phrank

I totally agree Lenny. If we want to be free and not give our government the ability to spy on those it suspects could harm us, then let's not be screened at airports any longer. Just where do we draw the freedom line?

LennyD

Phrank the "where to draw the line" issue seems to be the real problem as drawing it in the wrong place could do more harm than good (as evidenced by your airport statement).


I have to admit that I may be influenced from my personal connections to the Towers and those there that day etc, but I have seen the resulting changes and few have shown me that they will or are helping to remove the potential for something like 9/11 happening in the future.

Maybe I would have more faith in the countless changes since 9/11 if the results were not including things like my states previous director of homeland security being appointed by our Dem Gov. was ultimately also a suspected member of an Isreali spy organization that unexpectedly returned to his homeland before finishing his term, or if countless millions of dollars of taxpayer money were not wasted thru the homeland security grants on things like ATV's, boats, tractors, overtime, trucks, vans, countless pieces of non terror attack avoidence equipment, and pretty much just about anything the local govt receiving the money wanted but could not justify funding thru normal methods.

If you add the very fact that the only ones that will not be armed with anything more than a sharp piece of papper will be the innocent fylers on a plane, and the only armed ones will be the bad guys, and maybe in rare instances a armed federal officer.

I would not look forward to bringing a knife or nail clipper to a gun fight, but it would be better than a paper clip, and 20 or 50 passengers with anything better than nothing would obviously be better able to combat any threat.

Before anyone thinks this is claiming to arm everyone on a plane it is not, but the fact remains the same.

Personally I would rather be more in control of my safety and know that when people are properly prepared for an attack of any kind they are less likely to be a target.

Getting back on track it would seem obvious that our national security against any future attacks etc is serious business and of the utmost importance, but then so is the upholding of our constitution and very values and freedoms that have created the best place to live on the planet and also made up what we are today.

Just think how different everyones life (including your own) would be if we allowed our freedoms to be eliminated or watered down and were relying on our goverment to take care of us 100%?

I mean really think about it, and (everyone) please post just how you believe it would be different today or in the future if we were to give up our freedoms and allow the goverment to increase to where it is deeply in control of our lives.

Now think about how the goverment can most effectively and efficiently do it's real job, and just what that is to you.

We need our goverment, and it needs us for all to exist, and just like the drawing a line comment earlier there is a fine line that needs to be maintained in order for everything to work properly.

The question should be where is that line!!

__________________
*************************

Question Everything

phrank

Let me start by saying that my heart goes out to you and your family for whatever connection you have with the towers. Secondly, I feel there is nothing we can ever do to prevent another attack but we can sure make it hard on them to do it.

It's kind of like locking your door to stop someone from breaking in. If they really want to they can. You're just slowing them down.

I agree that it's where we draw the line that is the problem. I just don't know where that line should be. I do feel that if President Bush wants to hear my wife telling me what I need to get on the way home then he's welcome to. I really don't have a thing to hide if it means the safety of my country.

LennyD

Phrank thanks for the kind words, and thankfully everyone got out, or was able to stay far enough away etc. I had some relatives working for the NYPD not far from the towers, and have had professional connections with people at the Port Authority, and sadly most all of these guys knew someone well that lost their lives that day.

Oddly if my employment situation had not changed I would normally have been a couple blocks away around the times of the attacks.

Still I have to be carefull just how much of my freedom I am willing to trade for a "sense" of safety. I have also found that many even more personally affected wish to maintain their freedoms over trading them for a false sense of safety.

Just like you point out with the locked car door many methods only make us feel good (or keep the kids or wife from messing up your interior lol), and do not guarantee anything.

If you are ever misfortunate enough to have your car stolen or broken into you will well know how rediculous the questioning from the insurance investigator can be. I do not want to be legally liable to spend hours of my life and countless dollars to avoid being made to be as responsible as the criminal commiting the crime in the first place.

Now back onto the listening issue.

I also do not have a problem with increased security for us all, but have continued to question just why all American citizens are subject to the same treatment as potential terrorists, and just WTF would anyone want to know about when either you or I need to be getting home!

Also whenever this subject has come up outside of this forum the basic feeling of "if it helps my country I have nothing to hide" comes up. I do not totally disagree with this, and may agree more than it appears, but I am concerned that our willingness to be patriotic and just do the right thing is not used against us in anyway including taking away our freedoms.

When you consider that both ruling parties have already misued "safety" in seeking their agenda's, and that many agree that much of this is perceived and not actual you really need to question everything in order to protect our country and way of life as an American.

phrank

The last time I was flying to Colorado I watched as security had to do a random bag search and frisk a little old lady that had to be in her 80's. They have to do this to everyone and not just the ones that you or I would suspect. Go figure?

I don't think this is who they would be targeting as far as bugging phones etc... They wrote the law so it would appear to be PC, but, I'm sure they know who their targets would be.

