10 Things Government Can Do That Would Land You in Jail

[JD Barleycorn]

Oh ye of little brains. Please show me where I said that ALL muslims are the enemy. I specifically pointed out the core fundementalists and their supporters who are not the majority but a large minority that numbers in the millions. Like the Germans of World War II (I use them as an example because to use the Japanese would bring charges of racism by some racists on this site). The largest ethnic population in the US is the German population but we stopped allowing Nazi party rallies and Bund meetings. Being a militant German was not acceptable to the general public. We did not slaughter every German walking the streets but we did muzzle certain leaders (Father Coughlin) who demanded social justice and persecution of the Jews. We also kept POWs in the United States and no one, NO ONE, thought that they should be released to return to the fight in Germany.

If you are going to try to quote me, do it right and correctly.

[wellendowed1911]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Oh ye of little brains. Please show me where I said that ALL muslims are the enemy. I specifically pointed out the core fundementalists and their supporters who are not the majority but a large minority that numbers in the millions. Like the Germans of World War II (I use them as an example because to use the Japanese would bring charges of racism by some racists on this site). The largest ethnic population in the US is the German population but we stopped allowing Nazi party rallies and Bund meetings. Being a militant German was not acceptable to the general public. We did not slaughter every German walking the streets but we did muzzle certain leaders (Father Coughlin) who demanded social justice and persecution of the Jews. We also kept POWs in the United States and no one, NO ONE, thought that they should be released to return to the fight in Germany.

If you are going to try to quote me, do it right and correctly.

Here is what you wrote: if we are at war with Islamic fundementalists and millions of their apologists then why don't we go to war with them. Stop the building of mosques (until the war is over), stop funding Islamic organizations on college campusese (until the war is over), stop giving preferencial treatment to students from Muslim countries (until the war is over), and stop dealing with Islamic countries until the war is over.


By your logic muslim college students are terrorist, any muslim in a community that wants to build a mosque to worship is a terrorist- I don't know what treatment muslims from other countries receive that people from other countries don't so please enlighten me. Stop dealing with muslims countries: So we should kick Turkey out of NATO and Jesus if we stop dealing with muslims countries and they stop dealing with us- what the hell does that prove? Heck can you imagine what the gas prices would be if we just stopped dealing with muslim countries- do you know how stupid you sound making such a suggestion- there's roughly between 0 to 50 majority muslim countries in the word- do you realize how devastated not just out economy, but the world's economy would be if the U.S just stopped dealing with "muslim" countries? You my friend get the Dumb Ass Award of the Week!

[Old-T]

Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

Here is what you wrote: if we are at war with Islamic fundementalists and millions of their apologists then why don't we go to war with them. Stop the building of mosques (until the war is over), stop funding Islamic organizations on college campusese (until the war is over), stop giving preferencial treatment to students from Muslim countries (until the war is over), and stop dealing with Islamic countries until the war is over.


By your logic muslim college students are terrorist, any muslim in a community that wants to build a mosque to worship is a terrorist- I don't know what treatment muslims from other countries receive that people from other countries don't so please enlighten me. Stop dealing with muslims countries: So we should kick Turkey out of NATO and Jesus if we stop dealing with muslims countries and they stop dealing with us- what the hell does that prove? Heck can you imagine what the gas prices would be if we just stopped dealing with muslim countries- do you know how stupid you sound making such a suggestion- there's roughly between 0 to 50 majority muslim countries in the word- do you realize how devastated not just out economy, but the world's economy would be if the U.S just stopped dealing with "muslim" countries? You my friend get the Dumb Ass Award of the Week!

Another Barleycorn write first, think much later kind of post.

Either he is suggesting treating all Muslims like he would treat the dangerous ones, OR he somehow believes we (he?) can identify the bad ones by their thoughts. Waiting until after a bomb goes off doesn't help a lot, does it?

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

Good point COG- but let me ask you a very simple question that comes up all the time- let's just take TSA since no one likes them- I actually believe we should do away with TSA and allow airlines to hire their own security, but anyways- let's say today we got rid of TSA and tomorrow- some lunatic(s) is/are able to board a plane- take out a weapon, hijack a plane and we have 9-11 all over. Do you know how many Americans will be outraged on how this could have happened or why the govt is allowing this to happen....? People expect the government to protect them from everything. This is not the federal government's responsibility. That is part of the problem. Security should be left up to the airlines.

