Homeland Security Report Lists ‘Liberty Lovers’ As Terrorists

Discussion in 'Civil Rights & Privacy' started by RB, Jul 4, 2012.

  1. RB

    RB Founding Member

    http://www.infowars.com/homeland-security-report-lists-liberty-lovers-as-terrorists/

    If you believe in being free and personal liberty DHS thinks you are a right wing extremist. The list goes on and one.

    It is hard to even picture DHS and its agencies such as TSA having any respect for personal liberty or freedom so I think we can take that "making a difference" claim with a grain of salt.
     
  2. Doober

    Doober Original Member

    Interesting op-ed piece in the NY Times on the subject of liberty that might help to explain why the TSA is able to "succeed" with its abuses:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/04/opinion/the-downside-of-liberty.html

     
    Lisa Simeone likes this.
  3. Lisa Simeone

    Lisa Simeone Original Member

    Unfortunately, self-interest has been exalted in the past 30 years to the status of a virtue in this country. In so many ways, at so many levels throughout society. And the corporate ethos of "privatize the profits, socialize the losses" is part of that.

    "Just get me to my flight on time," no matter the abuses, no matter the cost, is par for the course.

    The United Sheeple of America have spoken, and they don't give a (expletive deleted) about anyone but themselves.
     
    Monica47 likes this.
  4. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    Translation: If you are a threat to the "success" of DHS, you are a terrorist.

    The report was dated January, so I do suspect this is all a rehash.
     
    Lisa Simeone likes this.
  5. MaximumSisu

    MaximumSisu Requiescat in Pace

    If you mean over-exalted and under-watched or regulated, yeah, probably.

    People generally don't give a shite about anyone but themselves or their gene line -- it's basic human psychology/biology (see: Wealth of Nations, The Selfish Gene). All Utopian solutions to the worlds problems have faltered on this basis. The trick is to devise market-based (though properly regulated) solutions, a formidable and so far unaccomplished task. Forced solutions (Socialism, Communism, other economies with elevated compulsion) haven't and won't work until we are redone by the gods.
     
  6. Lisa Simeone

    Lisa Simeone Original Member

    I would argue that socialism is working -- in Scandinavia, in France. The Soviet Union didn't have socialism; I guess they had a form of Communism, though the Italian Communist Party would have something to say about that, given that they disagreed with everything the Soviet Union did.

    There is no "pure" system. We in the U.S. don't have capitalism the way it's outlined in the mythos of the "free market." We have a combination of socialism and capitalism (so does Scandinavia, France, etc.). We have something of a social safety net, though it's being shredded all the time. We bailed out the banks, bailed out the auto industry, bailed out the airlines, give enormous subsidies to Big Pharma, Big Ag, Big Oil, etc. etc. -- you all know this. If we had pure capitalism the way the Randians want it, it would be every man for himself and screw you if you can't make it. (By the way, Ayn Rand was a recipient of tons of the dreaded "socialism" -- social security and tax breaks.)

    Again, there is no pure system. There will never be. There shouldn't be. Life is more complicated than that.
     
  7. nachtnebel

    nachtnebel Original Member

    Not working so great in Sweden, not working at all in France; in case you didn't know, they're headed for the same bankruptcy as the other western countries. Most of the G8 is mostly socialist, including increasingly the US, which has a mostly directed economy now.

    If y'all want to see why socialism might not be such a great thing purely on economic grounds (that is, if the disaster illustrated by the Soviet Union and eastern europe were not enough for you), take a quick peek at von Mises, Human Action, vol 3 "Social Cooperation Without a Market" chapter 26, The Impossibility of Economic Calculation Under Socialism.
     
  8. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    Norway is now propped up by income from their offshore oil. When it was first discovered in the 60s, they vowed to spend it on infrastructure and long-term investment.

    The infrastructure investments are phenominal. You can now drive all the way from Oslo to North Cape without getting on a ferry or hurtigruten, and although you still have to take ferries out to the island groups, many of the islands are now interconnected by bridges & roads.

    But the bills are catching up to them, and they are now using the oil income to subsidize their welfare state. When the oil runs out ...

    They do have something for everybody, even subsidized my brother & myself :) while our father was assigned to NATO's AFNORTH bunker at Kolsås.
     
  9. Lisa Simeone

    Lisa Simeone Original Member

    Sure, they're headed for the same bankruptcy as us. But that just goes to prove that our system isn't any better.

    Again, there's no pure system. It's all a mixed bag.

    At least I'd rather live in a society where the mere concept of taking care of the least among us isn't anathema.

    This country isn't a democracy. It's a corporatocracy.
     
  10. nachtnebel

    nachtnebel Original Member

    Oligarchy is more like it. I'd go further and say that this country is a place where the rule of Law is vanishing like the mist everywhere you look. It is being replaced by brute force wielded by whoever can seize the levers.
     
  11. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    And they're only here because of us, and because Sweden sucked up to whoever was more powerful at any point in time.

    France: We saved their sorry (expletive deleted).
    Sweden: Rented their railroads to Germany to use to invade Norway. As the tide turned in the war, so did Sweden's interests.
    Norway: Remained fully occupied by the Germans until after the surrender (Brits & free Poles withdrew from Norway after Dunkirk).

    Britain: Might or might not have survived WW II w/o U.S. help but certainly would not have regained Europe from the Germans. Without our intervention, Germany & the USSR probably would have fought to a draw leaving most of Europe in German hands for the indefinite future, at which point you can ponder the future of any remaining enclaves such as Sweden, Finland (already partly ceded to the USSR) & Switzerland.

    After WW II it was the U.S. military that held back the Warsaw Pact, with a "little" help from our friends.

    Europe's socialist countries have been great experiments that never could have survived on their own.
     

Share This Page