I don't mind being scanned to get into a Dallas Cowboy game if it means my safety. I don't mind getting searched to get on a plane, and I don't mind if they bug my phone. I just hope they don't take it to the extrem and let the power go to their heads.

Note: My basball team has always been the NY Yanks!!! Gotta love the pin stripes.

LennyD

If they are searching 80 year old women they I would have to suspect they would be listening in on them too.

And you provide yet another great example of why PC is a serious problem.

I am not one for posting copy of whats been printed etc but I remember more than one instance where the abuse of power has been reported already.

There are some that are playing for serious high stakes that will use anything available to them to help gain an advantage.

What puzzles me is that allowing all this to happen can backfire on those pushing it in the first place as there will be a time when the opposing group will have the ability to commit the same abuses on them.

I guess if it was used for the intended purpose and misused only for the parties to abuse each other it wouldn't be too bad, but there is just too much opportunity for these losses of our freedoms to cause unbelievable hardship for regular citizens.

Oh and the Yanks have been a favorite for years, but with what big money has done to all sports over the last 10-20 years I have lost much of my previous interest in it.

And haven't they had their share of great seasons already

Plus I have a problem when a decent seat is $200+ per game, and you have to shell out for an entire season and be lucky enough to be able to get them in the first place. Plus to add insult to injury there is expectation that the same seats in the new stadium will be $300-400 and will carry a multiple seat minimum.

You could purchase enough 50" LCD TV's to fill a room, throw in a top of the line surround system, and have every game catered for you and your friends etc and have plenty of cash leftover from what the cost would be for 4 decent season tickets.

That is really nuts, and makes it hard to be a fan.

Goobieman

No. Because I am not making overseas phone calls to suspected terrorists.

No. Because I am not an enemy combatant caught fighting US troops -- forgetting, for the moment that they get due process.

No. See above.

Was there anything else?

__________________
Haven't you noticed? We've been sharing our culture with you all morning.
-- King Leonidas

obvious Child

Pity how the internet refutes such idle beliefs

USATODAY.com - NSA has massive database of Americans' phone calls

__________________
"Maybe God doesn't care how you say your prayers, just as long as you say them" - Jeffery Sinclair

LennyD

Obvious child thanks for supplying some info to show how the potential for corruption with absolute power not only applies to this all but also is already taking place.

The point I attempt to make to those who continue to claim they do not have any concerns about new laws limiting their rights and freedoms like we are discussing here because they mistakenly believe the laws will 100% only affect people who are actual terrorist threats etc is that once the freedom is gone your as suspect to the new law as anyone else is, and the potential for abuse of these powers is larger than any of us would like to believe.

Any good American would be willing to make some level of sacrifice for their country (I am that level would vary greatly too), but the sacrifice on this one is way to high for the true benefit realized versus what is available without the new intrusive laws.

This thinking below seriously worries me.

Since we have enough problems with varying systems of unobtainable bail settings for non violent crimes (and others) throughout the US that many I speak with view as intentional towards keeping suspected criminals imprisoned prior to trial (sort of different to what many believe innocent until proven guilty was designed to provide). In many cases where many are jailed for such long times before their trials that they end up losing many of the things they worked their entire life for even if they are ultimately found not guilty etc do we really need to allow our government to introduce new laws that can actually imprison anyone without access to due process?

In some areas I understand it is not unusual for bail to be set intentionally well above what the accused can produce, and also for trials to approach one year from original arrest dates.

Though I do not agree with the current system used in some areas except for the most serious crimes with the utmost certainty of all evidence etc it would have to produce enough opportunity for any savvy attorney used by our government needing to help a true terrorist off the streets or from doing further harm.

Why should the American public have to sell their souls for their own safety?

I have looked at this from most every angle and as much as I want to be safe, and see all my fellow Americans maintain the previous feelings of safety I can not seem to justify any of these new or proposed anti terror laws in any way applying to a US Citizen, and in many instances can not see how the benefit can outweigh the costs.

We need to protect ourselves, but can not sacrifice our very "selves" and what has made us who we are only for the sake of feeling safe and especially when the previous laws were more than adequate to allow our safety.

I hope you all are getting this, and as much as I would also enlist for certain sacrifices and many of us have already.

Who actually enjoys being searched by clueless airline security and needing to waste an extra hour or two of their time only to hear that these same systems fail almost every test of their ability to eliminate actual threats?

Can any of the systems designed to improve overall safety do more than just test the levels of patience of the honest citizens who must endure them?

I know from previous involvement with those setting up systems that there are more viewing, listening, and searching equipment in use today than ever before that has almost our every move in covered in specific locations etc, and I am sure there has been many more systems placed since previous involvement etc.

Sure those without wrongful intent or actions should not have anything to worry about, but what if this is not true?

American

Jose Padilla was convicted by a federal jury and sentenced to 17 years in jail. Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri isn't even a US citizen, nevertheless, this case is in process.

Your comment regarding "freedom" is irrelevant in this case. Freedom doesn't mean you can break the law or take unlawful actions against the United States.

__________________
It's Obama's fault!