Of All The Liberties You Have Lost, Because Of The 911 Conspiracy. Which One Do You Miss The Most?

Originally posted by thesneakiod
Who you vote into government and what laws they create doesnt affect your life
if you can do all of the above IMO.

Lucky you. It must be nice to be so trusting in the benevolence of power.

So let me get this right...as long as *you* are not affected, it's ok if others are?

Originally posted by zappafan1
REPLY: By the way, the Supreme Court does not make law, 'nor can they change laws. A SC ruling is nothing more than legal opinion.

Just a legal opinon? Is that what you think of the SC? Last time I checked the SCOTUS was the highest judicial body in the U.S.....meaning they interpret laws. So, pretty much, what they say IS the law....as long is it's IAW the Constitution, ofcourse.


SCOTUS


Sporty

[edit on 12/8/2006 by SportyMB]

Hmmm, somehow I missed this post:

Originally posted by zappafan1
REPLY: By the way, the Supreme Court does not make law, 'nor can they change laws. A SC ruling is nothing more than legal opinion.

Straight out of the likes of Castro, Ahmadinejad, Chavez, Jong...and dare I say........Bush?



All hail to King George!

I live on a boat you admin edit to remove useless, childish name calling as a reminder to all, this Forum is under STRICT T.A.C. Enforcement, no warnings, uncivility will result in a ban. People questioning their government is a good thing I don't care if they are right or wrong. According to your over all additude no one should question anything or pay any attention to anything. Just walk threw life in complete complacency agreeing with everything anyone says. No wait everyone should just agree with you. Conversing with you is pointless all you want is everyone to agree with you and offer no other thought. You definitely are from Texas more childish rhetoric removed. Everyone be like me or else.


[edit on 8-12-2006 by Springer]

Originally posted by loam

Originally posted by thesneakiod
Who you vote into government and what laws they create doesnt affect your life
if you can do all of the above IMO.

Lucky you. It must be nice to be so trusting in the benevolence of power.

So let me get this right...as long as *you* are not affected, it's ok if others are?

uhm... the original question was how have your liberties been affected or lost, and mine
haven't. And Unless you have been the victim of terrorism no one else's life has really changed. Get over the thought that we're having our freedom and choice taken away and just enjoy life.

Originally posted by Vushta

I am not opposed to taking care of our security, I am not opposed to being smart and nailing those who would do us harm BEFORE they do it, that's common sense.

So what do you suggest being done?

Did you even read the post that's quoted from? The sentence below was good bit. The point was not that I disagree with the security measures in place, it's that I am appalled at how readily we accept the extremes attached to these measures out of fear of an "unseen danger" we are constantly reminded of by those who enact these measures.

Simply look into who owns the Federal Reserve and work your way down to the day Ike warned us of the Military/Industrial Complex. If you don't see patterns and indications of the "Old Money Families" using fear mongering to maintain their Permanent War Economy we can agree to disagree.

I would hope that those who constantly sing the song of "I do nothing wrong so I don't worry" have at least heard the words "Give me liberty or give me death" even if they don't take them to heart.

For us to blindly accept every restrictive measure, every trillion dollars of expenditure on "keeping the wolves at bay" without demanding justification is pitiful IMHO.

The government needs to know that they will be taken to task on EVERY dollar they spend and EVERY new law they pass. Right now it appears as though have a Carte Blanche to me, that's my problem, most people just nod their head and hope they will be safe. WHAT IF the threat is not nearly as big as it is being sold to us?

There are many examples in this thread and several others of ludicrous the "terrorist" threat really is, the way it's portrayed by the powers that be. That is NOT to say it doesn't exist, I believe it does, I also believe we must defend ourselves from it, my question is to what extent does it exist?

This government, when put upon by the Old Money Families has time and time again sold us out, used fear to squeeze us for more money, plotted and planned the most devious deceptions to get their way, etc...

There are many ways to stop this nonsense, term limits and campaign finance reform are two very obvious methods to move in the right direction but they will NEVER happen, it screws the system up.
Springer...

Since 911 we have seen the writ of habeus corpus rescinded, bills of attainder issued, the Posse Comitatus set aside, unwarranted search and seizure, the right to bear arms taken away. Now - have I been personally the victim of any one of these yet? Not as far as I know...but then how would I on certain of them (like my personal data, or the privacy of my communications). But is the intent of the original question to state that if it has not happened to me yet, then I have no right to speak against the laws, acts and processes that are in place hanging over my head like the unconstitutional Sword of Domecles?

