Welcome to SECTalk.com -- The SEC's Premier Fan Site!
You are currently accessing our site as a guest which means you can't access all of our features such as social groups, pick 'ems, and many more. By joining our free community you will have access to all of these great features as well as to participating in our forums, contacting other members, and much more. Registration only takes a minute and SECTalk.com is absolutely free, so please join today!
If you have any problems registering, please contact us.
Water Fountain
Talk about anything else. Jokes, Funny Stuff, Life Issues, how to brew sweet tea, etc....
Democrats: 1. Hilary Clinton 2. Kerry 3. (Insert pop/hot dem at the time of 2007)
Republicans: 1. John McCain (I would prob vote for him) 2. Bill Frist (would lose in the primaries, too right of center) 3. the darkhorse Orrin Hatch (he's been critical of republicans, and pro-life judicial nominees, could appeal to moderates and the right)
and that's great gatornation, but the problem is that YOU'RE sure that people wouldn't mind giving up those freedoms, the problem is that this country is democracy, historical resonance or not, now if we are going to change our gov't structure, that's one thing, but it is still a democracy. And yes I'm aware that the patriot act was passed by elected representatives, but do you think the patriot would pass a nationwide referendum? No. Safety over freedom, I don't know, you're starting to sound like a woman voter and a Torie, I know you're better than that, shit, terrorists should be afraid of american the size of you, at some point, you got to draw a line in the sand and say no, the terrorists have not beaten and will not change my country to dictatorship like theirs, I mean that's essentially what they're doing, you're letting them turn America into an Iraq (ppl tortured by Sadaam were "enemies" of the gov't) or a Saudia Arabia little by putting a premium on security over freedom. You can be as smartass as you like about the forefathers but the fact remains we are a free country and we're supposed to remain one, how is taking away civil liberties not letting terrorists win? Tell me that...
Well, you and Neo make some very good points. I guess I trust the government a bit too much.....i.e., they're not going to grab some random person off the street and keep him or her locked away for a few years; that is, they're probably going to have some reasonable level of suspicion with at least a shred of circumstantial evidence (e.g., email, phone tap, eye witness, etc.). But according to what you guys are saying, that doesn't seem to be the case.
I guess I'm more afraid of the streets and shops of America eventually resembling those of Israel and the Middle East.....a fear grounded in an assumption that the terrorists will succeed if we simply close our constitutional eyes in a fervent prayer that they will simply trip over themselves in the process of attacking our country. That's not being proactive, and that's exactly how 911 happened. We assumed x, y, and z, and a lot of people lost their lives because of assumptions (e.g., hijacked planes would be used for political or monetary gain, not massive, coordinated suicide missions, etc.).
I never want to worry that the restaurant in which I'm eating might explode. And if I have to join the Marines to prevent that from happening, so be it.
And the worst part is that our constitution seems to protect the insane rantings of radical clerics in mosques found within our own borders! That makes no sense to me.....at the VERY least, we should shut down muslim teachings of hatred, terrorism, and suicide bombings within our own country. Then again, white power groups and even sick fers like NAMBLA (sp?) have constitutional protections....perhaps ridding ourselves of the Wahabbi sect of Islam is impossible without altering the constitution.
I don't know.....but this isn't working. I'm all for the Patriot Act.
I agree that we have to work very hard toward breaking up all types of these hate groups. However, I dont think it would take the Patriot Act to do it. If the govt. wants to do something they will do it. Look at Crime Organizations and Mafia's. They are groups with businessmen,lawyers,police, and all types of people in it. They are located all over the globe. Yet the US govt. has been able to greatly reduce their power over the last 20-30 years and they arent nearly as strong as they used to be in this country.They didnt need the Patriot Act to do it and to me it would seem that Crime Organizations would be harder to bring down because of the complexity and reach of their systems. Now all of a sudden they need to pass the Patriot Act to keep the people safe and rid the country of all of these evil-doers? It sounds to me like another example of the current administration using scare tactics to push it's agenda into action.
Those who do not remember history are doomed to repeat it. Unfortuneately there are no more contenants left for us to sail to...
All true....but I don't see the subjective value of freedom and democracy if you're not alive to enjoy them. Staying alive and being safe should be our top priorities. If we can do that without the Patriot Act, I'm all for it. But the safety and protection of the American people should be our #1 concern.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cocky4ever
I agree that we have to work very hard toward breaking up all types of these hate groups. However, I dont think it would take the Patriot Act to do it. If the govt. wants to do something they will do it. Look at Crime Organizations and Mafia's. They are groups with businessmen,lawyers,police, and all types of people in it. They are located all over the globe. Yet the US govt. has been able to greatly reduce their power over the last 20-30 years and they arent nearly as strong as they used to be in this country.They didnt need the Patriot Act to do it and to me it would seem that Crime Organizations would be harder to bring down because of the complexity and reach of their systems. Now all of a sudden they need to pass the Patriot Act to keep the people safe and rid the country of all of these evil-doers? It sounds to me like another example of the current administration using scare tactics to push it's agenda into action.