Now I had to make this statement COG- but what do you want: Security or Liberty??? Liberty. Which one do you value more- do you like the idea of being able to fly from city to city with a near zero chance of your flight being hijacked or crashed into a building? Or do you value your freedom- not to be frisked, touch/ screened/ put through an X-ray with the chances of your flight being potentially hijacked and with the extreme cases of perhaps boarding your last flight? Or I could stay home, I could drive, or I could review the airlines' track records and find out which one has the best record. Getting rid of the TSA does not mean there will be no airline security.I am sorry COG- but in today's society you just can't have it both ways. There's no way the GOVT or any GOVT can fight Terrorism without it's citizens sacrificing some of their freedoms and perks- it just can't happen! Then the terrorists have won.COG to prevent a potential terror plot- how would the GOVT stop a threat if it weren't allowed to "eavesdrop"? Now keep in mind it was a Republican President [Incorrect. It was an idiot Republican Statist President] who introduced the Patriot Act and it was Dems who were pretty much against such an act and the right wing was supporting the act overall and a famous quote I heard many years coming from Right Wing was : " if you got nothing to hide why would you care if the govt eavesdropped to protect us from a terror attack?" That quote did not come from me, that is for damn sure. You have the right to be secure in your person and communications. Unless the government can prove probable cause, there can be no eavesdropping. I'm not giving up that Liberty.

WE, I don't agree with you, but you are throwing me off. You make some sensible points, and are actually being civil.

Do you think people would happily get on an airplane if there was no security? Of course not. The airlines would have to develop their own security. They will do it better, and fairer, than the government has. Also, this way, if you have a problem, you can take it up with the airline, who might listen, instead of the government, who doesn't care.

But I understand your point, however, when we give up liberty to gain security, our enemies win. We are no longer America.

[JD Barleycorn]

You do not have a historical base to even explain to you so I'll use simple math. I mentioned millions of muslims who support in one way or another the killers. Since you say that there are at least a billion then I am not talking about all of them am I?

Then again I didn't say anything different that liberal Bob Beckel said a couple of weeks ago. So I guess the idea has bipartisan support.

[CuteOldGuy]

[wellendowed1911]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

WE, I don't agree with you, but you are throwing me off. You make some sensible points, and are actually being civil.

Do you think people would happily get on an airplane if there was no security? Of course not. The airlines would have to develop their own security. They will do it better, and fairer, than the government has. Also, this way, if you have a problem, you can take it up with the airline, who might listen, instead of the government, who doesn't care.

But I understand your point, however, when we give up liberty to gain security, our enemies win. We are no longer America.

COG this is an interesting topic and I will keep it civil without any name calling or bashing but just like you I do value liberty- but again you avoided my question- let's say there's word that John Doe has been hanging around "suspicious" people and let's say he's been making phone calls to Somalia/ Pakistan or any other country that has hostile Al-Queada cells.
Ok there's 2 outcomes in this situation:
A. The govt could sit back and say well John Doe lives in America he has the freedom and liberty to call anyone in any country he chooses and he can associate with any person he likes. The govt minds their business and 6 months later John Doe commits a terrorist act and kills dozen of innocents people all because the Government was allowing John to pursue his liberty or freedom.

B. The Govt could follow up on these "signs", eavesdrops on his phone calls to Somalia/Pakistan. Monitor his friends/intercept John Doe's computer emails and would do you know they discover that John Doe is in cohoot with Al-Queada and has devised a terrorist plot to kill innocent Amercans. They arrest the POS SOB and save American lives.

COG I A ASKING YOU TO NOT PLAY POLITICS HERE AND PLEASE TELL ME WHICH OF THE ABOVE OPTIONS WOULD YOU RATHER HAVE PLAY OUT?


And how is it the Terrorist have won COG? If they are not able to kill and pull off their jihadist attacks to be with their 72 virgins than how can you say they won? You are taking this way too the extreme COG- you still have your liberty- last time I checked you can go where you want- you can speak out against the government- you still can vote- tell me what freedom you no longer have COG?

COG I normally fly about to 5 times a year- the only difference between Pre-9-11 and today's flights is that myself and most Americans have to arrive a little earlier and takes a little longer to board a flight- big frickin deal- we are giving up maybe total of an hours time- but we are assuring a safe destination.
Also, keep in mind if an airline company were allowed to provide their own security you till would have to get frisked and searched- what' the big deal?

[acp5762]

Originally Posted by WTF

My guess is that JL wants you to hang on to his root!

Be careful I am telling ya. You're going to end up with some sort of psychiatric condition one day from posting stuff like this. Just trying to help ya out.

[CJ7]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

WE, I don't agree with you, but you are throwing me off. You make some sensible points, and are actually being civil.

Do you think people would happily get on an airplane if there was no security? Of course not. The airlines would have to develop their own security. They will do it better, and fairer, than the government has. Also, this way, if you have a problem, you can take it up with the airline, who might listen, instead of the government, who doesn't care.

But I understand your point, however, when we give up liberty to gain security, our enemies win. We are no longer America.

the airlines are barely able to stay afloat as it is.. how much do you think it would cost the person buying a ticket to have the airline company buy sophisticated equipment, train and insure security agents throughout their terminal... Kansas City to Memphis $10.000.00 ... ALL ABOARD !

[JD Barleycorn]

You don't quite present it accurately;

A. The govt could sit back and say well John Doe lives in America he has the freedom and liberty to call anyone in any country he chooses and he can associate with any person he likes. The govt minds their business and 6 months later John Doe commits a terrorist act and kills dozen of innocents people all because the Government was allowing John to pursue his liberty or freedom.

