|
While I agree there are certain boundries and rights, some of which have been trampled on, there comes a point where this sort of thing is justified.
Europe has had terrorism issues for years and I still say they're freer than our country (the USA); even with their use of cameras, ID cards, and the lot.
The problem is in how it's all been carried out and the airplane "no boarding list" looks far more political than it is rational. (e.g. the leader of the Green party not being allowed to board; oddly constant "random" checks for certain people - aka those who don't vote "R"... terrorist groups including solely left-wing organizations yet the right-wing folks known for bombing and killing are left untouched...) While this is justified for certain left-wing groups (aka the folks who blow up SUVs - which is still wrong and potentially harmful to ANY form of life), the phrase "empty extermism" is still a viable phrase to describe what is going on.
There is a problem here. And it's not nearly as much about real terrorists as it is "big brother" against those who don't entirely agree with the government. We may not agree with the government but that doesn't mean we're automatically going to do anything vile. All we can do is vote and hope for the best. And why WON'T the goverment target the right-wing groups known to commit violence, when they have for left-wing? This only makes THEMSELVES look foolish in front of a country that I can only hope gives up its pied-piper nature.
Go after the groups known to be violent, that's fair - just so long as groups on BOTH sides are looked at; Timothy McVeigh's lot were violent - and right wing. They hated government for the sake of it; think "libertarians on amphetamines". And it's sad to think they're probably not being considered because of one fuckin' letter of the alphabet: "R". And if sunday morning talk shows having "R" folks dissin' each other, you bet the "R" extremists would use nasty methods too against their own.
The nonviolent are not the problem and will never be. Probably because we're nonviolent. :7
And how much of things should be left to technological intrusion and insane overkill laws when we should have an astute, aware populace using common sense to figure out wrongdoers? Oh yes, we're conditioned to buy things, not be social, and NOT question anybody. (can you say "oops"?) I mean, making any photographer a potential terrorist is asinine. A person taking a picture from a distance is obvious aCOMMON SENnd the picture reveals nothing even remotely useful on a technological level. Noticing some guy with a camera, notepad, paper, taking photos of the underside of a bridge and making notes is quite a different story!
Common sense instead of subjective, blanket laws is what people want and I'm sorry to see how Americans are either totally against things or totally for bolting down everything because they think they will be immune if they toe the line. (except they can't see how the line can be changed without them noticing it either.)
And maybe that's one reason why Congress' approval rating is 25%. Filled with a bunch of twits more interested in giving themselves raises, and voting on things that they don't bother to read (such as the original Patriot Act and in some cases the revised one that is even more mind-boggling!)
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
