit petty for an entire nation to be at war for, but whatever. I would have sent my own assassins personally), or we could even be there enforcing the UN's edicts (yeah, right, sure, not like they tried to stop us from going to war or anything).

What i would really like, is a reason that is believable, and that they stick with for a while :P



I think it's time to start taking bets, is Syria next? Or Iran? Or Palastine? Or will we get really crazy, and attack some small african nation and free them from their oppresors?

[Hippie3]

why would you think
that such a complex thing as war
would have just 1 simple cause/reason ?
it's just not that simple,
no slogan answers the question fully.
but just because we can't give one simple reason
that is not to say there is no rationale.
there are three kinds that insist on simple answers-
those seeking political advantage
and those with pre-existing bias,
and those who really don't care.
the rest of who really want to understand
must work past the one-liners
and educate ourselves fully on the issues,
if you really want to know,
if you really care.

[maidenofiron]

Originally Posted by Venice

I do admit that it never ceases to amaze me how there exists such a clear and well defined enemy and you guys will still rail on the U.S. and the president.

its funny that you say that because for most people they have never had, and will never have any contact what so everwith this "well defined enemy". I, just like 99.9% of americans have never seen a "terrorist" and yet we are told constantly to believe its the biggest threat out there. Now its obvious that you hate on the media, and yet the media is the only source of contact we have with this "threat". and I, just like you aswell as much of america thinks the media is bullshit and I ignore it. yet most people in the united states come into direct contact with governmental policies, many of which are not favored (declining economy, relaxed environmental restrictions, kids sent to war ect.). If the president is harming your wellbeing at home, while the media speaks of this foreign enemy which youve never seen before and never will, who do you fear most?

[Hippie3]

i've never met the president nor bin laden.
but at least the president isn't trying to kill me.
geo. bush was not in office when these problems were beginning,
it's extremely simplistic to create a scapegoat out of the president
for all the sins of history.

[maidenofiron]

Originally Posted by Hippie3

it's extremely simplistic to create a scapegoat out of the president for all the sins of history.

holy crap i never went that far. read my post.
i simply said that the president has way more influence over our daily lives than terrorists ever will.

[Hippie3]

you obviously don't fly on airplanes much,
nor do you live in nyc, etc.
your experience is not universal,
the families of the victims of terrorism
rightfully fear and hate bin laden more.
it was not our government that shattered their lives on 9/11.

[viraljimmy]

Originally Posted by Hippie3

my guess is that we're in for a very tough 21st century

Sure seems that way.
I'm scared of the future

[pskovinsky]

Hell, i'd go for a published set of reasons.

I fly on airplanes fairly often, the only difference between pre-911 and post-911 is that i have to take my boots off now, and that wasn't even totally 911 related.

[Hippie3]

we both know that you have already seen plenty of 'reasons' for the war,
so why waste time pretending you're really interested ?
your mind is already made up,
your curiosity is just a clever pretext meant to mask your bias.

[DJTetsu]

Ok, i guess the question of whether going to Iraq was a right one or not has been played out a billion times and there's no point in bringing it up again.

There's something that never never got explained to me, or atleast not fully.

I believe in everything happens is a cause and effect. I also believe that, because of this, no one is to blame (atleast not fully).

The media wants us to believe that Bin Laden just woke up one day and decided he hates the US and wanted to kill thousands, and that ofcourse would make him a good 'Cobra Commander' that we can simply go after.

I bet that no American today or atleast close to none of us wants say that part of 9-11 was due to our history of fucking with that whole region (basically for our interests), but it's my guess that it's the case. We supported him in Afghanistan (though there's a denial of it) and then he became against the U.S. for placing military bases all over the Middle East, and that includes siding with dictatorships. We really don't give a fuck. Afghanistan, by the way, we pretty much left it pretty fucked up after supporting one of the sides (I don't know which, but you can bet whom ever that benefits us). We probably did lots of things only for our own interest and masked them as spreading democracy. If the whole region was left unattended, would they all of the sudden attack us? Obviously we can't ofcourse, since the world depend on their oil. I have a feeling that the white man hates having to give all this cash to the middle eastern man.

Just my guess. There's so much we don't know. I just found that, in life, blame yourself first.

I also see it a shame that many Americans probably see the whole area as one big mess going on, and that there's probably a lot of ignorant grouping of all Middle easterners in that regions armed with guns must be from the same group. They really want to be shouting, 'kill em all!'

It is a mess that part is certain. It is true, there's no simple reasons. That's why someone saying, 'because they have WMD!' was someone oversimplying the situation.

The reason BTW according to my Republican brother (who really keeps up with this stuff), is so that we can place more bases and keep the other countries in the region in-line, and Iraq is a central place to do so. "oh, you wanna hike oil prices? we've got f-16s, ground troops, or ground missiles...how do you want it?"

[Hippie3]

sounds like you are blaming us
to me.

[DJTetsu]

in part yes.

Can't blame anyone fully.

[Hippie3]

yeah, right.
that's why the history books are
just full of accounts of the
american civil reconciliation ,
world reconciliation 1 and 2,
the cold reconciliation,
the vietnam reconciliation,
etc.

[Hippie3]

heh.
you changed your post
and now mine is nonsense.

[DJTetsu]

sorry to do that.

well my point was made.

I just don't think it's black and white.

The region as a whole has a monopoly on the world's oil. They can theoretically charge whatever they want. We probably went in there, wheelin and dealin with whom ever that can go along with a standardized pricing plan. And it didn't matter who this person was, and I bet a dictator is even easier to deal with since, they have the last say in that whole country. We'll support a revolution or suppress one, which one you want?

This will eventually piss off some people.

If i continue with this, the low cost of oil we've been paying through those years, was infact was in part a price for 9-11 (indirectly, and I don't want to get at anyone or anyone that knows victims etc.). If you don't see a connection, try imagining what type of motivation would lead you to want to kill thousands of people.

I'm not hear to say we caused it entirely. Bin Laden clearly is mostly at fault and needs to be captured and killed slowly. But we did help him cause it. We did it by a certain small percentage only God himself knows.

With bases in Iraq, if a country wants to step out of line (oil production/pricing), we now have an excuse to send missiles and say, we thought there were terrorirsts.

The list of countries in the middle east is fairly short and Iraq is in the smack middle:

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgu...magesr&start=2


BTW this has been a motivation for me to look stuff up. I don't need to getting at people TOO much. =)

[Hippie3]

that is quite similar to saying
that a woman who wears skimpy clothing
is to blame
if she gets raped.