Ask not for whom the bell tolls - because if you have to ask, you're being a self-centered person who doesn't care about your fellow citizen...just about yourself. And yes, it's tolling for you as well.

Originally posted by Valhall
the right to bear arms taken away.

That could only be a good thing.



[edit: fixed quote tags]


[edit on 8/12/2006 by 12m8keall2c]

Originally posted by thesneakiod

Originally posted by Valhall
the right to bear arms taken away.

That could only be a good thing.

there are SO many things wrong with this statement I dont know where to begin.... OH yeah.. thats it... THE CONSTITUTION.. ever heard of it?

Right to bare ARMS.!

you take away that right... and you take away peoples ability to defend themselves. You also, fail to remove guns from criminals hands as they will get them illegally anyway(they do now, for the most part). You also make the people defensless against the govt.. shoud the need ever arise for one to defend themselves against that.

so in summary...That could only be a very very very very BAD thing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Originally posted by Springer
For us to blindly accept every restrictive measure, every trillion dollars of expenditure on "keeping the wolves at bay" without demanding justification is pitiful IMHO.

No doubt!

And I also find it surprising how many of those who hold an opposite view actually call themselves conservatives!

Those who sacrifice a bit of freedom to an ounce of security deserve neither.

Originally posted by TONE23

Originally posted by thesneakiod

Originally posted by Valhall
the right to bear arms taken away.

That could only be a good thing.

there are SO many things wrong with this statement I dont know where to begin.... OH yeah.. thats it... THE CONSTITUTION.. ever heard of it?

Right to bare ARMS.!

you take away that right... and you take away peoples ability to defend themselves. You also, fail to remove guns from criminals hands as they will get them illegally anyway(they do now, for the most part). You also make the people defensless against the govt.. shoud the need ever arise for one to defend themselves against that.

so in summary...That could only be a very very very very BAD thing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thats like saying we should legalize drugs so everyone has the choice to take them.
If they made guns illegal do you honestly think criminals wouldnt get hold of them?
Do you think crims would not get them because the only way to possess a gun would be illegally? If you buy a gun for the use of a crime you're hardly likely to register it are you?

thesneakiod,

Please do a little research. The right to "bear arms" refers to the constitutional right of the American people to always be able to form a well-armed defense against a corrupt government.

*sigh*

The second amendment Provides, "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

www.saf.org...

You cannot hope to defend your freedoms and your rights under the constitution if you do not spend time finding out what they used to be.

And yes, I said that just the way I meant it.

Originally posted by thesneakiod
Thats like saying we should legalize drugs so everyone has the choice to take them.
If they made guns illegal do you honestly think criminals wouldnt get hold of them?
Do you think crims would not get them because the only way to possess a gun would be illegally? If you buy a gun for the use of a crime you're hardly likely to register it are you?

You miss the point. The right to bear arms was not as a protection against the criminality of individuals, but against the criminality of government.

EDIT:



Val you beat me to it!

[edit on 12-8-2006 by loam]

Originally posted by thesneakiod
Thats like saying we should legalize drugs so everyone has the choice to take them.
If they made guns illegal do you honestly think criminals wouldnt get hold of them?
Do you think crims would not get them because the only way to possess a gun would be illegally? If you buy a gun for the use of a crime you're hardly likely to register it are you?

Let me give you alittle perspective if I may. I grew up in a family that was involved in OC(Organized Crime) And when they wanted guns... they got guns. they didnt register them because they didnt want them to be traceable.
thats not how I THINK it was or might have been... that IS the way it is.

Making guns illegal will be yet another devastating blow to our beloved Constitution which you should probably read sometime.

And BTW your response make little sense.. you said firstly in response to another that the removal of guns would be... and I quote "this could only be a good thing"... then you answer above to my response to that by actually making my point.. yes the criminals will still get the guns.. but joe public wont be able to defend themselves against them.. not if guns are illegal which is what you said would be a good thing... Am I missing something here? are you for The Constitutional right to bare arms or not? I am confused alittle. please clarify.

thank you for your time,

TONE23

Valhall, where has the Bush Adm. tried to take the 2A? It's been during this Adm's that the Assault Weapons Ban sunset and not reinstated. Maybe you are referring to the Clinton Adm. and the Dem. controlled senate?

