Poll: Gitmo Detainees - Involved In 9/11?

Devil505 wrote:Simple answer to you Terry:

"People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both."
Ben Franklin
(just as true today as it was 200 years ago)

I'm not trading any of my freedom. You'll have to decide for yourself if you are or not. I want the Federal govt' to do their primary job which is to protect the people and sovernty of the US.

jpete wrote:Yes, AQ was trained in Afganistan. Guess who gave them the training facilities? You and me with our tax money through the CIA.
Did we support the mudjahadeen during the era when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. Yep. The world is not a simple and static place. Things change, *censored* happens. The Soviet Union collapsed. A radical element of islam now wants to kill you.

Yes Pakistan has nuclear capability. Guess where they get the money? From you and me with our tax dollars through foreign aid.
Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.

My foreign policy calls for not giving money to people who might potentially kill us.
Good luck with that one. The US gives money, money we don't have of course, to everyone. always has in modern times.

If your foreign policy is to continue to do so, you might as well put a bullet in your head now.

You go first. I think I'll wait and see what happens.

Wow, sorry I gave the laptop to the wife and watched the Bud shootout at Daytona! After reading through all the posts I sum it up like this. Each and everyone in here on this subject make good points that we all can agree with. Throwing onliner quotes from old Ben & Tom are nice and they generally apply except for the fact that, as pointed out, this is not the 1700's. We are still batting this about without the information that our government officials have. Even comments made about events from the past cannot guarantee that all the facts are known or that misinformation hasn't been spread.
I fear my govenment more then the terrorist personally. But I feared Devil's new police force even more.(previous thread)
Answering the comment from Jeff about my prefering people to fear us rather then respect us. The two are very close to being the same thing. The results are the same with either. Saddam may have respected the Kuwati's when he invaded but he surely didnt fear them. Us he feared but didnt respect. He thought we were weak as we have shown at times and would not attack him. If they think we are going to kick someone in the b**Ls everytime they attack us, they will have to be more thoughtful about the attacks. Or they may become more of a bother then they are worth to the leaders that hide them. remember as our Savior and his cabinet start talking. These people think talk is a sign of weakness. Lets carry a big stick.

coalkirk wrote:I'm not trading any of my freedom. You'll have to decide for yourself if you are or not. I want the Federal govt' to do their primary job which is to protect the people and sovernty of the US.

Some of the provisions of the USA Patriot act of 2001 have already been misused to allow our government (NSA) to listen in on telephone & electronic communications of law abiding citizens with no probable cause, no court authorization (including the FISA Court) & no oversight. You have most definitely lost some rights to "Big Brother", & that presents more of a danger to you than does any terrorist.

Devil505 wrote:
Some of the provisions of the USA Patriot act of 2001 have already been misused to allow our government (NSA) to listen in on telephone & electronic communications of law abiding citizens with no probable cause, no court authorization (including the FISA Court) & no oversight. You have most definitely lost some rights to "Big Brother", & that presents more of a danger to you than does any terrorist.

And you are willing to let "Big Brother" take away some of OUR Second Amendment rights. That presents the biggest danger of them all.

SuperBeetle wrote:And you are willing to let "Big Brother" take away some of OUR Second Amendment rights. That presents the biggest danger of them all.

...No I am not! You & I just disagree over what our 2nd amendment rights are.

Devil505 wrote:

SuperBeetle wrote:And you are willing to let "Big Brother" take away some of OUR Second Amendment rights. That presents the biggest danger of them all.

...No I am not! You & I just disagree over what our 2nd amendment rights are.

I know what they are:

" 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"

KLook wrote:Wow, sorry I gave the laptop to the wife and watched the Bud shootout at Daytona! After reading through all the posts I sum it up like this. Each and everyone in here on this subject make good points that we all can agree with. Throwing onliner quotes from old Ben & Tom are nice and they generally apply except for the fact that, as pointed out, this is not the 1700's. We are still batting this about without the information that our government officials have. Even comments made about events from the past cannot guarantee that all the facts are known or that misinformation hasn't been spread.
I fear my govenment more then the terrorist personally. But I feared Devil's new police force even more.(previous thread)
Answering the comment from Jeff about my prefering people to fear us rather then respect us. The two are very close to being the same thing. The results are the same with either. Saddam may have respected the Kuwati's when he invaded but he surely didnt fear them. Us he feared but didnt respect. He thought we were weak as we have shown at times and would not attack him. If they think we are going to kick someone in the b**Ls everytime they attack us, they will have to be more thoughtful about the attacks. Or they may become more of a bother then they are worth to the leaders that hide them. remember as our Savior and his cabinet start talking. These people think talk is a sign of weakness. Lets carry a big stick.

I love the "it's not the 1700's anymore" mentality. The only thing that's changed is the scale and speed with which attacks occur. Early Americans had Indian attacks on land and pirate attacks at sea. Then they fought the largest empire the world had ever seen, the British.

The concepts of freedom vs. tyranny are universal and timeless. That's why "Natural Law" is the only law. Descartes said "Cogito ergo sum", "I think therefore I am."

You have rights and freedom for the same reason.

When you say "I haven't given anything up" even though this whole conversation is being recorded for future review is just whistling past the graveyard.

I think Jeff and I are not so far apart, just that he is way further to the right then I am. I guess the only right I have given up so far is that I don't care if the gov. wiretaps my phone calls. They will just hear me fighting with some trust fund baby from Boston, New york, New Jersey, etc. that have more money then brains. Quote: What do you mean you cant start my log chalet next week? Answer: Because it is -20, the wind is blowing 30 knots, and it is going to snow for the next 2 days. Quote: But I just have to have my house on the market in May! Answer: dead silence

You keep on fighting Jeff, I don't disagree with you mostly. I will become an enemy of the state when the Savior tries to take my guns anyway.

Kevin

KLook wrote:I don't care if the gov. wiretaps my phone calls.

Well you should!....... Suppose you are talking to your friend & you mention a health issue, only to find out that your health & life insurance rates are suddenly doubled due to you being a higher risk? Suppose you mention a new TV you just bought & suddenly start getting buried with letters & email spam from electronic companies?...That red light you accidentally ran & mentioned it to your friend on the phone.....& get a ticket mailed to you? How about if you suddenly lose your job because your employer is a Republican & you told your friend you are a Democrat...or vice versa?

How about letting the government come into your house to search for things? Careful....how about that TV show you recorded without permission or that bootlegged CD?)

Think these things are far fetched? You are just naive!
The government has no business violating your privacy unless they have probable cause to believe that you are committing a crime & have brought their evidence to an independent party (the courts) to request a wiretap or search warrant.

Devil, that post coming from Jeff would have been understandable. But coming from you and the stand you have been taking about our other rights makes it just bizarre. You will not get a rise out of me that easily. I can tweak and aggitate a little also! Fact is with todays technology we common folks cant hope to know everything our gov. does. Just find out after the fact and have a fit.

Kevin

KLook wrote:You will not get a rise out of me that easily.

Not trying to get a rise out of you but just pointing out how very dangerous that thinking is. Seriously, should government agents have the right to search your house for anything they want, at any time? (If you are a law abiding citizen, why should you care?)
Just answer that question please.

Edit: Never mind...getting way off topic