Quote:
|
Originally Posted by stevo
No, this is nothing more than something that has been going on for quite sometime. Something well within US Customs policy and procedure. This "case" in particular has nothing to do with military members' mail being censored by a CO. No one would have been upset 10 years ago if this happened. But oh no, big bad bush and co. are ready to strip away all our freedoms. Good thing they don't have the 3 more votes they need to suspend voting rights and repeal the 22nd amendment. Give me a break. I guess we'll have to wait until next week when the media creates some "news" about another "scandle" in a feigned attempt to re-create watergate.
|
This Abrahamoff plea alone blows Watergate out of the window...reading on.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by stevo
As cynthetic has pointed out, this doesn't hamper anyones freedom, nor does it change the way they go about their lives.
|
Isn't it a federal offence to open someone's mail without a warrent?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by stevo
As for the war on terror, most on the left think it is some charade. Nothing but another name for a waste of lives and money. The thing about this war is that we don't see the immediate results of victory as we would see the immediate results of failure. If we were to fail, we would know it. It would be in the form of thousands of deaths and destruction akin to 9/11. Success we don't immediately see would be the terrorist plots that never materialized because they were prevented ahead of time. Just saying we're winning beacuse we haven't been attacked isn't going to cut it for many. I know the arguements. And listing the plots that were foiled ahead of time would not be wise as it would advertise who we've caught and our methods of surveillance. So, this is a war where much has to be taken on faith, and it is hard to have faith in government. But really, I don't see any other way, we either call it quits or we trust that the people we elected to the top are making the right decisions.
|
There is no such thing as a war on terror or a war on evil or a war on any ideal. You can't bomb the dictionary. If we are to declair war, then let it be against the al Qaeda or some specific group of people that actually exist, and let it be for a good reason, too. If we declair war on an ideal, that means that anyone who could be associated with that ideal is who we are at war against, and that isn't the way a war is fought. The fact is that if we were truely fighting terrorism, we'd be fighting ourselves. You know as well as I do that we bombed Iraq with a 'shock and awe campaign'. A campaign of bombings in order to bring fear into people is terrorism, pure and simple. It is because of the generality of the declairaction of war that people like me get nervous. Who is to say who is or isn't a terrorist? How does the president expect to stop evil? Isn't 'evil' subjective? How does opening an 80 year old mans mail help to stop anoyther 9/11? It doesn't. Neither would opening my mail. Neither would opening your mail. The war on terror is not a success because global terrorism has taken a very, very sharp rise since our declairation of war on terrorism. Also, I can't trust that these people who are now connected to dozens of scandals. I don't see how anyone can trust these people anymore.