Why is this the Endlessly used excuse validating the allowance of policies that are eroding our freedoms and giving our governments more control and responsibility over our lives? In a dictatorship this is progressive thinking, in a free society it is regressive thinking.
The problem lies with what is considered to be "something to hide". I don't want to be filmed 24 hours a day, everywhere I go, does that mean I've got something to hide? I don't much like the idea of being fingerprinted if i want to go into a bar, does that mean I have got something to hide? Yes, if I am an enemy of the gestapo in the 1930s, but no if I am a free citizen in 21st century Britain or America.
Since when were long established civil liberties and the citizen's right to privacy replaced with this "new freedom", this "freedom lite" shall we call it, this guilty until proven innocent mantra?
NBC spcial on "surveilence society"
http://www.infowars.net/articles/november2006/211106_b_BB.htm
2006-11-24 07:31:49 · 14 answers · asked by big-brother 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Sketchy, circumstantial evidence, or unassailable video/audio proof of innocence?
I want the criminals and enemies of the state locked away.
2006-11-24 07:44:33 · answer #1 · answered by ? 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
As long as we stay scared of 'enemies' who hate us 'because we're free' our fear can be manipulated in any way. Once our freedoms are gone though we may realize why they were so important in the first place. The founding fathers didn't much trust governments. Having just fought for independence from a corrupt system and all. They made a dahm good constitution to control the amount of power any one appointed man could have.
Unfortunately now the system has been overrun with corruption. Politicians have fallen into the habit of relying on corporate campaign contributions more then the will of the people. It is the people who may feel the need to inform the general public that are most at risk of being watched. Those that want you to know that defense contracts are handed out to the same companies that contribute to campaigns without any bidding involved, are the ones that truly need to worry about being labeled traitor. They are being patriotic and trying to inform the public so we have an educated electorate but they could very well be deemed 'enemy combatant' and lose all rights. Even the most basic right that has been in place since kings ruled, the right to be accused of a crime. Imagine years later when we are accustom to people of the press simply going away without trail. How would the government operate then??
2006-11-24 07:39:25 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Here is what you might think is a ignorant answer. But it ultimately comes down to our society being TOO PC. We do not want to offend anyone, so we try to treat everyone the same. Mean while the real criminals know how to get around the B.S. ( the dog and pony show) that goes on with our so called security. I have heard from my police friends that even some of these TSA workers ( airline security) have arrest warrants for them. Or are driving with suspended licenses. As for Bars if people stopped going to the bars that treated them like this. That would stop immediately, I know i don't go to places like that. But they are private so they can do what they want. All so if the cops could start kicking some A** that would too. If you want to run your mouth, you should get your a** beat.
2006-11-24 07:47:49 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I definitely share your angst there. In a society built on the concept of liberty there should be no place for the "as long as your not doing anything wrong" mentality. There are a lot of things that people do that aren't wrong, but are embarrassing. And there are some things that people do that are "wrong" that shouldn't be in a free society. It seems like we get closer to a totalitarian state every day.
2006-11-24 07:38:49 · answer #4 · answered by Chris J 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
There is absolutely nothing wrong with being a stay at home mom. I am currently a stay at home mom. My son is 3. I think the more time you have with your children before they start school is best. If you have the means to stay home, I highly reccomend it. When else are they gonna be that small again and need so much attention?
2016-05-22 22:49:58 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Conditioning.
People will accept anything over time and even make excuses for those who wish to do us harm.
I would rather die, than live a life monitored constantly.
Those who will not protect the rights our forefathers gave their lives for, dont deserve them. If you think what the government is doing is okay there is something really very odd about you.
2006-11-24 07:42:20 · answer #6 · answered by Perplexed 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
This brings to mind the analogy about tossing a frog in a pot of cool water and gradually turning the heat up till it reaches boiling point, the frog will stay in the water till it dies. Toss the frog in a pot of already boiling water and it will jump out and live. Bad business this....bad indeed.
2006-11-24 07:35:16 · answer #7 · answered by Rich B 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Dude the man is like all in my grill.
Even Yahoo is going postal on me Man
Only Steph and peggysuelee have been like total buds
2006-11-24 08:16:33 · answer #8 · answered by ? 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because if someone is doing nothing wrong then they have nothing to worry about. It needen't be explained. If one is doing something wrong, then they have something to worry about. Is it the liberals have so much to hide they hate any sort of terrorist protection?
2006-11-24 07:43:21 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Believe me when I say I can defend my clients more effectively when there IS video or other surveillance.
Too many people rotting in jail on hearsay and circumstantial evidence.
2006-11-24 07:34:29 · answer #10 · answered by ? 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