I think you missed the part of the article that said that certain wrong things were done in the past but we were not dragged down by them, we corrected them. A surveillance state - so-called - needs to be fully examined for what it really is. Read the publicly available literature published by the military. The reasons are sound. There are a lot more people in the US today as opposed to 1960. Speed is of the essence. The good guys need fast, accurate intelligence or people will be pretty upset if a “dirty” nuclear weapon goes off in their location. Are people afraid they’ll be seen cheating on their wives or going to strip clubs or Bob’s dope house, or committing crimes? As a law-abiding citizen, I’ve never been arrested for anything. And I’m from the fake name Baby Boomer generation.Non-whites are human beings and therefore have human rights, equal to those of whites.
Racial integration is not something to be feared.
Women have rights equal to those of men.
Pre-emptive war is wrong.
A surveillance state is dangerous.
Social inequality can be dangerous.
Would everyone here actually agree to this list, as contained (more or less) in the article? The ironic thing is that I think the percentage of U.S. atheists that would agree to this list would be higher than the percentage of U.S. theists that would! That makes the premise of the article kinda funny to me.
I agree, Ed. Not so much about the surveillance state, but about the rest.I think you missed the part of the article that said that certain wrong things were done in the past but we were not dragged down by them, we corrected them. A surveillance state - so-called - needs to be fully examined for what it really is. Read the publicly available literature published by the military. The reasons are sound. There are a lot more people in the US today as opposed to 1960. Speed is of the essence. The good guys need fast, accurate intelligence or people will be pretty upset if a “dirty” nuclear weapon goes off in their location. Are people afraid they’ll be seen cheating on their wives or going to strip clubs or Bob’s dope house, or committing crimes? As a law-abiding citizen, I’ve never been arrested for anything. And I’m from the fake name Baby Boomer generation.
Right now, even after forced busing, Detroit is the most segregated city in the country. I drive through black neighborhoods there without issue. I’ll buy gas there. People have been friendly to me. And another thing. They sure have a lot of churches.
Peace,
Ed
Can someone explain their issues with surveillance? The NSA is tapping every electronic device out there. Every cell phone, every text message and your computer. They’ve got a small fleet of satellites parked on one side of the planet just for that purpose. Is it because you’ve got 50 Gig of porn on your (referring to no one in particular) hard drive?I agree, Ed. Not so much about the surveillance state, but about the rest.
Again, Ed, you have me at a loss. You just shared an article extolling American values, and now you’re asking me what objections I would have to an NSA that is limitless in power, having access to all of my personal documents and communications without due process? You also desire, as far as I can tell, a government that censors the media? Is that right? Do you indeed believe in American values? That’s fine if you don’t, but if you do, I’m not sure what you think those values are.Can someone explain their issues with surveillance? The NSA is tapping every electronic device out there. Every cell phone, every text message and your computer. They’ve got a small fleet of satellites parked on one side of the planet just for that purpose. Is it because you’ve got 50 Gig of porn on your (referring to no one in particular) hard drive?
Peace,
Ed
For all industry experience you claim ed, you seem out of touch with a typical superhero weakness: identity. But here’s the thing, it’s not just a superhero weakness. It’s every human being’s.Can someone explain their issues with surveillance? The NSA is tapping every electronic device out there. Every cell phone, every text message and your computer. They’ve got a small fleet of satellites parked on one side of the planet just for that purpose. Is it because you’ve got 50 Gig of porn on your (referring to no one in particular) hard drive?
Wow. Where did I mention censoring the media? I just wanted - from anybody - a cogent reply. Thanks for your thoughts.Again, Ed, you have me at a loss. You just shared an article extolling American values, and now you’re asking me what objections I would have to an NSA that is limitless in power, having access to all of my personal documents and communications without due process? You also desire, as far as I can tell, a government that censors the media? Is that right? Do you indeed believe in American values? That’s fine if you don’t, but if you do, I’m not sure what you think those values are.
To address your question, the reason I would not want the NSA or any government agency to have unlimited access to my private documents and communications (and those of others) is this: to preserve our liberty. I want people to be free to express disagreement with government policies (e.g. abortion, war, whatever) without fear of reprisal. I don’t want an unscrupulous government official to use such information to punish political rivals or threaten the electoral process, nor do I want a rogue official to use such information to stalk a love interest, sell identities/banking information/whatever, to track the movement of personal or political enemies. That’s for starters.
And yeah, if I’m arrested, I want it to be on a warrant. I want a fair and speedy trial. I don’t want jackboots kicking in my door at midnight and seizing or for that matter *planting *“evidence.”