Well, that makes sense, but I disagree that the Mafia was more difficult to deconstruct than these terrorist cells seem to be. The Mafia is highly organized, and once the internal corruption of law enforcement began to dissolve, good things started happening. With regard to terrorism, at this point, there exists basically no structural hierarchy; they operate of their own volition within their own personal time frame. They blend in completely with the United States' ubiquitous landscape of multiculturalism...no one stand out. Perhaps there are local organizers that help direct funds and other means of support to some of these localized groups, but for the most part, there is no leader upon which we can focus. It's much more slippery, imo.
All true....but I don't see the subjective value of freedom and democracy if you're not alive to enjoy them. Staying alive and being safe should be our top priorities. If we can do that without the Patriot Act, I'm all for it. But the safety and protection of the American people should be our #1 concern.
Well, that makes sense, but I disagree that the Mafia was more difficult to deconstruct than these terrorist cells seem to be. The Mafia is highly organized, and once the internal corruption of law enforcement began to dissolve, good things started happening. With regard to terrorism, at this point, there exists basically no structural hierarchy; they operate of their own volition within their own personal time frame. They blend in completely with the United States' ubiquitous landscape of multiculturalism...no one stand out. Perhaps there are local organizers that help direct funds and other means of support to some of these localized groups, but for the most part, there is no leader upon which we can focus. It's much more slippery, imo.
Yeah, you make some good points. I still think it would be possible to counteract terrorism without the Patriot Act. Plus I dont really see how we can say we're spreading democracy and freedom throughout the world while taking away freedom and democracy here at home. If we want to combat terrorism why do we have such porous borders? I know its hard but we are failing MISERABLY at even attempting to make our borders more secure. They pass a bill that is supposed to protect the citizens of this country from terrorism while leaving out the 2 biggest issues: drivers licenses and passports. Every single one of the terrorist used one of those two means to board the planes on 9/11. I watched family members of 9/11 victims beg in front of Congress and the House to not pass the bill until it was changed to include those two things. Less than a week later the bill was passed. Why would they do that? Im sure it probably has something to do with the fact that so many lobbyist groups have a high interest in keeping our borders porous so they can acquire cheaper labor. I think its also funny how they come up with these names. The "Patriot Act". That right there says it all. Its a patriotic act so people should support it. Word manipulations are found all throughout politics. The "Prison Abuse Scandal". Since when was beating someone physically and mentally,raping them,torturing them, even elctrocuting their genitals considered a "scandal". OK, I kinda got off track but back to the point. All Im saying is that to use the term "Patriot Act" to describe that bill it is an oxymoron.
It is for those of us against the patriot Act as well. We just want the American public to be safe from the US Government as well as terrorists.
Precisely. I think Ashcroft had the Hateriot Act in his pocket and 9/11 was the perfect opportunity to put it on the table... but then I distrust everything about the BUllSHit administration.
I think its also funny how they come up with these names. The "Patriot Act". That right there says it all. Its a patriotic act so people should support it. Word manipulations are found all throughout politics. The "Prison Abuse Scandal". Since when was beating someone physically and mentally,raping them,torturing them, even elctrocuting their genitals considered a "scandal". OK, I kinda got off track but back to the point. All Im saying is that to use the term "Patriot Act" to describe that bill it is an oxymoron.
Don't Forget "No Child Left Behind" No let's leave all the poor one's behind.
Don't Forget "No Child Left Behind" No let's leave all the poor one's behind.
Good point. Lets just change all of the names right now.
1.) The One Step Closer to A Dictatorship Act.
2.) The Abu Ghraib Prison Tortures.
3.) The Leave All the Less Forunate Ones to Fend for Themselves in a Crappy Economy with a Bad Education Without Raising Minimum Wage Act.
Yeah, you make some good points. I still think it would be possible to counteract terrorism without the Patriot Act. Plus I dont really see how we can say we're spreading democracy and freedom throughout the world while taking away freedom and democracy here at home. If we want to combat terrorism why do we have such porous borders? I know its hard but we are failing MISERABLY at even attempting to make our borders more secure. They pass a bill that is supposed to protect the citizens of this country from terrorism while leaving out the 2 biggest issues: drivers licenses and passports. Every single one of the terrorist used one of those two means to board the planes on 9/11. I watched family members of 9/11 victims beg in front of Congress and the House to not pass the bill until it was changed to include those two things. Less than a week later the bill was passed. Why would they do that? Im sure it probably has something to do with the fact that so many lobbyist groups have a high interest in keeping our borders porous so they can acquire cheaper labor. I think its also funny how they come up with these names. The "Patriot Act". That right there says it all. Its a patriotic act so people should support it. Word manipulations are found all throughout politics. The "Prison Abuse Scandal". Since when was beating someone physically and mentally,raping them,torturing them, even elctrocuting their genitals considered a "scandal". OK, I kinda got off track but back to the point. All Im saying is that to use the term "Patriot Act" to describe that bill it is an oxymoron.
Linear Mode
