"National Security" or 1st Amendment rights denial?

[easymo]

Eagler. I understand your preference.

  As for myself.  I like seeing the talking pig on TV.  When they drag his corpse out for viewing.  It will make it all the sweeter.

[AKDejaVu]

Good point Deja. So, in your opinions...do you think the Gov't used good judgement in issueing such advice? Or is freedom of information more important?

There is still freedom of "the press"... it has not been replaced.  It has not been restricted.  I don't think that the U.S. Government nor the media want to try to debate this issue right now.  The government was moderate, and the press will/won't respond apropriately.

On a side note... I find several things about "freedom of information" quite amuzing right now.  I watched a few minutes of "60 Minutes" when they were interviewing the doctor that was detained for two weeks before being released.

The gentleman being interviewed provided the reasoning behind his intitial detainment:

• He'd recently been to both Boston and N.Y.C.
• He'd recently wired a sum of money to the middle east
• He'd recently called someone in Afghanistan with the last name "Ladin"
• He'd recently booked 5 seats on another flight (dunno if one way or not)

The gentleman explained how he was transfered from one detaining center to another before the F.B.I. interviewed him.  At one center, he actually feared for his life based on the looks the guards were giving him.

Here is the truly ironic part:  This was all because of the media.  The F.B.I. had not released any information on this individual.  The media dug up basically what was shown above (some of it anyways) and presented some pretty incriminating stories.  This was brought up by the interviewer as if it were "matter of fact"... not really the issue.

The gentleman was then asked about his "interogation" to which he responded "The F.B.I. acted with complete professionalism.  I was quite impressed.  I consider them to be friends.  They asked me the questions and I answered (with my lawyer present) and they were satisfied.  They then let me go."

In situations like that... who is the beast?  Who is running out of control?  Who is not using the better side of discretion?  Who is pushing the limits of their rights and coming the closest to violating someone else's.  Quite the paradox.

AKDejaVu

[Hangtime]

News flash folks..

Item.. if a towel head wants the latest terrorist news and secret handshake info, he can get it direct via the internet off the Arab TV website. I believe its also available live and direct via the Dish Network.

So, I might add; can we.

This messed up situation where we start tearing and ripping at each other while wailing about percieved encroachments to our 'civil rights' is a made to order benefit for the terrorists, who, surpise; suprise, are no strangers to the concept of 'divide and conquer'.

Lets focus on trashing the Terrorists, not each other.

I suspect that when it's over, "ends justifies means" will be sagely nodded to.. and any infringements upon our 'civil rights' will be restored. To accomplish the looked for 'ends' it seems wize that we ALL insist terminoligy like "for the duration of this crisis" should be appended to any legisilation or executive orders (and requests) that may in FACT suspend or abridge those rights.

And in the meantime, look through the posturing of our politicians, spin doctors and meadia twits for REAL threats. Frankly; poppin a muzzel on our elected officals regarding classified military and defense issues would be just as welcome as corking the talking heads blathering away in the media...

"...for the duration of this crisis."

[easymo]

It always comes back the the same question.  Are you willing to trade your free society for security?

  My answer is.  diddly no.  Nuke me, I would rather be dead.

 BTW. Hang.  As long as there is one of these pigs left in the world.  The goverment can argue that its no over.  This could go on for generations.

[ 10-11-2001: Message edited by: easymo ]

[fd ski]

Ripsnort, since you asked..

Whole thing is quite amusing as far as i'm conserned.
I can think of millions of better ways to communicate without depending on news agencies to air your speach in entirety  
What if they deemed it too long and turned it into soundbites ? Mass suciside of terrorists since the message was corrupted..

It's a joke.

DofJ already asked for sweeping powers due to "terrorist emergency" but in the end, they will stay long time from now and will be used against people like you and me.

I thoght you reps were afraid of the big government, weren't you ? Now you want it bigger and more powerful ?

How about this ? Terrorist buys a gun and shoots 10 people with it before he's nailed.
Possible scenario, isn't it ?

Would you agree with "suspending" 2nd ammendement for a while ?
And how would you react of this sort of changes to constitution were being carried out by Gore ?
I know Cabby would have a fit  

[Manedew]

You really think Osama needs the US media to send messages? Comeon what BS, just take a moment to think how many ways you could order someone halfway around the world to strike or not...   Newspaper Classified section .. easy to place a code... So let us, everyone see the thing.. bet any dweeb can find it on the net anyway.

[Hangtime]

Reasonable precautions vs credible threats.

Is it reasonable to force all americans to stand in lines for 2 hours min to fly to the next city?

Is it reasonable to have your commute into the city extended by 2 hours every day.. in EACH direction?

There's a hunderd more examples of financial and functional sacrafices being made right now to accomodate the war on terror.. and it would seem we're goin along with it; semi-willingly; grudingly, grumbling, but "yeah; ok... if we gotta; we gotta.."

The number of encroachments into our ALL our 'personal libertys' are running signifcantly higher than those that we here in NY are feeling already.. your emails are being read, your cell phones and land lines are monitored for 'flag' phrases and words, soon you will have a national identity file and identity card, your finances and personal movements will be monitored and recorded, .. itsa DONE DEAL folks. All it's gonna take is time.