Don’t those sound like American values to you?
There’s nothing wrong with the strategy ed it’s the trust that people have issues with. How do we know that the NSA won’t be compromised the same way Hydra compromised S.H.I.E.L.D? That’s why people are scared. The very possibility is creating the unease.Does anyone see where I’m going with this? There is a very much needed balance between privacy and security but, and I’ve read this a hundred times, the enemy, and by necessity, the public, can’t know what the intelligence community knows regarding national security. They - the terrorists - can’t have a clue. I do not want to see an erosion of privacy or due process in this country. Either we trust Senate committees that have a right to create that balance and know what’s going on or we don’t.
I am curious what any supporter of the NSA spying would say about it, if it came out that certain judges were intimidated to change their positions because of information someone might have on them. A Supreme Court judge might be approached and told ‘you will vote this way tomorrow or this information will be released to the press.’ What would you say to that? Everyone’s got skeletons.Can someone explain their issues with surveillance? The NSA is tapping every electronic device out there. Every cell phone, every text message and your computer. They’ve got a small fleet of satellites parked on one side of the planet just for that purpose. Is it because you’ve got 50 Gig of porn on your (referring to no one in particular) hard drive?
Peace,
Ed
I don’t want anyone to have my information because I don’t want it to be used against me. There are bad people who would use the information they have against people. Hitler, Stalin, Mau are all examples of people who would use it who have had power.Wow. Where did I mention censoring the media? I just wanted - from anybody - a cogent reply. Thanks for your thoughts.
I firmly believe in due process, privacy and am against the abuse of power by the government and associated agencies. Or the unlawful sharing of private information by anyone.
During the last Iraq war, I tried to buy a money order. I was required to show my driver’s license. Why? Because individuals were sending money to the enemy. There’s a lot people don’t know and - not referring to you - are afraid to find out. It’s much easier to go to bed at night because people are already stressed out. If anyone takes the time to read the literature, it becomes very clear. There will be no more World War II’s unless some major power starts it. Since that’s unlikely, what’s left? Small groups that could be anybody anywhere and with sympathizers in the country of interest. Let’s talk about the US. We are at greater and greater risk for low-intensity actions. The analysts could care less if anyone is the most immoral person on the planet regarding their sex lives and addictions. Those people don’t matter. Who does? People willing to sell automatic weapons to anyone - no questions asked. Or explosives or even nuclear material.
Does anyone see where I’m going with this? There is a very much needed balance between privacy and security but, and I’ve read this a hundred times, the enemy, and by necessity, the public, can’t know what the intelligence community knows regarding national security. They - the terrorists - can’t have a clue. I do not want to see an erosion of privacy or due process in this country. Either we trust Senate committees that have a right to create that balance and know what’s going on or we don’t.
Personal vendettas only happen in movies. Based on my readings of human behavior, nobody will kick your door in at night or plant evidence unless they have something against you. And how does someone protest against any government action today? Carrying a sign in front of a government building? Posting on the internet? Sending a letter? Yes, we should protest any government abuse of power but that takes courage and a willingness to take a risk.
How about those President Bush designated “Free Speech Zones”? Anybody? Did anyone protest that and if so, what were the results? I watched the Civil Rights movement under the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr, unfold as it happened. I read his biography. He told his fellow protestors: “If you can’t control your urge to fight back then don’t march with me. That does not mean I no longer want you, but we have to face the police dogs, the water hoses and the bricks and bottles.” Non-violence was his strength.
The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.
Peace,
Ed
It can be difficult to decide what is the greater threat. Is it our own government, or potential enemies abroad?Again, Ed, you have me at a loss. You just shared an article extolling American values, and now you’re asking me what objections I would have to an NSA that is limitless in power, having access to all of my personal documents and communications without due process? You also desire, as far as I can tell, a government that censors the media? Is that right? Do you indeed believe in American values? That’s fine if you don’t, but if you do, I’m not sure what you think those values are.
To address your question, the reason I would not want the NSA or any government agency to have unlimited access to my private documents and communications (and those of others) is this: to preserve our liberty. I want people to be free to express disagreement with government policies (e.g. abortion, war, whatever) without fear of reprisal. I don’t want an unscrupulous government official to use such information to punish political rivals or threaten the electoral process, nor do I want a rogue official to use such information to stalk a love interest, sell identities/banking information/whatever, to track the movement of personal or political enemies. That’s for starters.
And yeah, if I’m arrested, I want it to be on a warrant. I want a fair and speedy trial. I don’t want jackboots kicking in my door at midnight and seizing or for that matter *planting *“evidence.”
Don’t those sound like American values to you?