The New Homeland Security State

[Cybernoid]

Something I found on Alternet. It seems too absurd to be true, but I don't see why it wouldn't be. It immediately reminded me of Half-Life 2 and the Combine.

 

[Varsity]

Oh goody, American politics. :|

 

[el Chi]

Oh goody, American politics. :|

Quite. A can of explosive worms if ever there was.

This article certainly is unsettling. So is the whole issue of measures taken in the name of "homeland security." Some say that if you do nothing wrong then you have nothing to fear, but this isn't necessarily true. And besides, it's the principle of our freedoms being limited.
Let's hope old Tony doesn't get any ideas...

 

[DreamThrall]

Hah.... now, whenever there is a political thread, it is hijacked by people saying "eugh politics" and "this is going to get nasty", and "I wonder how long till this gets closed"

 

[The Dark Elf]

If this is a political thread, i will put a lot of money on it turning to hell. They always do, people can't agree to disagree and it all turns personal, half the time those very same people don't even know what they are talking about neither. Which would make it funny if it wasn't so annoying having to mess around locking the threads.

 

[DreamThrall]

See what I mean? ;-)

 

[Sgt_Shellback]

If this is a political thread, i will put a lot of money on it turning to hell. They always do, people can't agree to disagree and it all turns personal, half the time those very same people don't even know what they are talking about neither. Which would make it funny if it wasn't so annoying having to mess around locking the threads.

Damb liberals ruin it every time... :wink:

 

[CptStern]

that article is certainly disturbing, one step closer to becoming a police state and the disturbing part is that the people say nothing, do nothing. The generic response is "if it means winning the war on terrorism I'll happily give up some freedoms"

on the subject of heated political debates ..I find it's usually the ardent supporters of the war that cause the most problems ...if I had a nickle for every time I've been called a commie or anti-american ....I'd have enough money to buy a cup of coffee :E

 

[Razor]

Quite. A can of explosive worms if ever there was.

This article certainly is unsettling. So is the whole issue of measures taken in the name of "homeland security." Some say that if you do nothing wrong then you have nothing to fear, but this isn't necessarily true. And besides, it's the principle of our freedoms being limited.
Let's hope old Tony doesn't get any ideas...

I think the major problem is that Tony doesn't get any ideas and relies on Mr Bush.

Tony Blair: Oh Mr Bush, you are so manly, can you please help me run my country, oh thankyou, you are so wonderful, i love you. :naughty:

 

[Sgt_Shellback]

that article is certainly disturbing, one step closer to becoming a police state and the disturbing part is that the people say nothing, do nothing. The generic response is "if it means winning the war on terrorism I'll happily give up some freedoms"

on the subject of heated political debates ..I find it's usually the ardent supporters of the war that cause the most problems ...if I had a nickle for every time I've been called a commie or anti-american ....I'd have enough money to buy a cup of coffee :E

The author is disturbing.... No wait... It's even more disturbing anyone is listening to him... Guess it goes to show that people believe anything they read on the web... Once more disturbing...

 

[CptStern]

The author is disturbing.... No wait... It's even more disturbing anyone is listening to him... Guess it goes to show that people believe anything they read on the web... Once more disturbing...

hmmm I've been to a dozen protests and there's always an intimidating police presence (in the hundreds), even when it's a peaceful march such as last years peace rally at the american embassy in toronto. We sang Lennon's "give peace a chance" to the sound of police horses hooves striking the asphalt, it was quite a scene ...oh did I mention this was organised by a parent group? yup half the protestors were under the age of 10. First time my 4 yr old neice saw a gun

 

[el Chi]

I think the major problem is that Tony doesn't get any ideas and relies on Mr Bush.

Tony Blair: Oh Mr Bush, you are so manly, can you please help me run my country, oh thankyou, you are so wonderful, i love you. :naughty:

Hnnnngggh - wouldn't put it like that but I was certainly more comfortable with his "special relationship"* with Clinton.



*Their words, not mine.

 

[Cybernoid]

The author is disturbing.... No wait... It's even more disturbing anyone is listening to him... Guess it goes to show that people believe anything they read on the web... Once more disturbing...

So the author of the article made it all up? Why and how would he?

 

[Sgt_Shellback]

So the author of the article made it all up? Why and how would he?

Once the authors credability is established to be a criminal far left wing nut what matters in what he says? Nadda

 

[CptStern]

huh? where did you get that from?

 

[Neutrino]

Here's some interesting information related to the subject.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech_zone

Free speech zones (also known as First Amendment Zones or derisively as Free speech cages) are areas in the United States that are set aside for political protesters to exercise their right to free speech. These came into existence soon after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks as part of George W. Bush's security campaign.

Free speech zones are set up by the Secret Service who scout locations where the president is to pass through or speak at. Officals target those who carry anti-Bush signs (and sometimes pro-Bush signs) and escort them to the free speech zones prior and during the event. Reporters are often barred by local officals from displaying on camera or speaking to protestors within the zone. Protestors who refuse to go to the free speech zone are often arrested and charged with trespassing, disorderly conduct and resisting arrest. In 2003, a seldom used federal law was brought up that says that 'entering a restricted area around the President of the United States' is a crime.

Federal justification for the formation of free speech zones has been expressed in several different ways....Homeland security (Created by the Bush administration.) along with the Joint Terrorism Taskforce of the FBI however have stated that war demonstators and protestors should be considered by local authroities as possible terrorists.

There is much controversy surrounding the creation of these areas, and not a small amount of irony, considering that the U.S. Constitution defines the entire nation as a "free speech zone" and according to Bush as "the free-est country in the world".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Republican_National_Convention

Like the 2004 Democratic National Convention in Boston, Massachusetts, the Department of Homeland Security officially declared the 2004 Republican National Convention a National Special Security Event. As such, the United States Secret Service is charged with employing and coordinating all federal and local agencies including the various bureaus of the Department of Homeland Security, Federal Bureau of Investigation and New York Police Department to secure the venue from terrorist attacks.

 

[Sprafa]

hehe, according to the Constitution the USA should be just those little nests of "free speech".