There's a policy change in the wind.. the government is posturing to act on info before a crime is committed.. a complete reversal on previous policy.

And they say they are gonna do it without infringing on the constitution.. I dunno how that can happen.. but I just heard Ashcroft insist that thats the plan.

Basicly, they say they're gonna enforce policy first, then 'the law'..........

The lunatic ravings of my maniacal mind.

[StSanta]

The terrorists atacked yer way of life. Now you're ready to change it?

I've been under the impression that the most *ardent* defenders of  constitutional rights (well, when it suits their goals) have been Republicans.

And I am left with the feeling that had it been Clinton saying the same things, there'd be great wails and screaming.

Might just be me though.

So: no. Don't infringe on the rights of the individual. The Constitution is not a thing that can, or should, be tinkered with to fit the current political climate. *Especially* as it would be admitting a defeat: USA 0, Terrorists 1.

[weazel]

Originally posted by StSanta:
The terrorists atacked yer way of life. Now you're ready to change it?

I've been under the impression that the most *ardent* defenders of  constitutional rights (well, when it suits their goals) have been Republicans.

And I am left with the feeling that had it been Clinton saying the same things, there'd be great wails and screaming.

Might just be me though.

So: no. Don't infringe on the rights of the individual. The Constitution is not a thing that can, or should, be tinkered with to fit the current political climate. *Especially* as it would be admitting a defeat: USA 0, Terrorists 1.

Exactly, the right wingers are going to get their police state.

[Ripsnort]

10bears said "Question: Have the Republicans softened their stance on federalizing security at airports/bus and train stations?.. I know the Demos have been trying to get that through for years but it keeps getting blocked.The Republicans say it would be too inconvenient and expensive.

Unfortunately, money talked to Al Gore, this was the result:

 

But within days, according to Victoria
                             Cummock, a whistleblower commission
                             member, the airline industry jumped all over
                             Gore with concerns about costs. As a result, 10
                             days later, Gore sent a letter to airline lobbyist
                             Carol Hallett promising that the commission's
                             findings would not result in any loss of
                             revenue.

                             The Democratic National
                             Committee received
                             $40,000 from TWA the next
                             day. Within two weeks,
                             Northwest, United and
                             American Airlines ponied
                             up another $55,000 for the
                             1996 campaign. In the next
                             two months leading up to the November
                             elections, American Airlines donated $250,000
                             to the Democrats. United donated $100,000 to
                             the DNC. Northwestern contributed $53,000.
                             Other reports suggest even more airline money
                             was poured into the election campaign that
                             year.

[/b]

Here's the article: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=24840  

Fdski/StSanta:
Conservatives are for bigger military primarily.  Less intrusion on our lives Governmentally, however, in a case of War, I believe most don't mind alittle intrusion if our lives at our stake, think about that.

One thing is certain, those armed (2nd amendment) sleep alittle more comfortably at night than those not armed  

[Ripsnort]

Weazel, there's a big difference in a police state as you think of it and terrorism reality we live in today.  Extra security at the airport, allowing wire tapping on suspected terrorists I don't have a problem with if it means making the area I live in that much safer.  I haven't seen any Jack boots marching to brass bands down mainstreet yet.  

[Ripsnort]

StSanta: The Gov't just asked the media to put a cap on it, they didn't require it like Hitler and Gobbels did.  The media complied, or in some cases, they will review the tapes thoroughly prior to showing them.  Its outside the scope of 1st amendment rights when its a Nationaly Security issue, unfortunately, Gov'ts in the past have taken advantage of that, but I just don't see that happening in an open society that a Democratic Gov 't provides.

[weazel]

Originally posted by Ripsnort:
Weazel, there's a big difference in a police state as you think of it and terrorism reality we live in today.  Extra security at the airport, allowing wire tapping on suspected terrorists I don't have a problem with if it means making the area I live in that much safer.  I haven't seen any Jack boots marching to brass bands down mainstreet yet.    

Pull your head out of the sand then go back and read Hangtimes post, the reality of the situation is BIGGER more intrusive government.

All the lies Bush told in his campaign were just that.

You may believe the rhetoric they spew...I don't.

You right wingers crack me up, if you were in the mens room with dubya and he unzipped and told you it was the right thing to do would you gobble his cock?

<visualizes cabby with a glassy eyed drooling slack jawed expression on his face>

Your guns are the next thing you will lose... they can be used for terrorist attacks.

[ 10-12-2001: Message edited by: weazel ]

[Cobra]

Originally posted by weazel:

 
 and he unzipped and told you it was the right thing to do would you gobble his cock?

 

LOL Weazel....all your hyberpole aside, you got the wrong Pres.  It was the previous occupant that did that!

[Ripsnort]

yeah, bush lobbied tax cuts in the election run, ya, he lied about that!   (Rip counts the $600 bills laying in front of him, knowing that the other $600 was stolen by the Dems when they petrified his tax proposal)