B. The Govt could follow up on these "signs", eavesdrops on his phone calls to Somalia/Pakistan. Monitor his friends/intercept John Doe's computer emails and would do you know they discover that John Doe is in cohoot with Al-Queada and has devised a terrorist plot to kill innocent Amercans. They arrest the POS SOB and save American lives.

It is about due process and equal treatment. Due process that everyone understands and can chose to conform to. Equal treatment that everyone from Obama to George Zimmerman are subject to the same laws. Option two doesn't work if the government decides secretly (without making it public) that calling a certain country is suspicious, or belonging to the Tea party, or joining an organization that opposed abortion (these are all part of the DHS watch parameters) to an extreme; like joining a radical muslim sect that is already on the watch list, or sending hate letters to GOP politicians that they hold responsilbe for Iraq (the media and democrats have said so), or a public person who points the finger of indignation at another person for political reasons only?

Remember; Due Process and Equal Treatment

Let me turn the tables on you; what if we capture a terrorist in the process of planting bombs, well built bombs (think Boston X10), and it is discovered that he had three others that he has already planted and only he knows where they are. They all seem to be designed to go off together by timer (you have ten hours). Now, do you read him his rights, get him a lawyer, and wait and see if he plays nice or do you drop him down a deep well with a couple of CIA interrogators or Chicago cops for some enhanced interrogation. Remember, this is what they used to ask about ten years ago. How would you go with it now?

[wellendowed1911]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

You don't quite present it accurately;

A. The govt could sit back and say well John Doe lives in America he has the freedom and liberty to call anyone in any country he chooses and he can associate with any person he likes. The govt minds their business and 6 months later John Doe commits a terrorist act and kills dozen of innocents people all because the Government was allowing John to pursue his liberty or freedom.

B. The Govt could follow up on these "signs", eavesdrops on his phone calls to Somalia/Pakistan. Monitor his friends/intercept John Doe's computer emails and would do you know they discover that John Doe is in cohoot with Al-Queada and has devised a terrorist plot to kill innocent Amercans. They arrest the POS SOB and save American lives.

It is about due process and equal treatment. Due process that everyone understands and can chose to conform to. Equal treatment that everyone from Obama to George Zimmerman are subject to the same laws. Option two doesn't work if the government decides secretly (without making it public) that calling a certain country is suspicious, or belonging to the Tea party, or joining an organization that opposed abortion (these are all part of the DHS watch parameters) to an extreme; like joining a radical muslim sect that is already on the watch list, or sending hate letters to GOP politicians that they hold responsilbe for Iraq (the media and democrats have said so), or a public person who points the finger of indignation at another person for political reasons only?

Remember; Due Process and Equal Treatment

Let me turn the tables on you; what if we capture a terrorist in the process of planting bombs, well built bombs (think Boston X10), and it is discovered that he had three others that he has already planted and only he knows where they are. They all seem to be designed to go off together by timer (you have ten hours). Now, do you read him his rights, get him a lawyer, and wait and see if he plays nice or do you drop him down a deep well with a couple of CIA interrogators or Chicago cops for some enhanced interrogation. Remember, this is what they used to ask about ten years ago. How would you go with it now?

You have to define enhanced interrogation- if your "enhanced interrogation" is the same as torture than I am against it- even in this situation- there are clear laws during the Geneva conference after WW2 that states clearly what torture is and we agreed with many other nations not to use torture.
Unless, you think torture is o when it benefits us- which is not good. I need to know what you classify as enhanced interrogation. Hell even John McCain who knows from experience and lives to tell about is clearly against torture.

[zerodahero]

Careful COG. You are criticizing the government. That's considered hate speech.LOL

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by zerodahero

Careful COG. You are criticizing the government. That's considered hate speech.LOL

It would only be Late Breaking News if Hanoi (SOLF) James wasn't "criticizing the government."

[CuteOldGuy]

Patriots will question and criticize when necessary.

WE, you left out the obvious third option: Take what they know to a judge, and find out if they have probable cause. If they do, then they can eavesdrop to their little heart's content. But without that check on government law enforcement, the eavesdropping and other intrusive investigative measures will have no restraint. We really don't want that.

[CJOHN]

using your spying to dzug again..... jongotti328 - got the energy drink from the vending machine where you have a kid wait there until johnny come in then he leave (monster is out only thing energy drink left is full throttle) at the boarder texas and lousiana(texas side) ...tinytimmy- drank tiny amount(FUCKING camera in vehical)... nottoc ....FU.... motel 6 ...said room full when not, so johnnny stay at the one next to it SUPER 8....room 107 ...at least lousiana drink are not DZUG like FUCKING TEXAS......FUCK YOU ...DON'T FORGET YOU WERE FORGIVING NOT 1 or 2 or 3 or 4, BUT GUESS WHAT YOU FUCKING CONTINUE.