I still have my long and short firearms thanks to the Republican and a hand full a Dem's.
I can still buy reloading components on line and in stores. Oh, the the 2A will always be under attach form the Commies and Socialist in this country because they can't have a easy take over if "we the people" have our guns. Then there is of course the Scared-Dee-Cat Wimps that want everyone to be a victim.

To the rest of you all; I can't see where it is a infringement on your liberty to not board a commercial air line with a H2O bottle or some high dollar vanity cream.

I am sure for a fact, that if the US did not take these actions and something did happen most of you would be raising hell than the Government did not do enough.

Right now in the Great State of Oklahoma there is a Fire Ban. Is this for the greater good? Have my rights to have a campfire been infringed? Is it Bush's fault or Dem. Gov. Henry?

Roper

Originally posted by TONE23

Originally posted by thesneakiod
Thats like saying we should legalize drugs so everyone has the choice to take them.
If they made guns illegal do you honestly think criminals wouldnt get hold of them?
Do you think crims would not get them because the only way to possess a gun would be illegally? If you buy a gun for the use of a crime you're hardly likely to register it are you?

Let me give you alittle perspective if I may. I grew up in a family that was involved in OC(Organized Crime) And when they wanted guns... they got guns. they didnt register them because they didnt want them to be traceable.
thats not how I THINK it was or might have been... that IS the way it is.

Making guns illegal will be yet another devastating blow to our beloved Constitution which you should probably read sometime.

And BTW your response make little sense.. you said firstly in response to another that the removal of guns would be... and I quote "this could only be a good thing"... then you answer above to my response to that by actually making my point.. yes the criminals will still get the guns.. but joe public wont be able to defend themselves against them.. not if guns are illegal which is what you said would be a good thing... Am I missing something here? are you for The Constitutional right to bare arms or not? I am confused alittle. please clarify.

thank you for your time,

TONE23

Since im not American i havent boned up the the constitutional right to bare arms for
the event that you will need them against a corrupt government(which, ironically you already have one in power), so im sorry for being ignorant on that one.

It still however, doesn't change my opinion that no one should have guns, whether its a age old right or not. that was the point i made which obviously you didnt grasp.
And to say joe public wouldnt be able get hold of a gun if they were outlawed is laughable.

thesneakiod,

sorry sneak I didnt know you were not american...oops...lol
That explains why you havnt read the Constitution.

Anyway, I dont personally believe in guns myself.. but in America it is one of the most treasured rights that we can have. And, BTW I am more than fully aware of how corrupt this govt has become (on both sides of the political spectrum, that we have)

Fortunately we have NOT lost that right ...yet. But once we do there is a line that is crossed that cannot be uncrossed.

anyway thanks for your time.

TONE23

Originally posted by Roper
Valhall, where has the Bush Adm. tried to take the 2A? It's been during this Adm's that the Assault Weapons Ban sunset and not reinstated. Maybe you are referring to the Clinton Adm. and the Dem. controlled senate?

For both the Posse Comitatus violation and the arms infringement I point you to post-Katrina New Orleans. That's what I was referring to.

Originally posted by Vushta

Originally posted by Frith
The right to life.

If the government cannot take my life without due process of law then clearly my right to life has been eliminated through this act.

So you're dead now and communicating from the other side??

Great thread Duhh. The response is always the same to direct questions to claims that are made. "My liberties have been stripped!".. Well which ones?..."I don't know, they just have been".."Explosives in the towers!"..How were they put there?..."I don't know..they just were"

Vushta why do you think people keep saying that? Becuase they can't take there heads out of there butts to really see the truth. It's not quick, it will become slow and slow and slow until one day were all screwed out of our minds. Well happy with your goddamn negative beings and galactic federation posts. Deny ignorance? yeah ok, i suppose ignorance is our best friends now isn't it? I was the only one here that posted something government/corporate was actually doing. Because it seems like i'm the only few on here that get there heads out of the clouds and actually see what's going in america. There was no bombs in the buildings, there was no bombs on the planes, and there sure as heck wasn't any aliens involved in 9-11 either. We can all chalk up to human stupidity/incompanants. We hold so much in things that give nothing in return, how pitifull. People are pussies (sorry i have to use this) becuase when you ask them something, they never can answer. You know what i think? (sarcasm) The world is really controlled by giant laser shooting teddy bears. And aliens are just a prerequisite of us being forcefed peyote in our drinking water (end sarcasm).