Snowdon is a dummy

(just messing with you guys)

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

You didn't address anyone especially but only "Those citizens reflexively and unnecessarily decrying curtailment of privacy and individual rights".

I one of those - like the some 80 million others, who live under our constitution.

I don't think that we live under "the tyranny of individuality". But if you think so, it certainly is your right.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

You didn't address anyone especially but only "Those citizens reflexively and unnecessarily decrying curtailment of privacy and individual rights".

I one of those - like the some 80 million others, who live under our constitution.

I don't think that we live under "the tyranny of individuality". But if you think so, it certainly is your right.

To say that we are "the greatest ally of "the late Osama Bin Laden…and the other leaders dedicated to the destruction of so-called western ideals are taking advantage of the soft underbelly of “democracy” and “freedom.” " seems to be ... well,your opinion.

0 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

You didn't address anyone especially but only "Those citizens reflexively and unnecessarily decrying curtailment of privacy and individual rights".

I one of those - like the some 80 million others, who live under our constitution.

I don't think that we live under "the tyranny of individuality". But if you think so, it certainly is your right.

I understand, Walter...and I do not expect my take on this to be popular. Just sharing it though.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

I understand, Walter...and I do not expect my take on this to be popular. Just sharing it though.

If you published such here, Frank, you would at least be "observed" by the domestic intelligence agency [Department 2: Extremism (left- and right-wing] ... .

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Seems they share my sentiments then.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

Seems they share my sentiments then.

And that is either blank cynicism or our agencies work differently to yours: the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (the domestic intelligence agency) is tasked with intelligence-gathering on threats concerning the democratic order, the existence and security of the federation or one of its states (that is done by the states' agencies), and the peaceful coexistence of peoples; with counter-intelligence; and with protective security and counter-sabotage.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
Seems they share my sentiments then.

And that is either blank cynicism or our agencies work differently to yours: the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (the domestic intelligence agency) is tasked with intelligence-gathering on threats concerning the democratic order, the existence and security of the federation or one of its states (that is done by the states' agencies), and the peaceful coexistence of peoples; with counter-intelligence; and with protective security and counter-sabotage.

I'm saying individuals have to be willing to give more authority to the governing bodies rather than demanding individual freedom to do what they want...

...and you perceive that to be a threat to your constitution???

What are you smoking today, Walter?

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Quote:
I do not see it as desirable or undesirable.

I am happy you have no problem with the heads of the intelligence communities having databases that is a wonderful source of blackmail information to our elected leaders but worthless as far as any terrorist threats and all pay for by the taxpayers.

watching Frank and revelette push old Communist party lines, or perhaps simply accepting them, worries me for the US

0 Replies

The soft underbelly of the US democracy. Oh so soft...

http://s2.djyimg.com/n3/eet-content/uploads/2014/05/Statista-Infographic_2162_military-expenditure-in-2013-.jpg

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

I'm saying individuals have to be willing to give more authority to the governing bodies rather than demanding individual freedom to do what they want...

And I'm saying to want my constitutional rights as they are written in the constitution. I'm not 'demanding' anything else.

1 Reply

Nobody pushing communism...or communist ideas here. People who try that crap might as well bring Hitler into the thread.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
I'm saying individuals have to be willing to give more authority to the governing bodies rather than demanding individual freedom to do what they want...

And I'm saying to want my constitutional rights as they are written in the constitution. I'm not 'demanding' anything else.

It is almost impossible to figure out what you are saying, Walter.

You said, "If you published such here, Frank, you would at least be "observed" by the domestic intelligence agency [Department 2: Extremism (left- and right-wing] "...and I pointed out they must be agreeing with my sentiments.

But following what you are saying is like hanging wallpaper with arm tied behind your back.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

The soft underbelly of the US democracy. Oh so soft...

Yeah...the US does spend a lot on its military.

Reagan used to claim he bankrupted the Soviet Union by getting them to do that.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Our Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution doesn't observe those, whom they agree with.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

An awful lot of judgmental people here. I wouldn't know a communist idea if it slapped me in the face. I just accept the need for our government to try and keep track of terrorist in the digital world. If mass data collection does not work, then they should stop it and try another way. For me, it is as simple as that, no more and certainly no deeper than that.

2 Replies

@revelette2,

It's already been 'proven' that mass data collection does not work. We have also learned that the intelligence agencies broke the law. It's against the law to presume all citizens are potential criminals. The right to privacy is a Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948.

Quote:

The police (or any government agency) aren't allowed to search you unless they have a warrant signed by a judge or unless they are arresting you.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Our Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution doesn't observe those, whom they agree with.

Well...since I am saying "Let the government govern"...why are you suggesting they would be monitoring me.

1 Reply

@revelette2,

revelette2 wrote:

An awful lot of judgmental people here. I wouldn't know a communist idea if it slapped me in the face. I just accept the need for our government to try and keep track of terrorist in the digital world. If mass data collection does not work, then they should stop it and try another way. For me, it is as simple as that, no more and certainly no deeper than that.

Don't pay too much attention to that "preaching communism" crap, Revelette...it is just a way someone with no realistic arguments gets past the day.

I have nothing against communism...except that it doesn't seem to work. But if someone could come up with a way to make it work better than capitalism...I could adopt it with no trouble.

Frankly, I think the system that will work best will not only incorporate elements of both socialism and free enterprise...but will have other features not evident in either of those systems.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

Well...since I am saying "Let the government govern"...why are you suggesting they would be monitoring me.

You don't live here, so they wouldn't. And that's why I used the conjunctive.

The government wouldn't monitor you but the intelligence agency.
Certainly the government should govern - that's why we elected them (respectively the parties, they come from).
But they have to follow the constitution as well as I have my constitutional rights.

1 Reply

Snowdon is a dummy

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know