Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Freedom is Slowly Dying: TSA is NOW Stopping People on Highways!

Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 19, 2011, 11:16 p.m. EST by VivaLaRev (120)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

http://www.newschannel5.com/story/15725035/officials-claim-tennessee-becomes-first-state-to-deploy-vipr-statewide http://tennesseenewspress.com/2011/10/19/tsa-checkpoints-now-on-tn-highways/

"Statewide Terrorism"? What? You are now, all, guilty until proven innocent! This scares the shit out of me! The TSA MUST be stopped!

253 Comments

253 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 13 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

Yes, and how about getting the full monty pat-down at your friendly neighborhood NFL game?

A chilling quote from the article by TN's homeland security commissioner: "The bottom line is this: if you see something suspicious say something about it," Gibbons said Tuesday. Spoken like a true Comrade.

No U.S. citizen is to be trusted. You should be spying on your neighbors and friends and reporting them to authorities.

The war on terror is a sham. The real goal of the Patriot Act was always to spy on the American people, take their freedoms away, and train people and their children to 'submit' to authority - anywhere, at any time.

[-] 6 points by MiMi1026 (937) from Springfield, VA 13 years ago

1984 finally arrived 25+ yrs later. What a sham. What a Shame!

[-] 10 points by Nicolas (258) from Québec, QC 13 years ago

They haven't won yet. They've tipped their hand too soon, and the world is awakening. We can stop this folks.

[-] 5 points by MiMi1026 (937) from Springfield, VA 13 years ago

We will. Its a slow process,but we will succeed in removing these parasites.

[-] 1 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

I hope you're right. The only problem is they are not awakening fast enough!!

However, I've talked to a handful of people here and opened their eyes.

Have you had any luck?

[-] 0 points by libertarianincle (312) from Cleveland, OH 13 years ago

Except you have half the dolts here wanting to give the government MORE power.

[-] 2 points by phasing (72) 13 years ago

Yes its very frustrating that the only candidate willing to speak out against the patriot act, Ron Paul is getting chastised by the band wagon here because he showed up at wallmart? Or maybe because no one here wants to hear why unions are dangerous, and RP is eloquent versed and educated when speaking about them. But because "unions stand in solidarity with ows" RP is chastised - people please research these issues. Wake up, quit hating someone for these reasons, break free of the kardashian mindset.

[-] 2 points by Nicolas (258) from Québec, QC 13 years ago

We need a government with power. It has to have power to balance private power. It's just wholly misdirected and not working to protect the people, as it should be, right now. The current situation isn't bad because the government is too big or private interests too powerful, it's bad because both are pushing the same way, both are working together to screw the people, instead of balancing each other.

[-] 1 points by misunderstood101 (68) from Los Angeles, CA 13 years ago

power to the government..or power to the people.... can't serve two masters

[-] 1 points by libertarianincle (312) from Cleveland, OH 13 years ago

Agreed, but both need checked, and "We the People" are the only way that is going to happen. We cannot just blindly trust government to "do the right thing".

[-] 3 points by Nicolas (258) from Québec, QC 13 years ago

Agreed.

[-] 0 points by seaglass (671) from Brigantine, NJ 13 years ago

Good pt. This is a chicken and egg problem. Corporatism is a closed loop. Corps. buy power and their bought shills inside Gov't give them more and more of it. Regulation of whole Industries becomes the opposite of regulation or "capture." This is where the Industry in ? captures and rewrites the regs. codes etc. to their advantage. This is the essence of what we face today. They like to use the euphemism "The Public Private partnership. Its Corporatist code for CORRUPTION!

[-] 0 points by seaglass (671) from Brigantine, NJ 13 years ago

Who here wants to give the Gov't more power? If asking that they enforce the existing regulations to control the Wallst. Casino is asking for more power so be it.

[-] 1 points by libertarianincle (312) from Cleveland, OH 13 years ago

You are kidding right? Do you read the posts here? People think that government, for some reason, is more altruistic than corporations. They are the SAME people, the same elitists motivated by the same agenda: Carve themselves a bigger piece of the pie.

The problem is, if I don't like Bank of America, I can choose not to do business there. I cannot do the same thing for my taxes.

[-] 0 points by seaglass (671) from Brigantine, NJ 13 years ago

Why do u feel compelled to defend the Fortune 500? Don't you get it? These Int'l Corps. own DC lock stock and barrel. They're one face! Both suck.

[-] 1 points by libertarianincle (312) from Cleveland, OH 13 years ago

I do get that, but I think the majority of people here only see one side of that face.

[-] 0 points by seaglass (671) from Brigantine, NJ 13 years ago

I disagree. I think most do get it. Were all looking at the same thing but the problem is what filter your looking at it with. The facts though are pretty obvious. The name of the problem is corruption no matter how you spell it.

[-] 8 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

This is what our government is doing with your tax money. Robbing us of liberties and sending us the bill.

[-] 2 points by Dost (315) 13 years ago

Did you even read the book? Be honest?

[-] 2 points by libertarianincle (312) from Cleveland, OH 13 years ago

I read 1984.The character at the end that shares a cell with Winston was turned in by his own children, and he praised them for it. That was some powerful imagery and very symbolic.

Anyways, what is your point?

[-] 1 points by MiMi1026 (937) from Springfield, VA 13 years ago

Mandatory 10th grade reading material.

[-] 1 points by Dost (315) 13 years ago

Depends where you lived. My daughter never read it here in California.

[-] 1 points by MiMi1026 (937) from Springfield, VA 13 years ago

Im older than your daughter fore sure. I am also northeastern born and raised. It was mandatory for 10 th graders to read the classics when I was in school in the late 1970's.

[-] 3 points by MeAndWeThePeople (59) from Chicago, IL 13 years ago

Exactly, when is the last time you saw a terrorist? I never saw one and probably will not because if they are half decent they blend in.

[-] 3 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

You won't see one because the war on terror, just like the war on drugs, is a scam.

The goal is to take our liberties away. What few terrorists there are are only being created by the fact that we've been bombing, occupying, and destroying their country for the last 10 years.

[-] 2 points by sudoname (1001) from Berkeley, CA 13 years ago

I find it funny they interviewed a guy named "Kevin McCarthy" in that article, when this is basically McCarthyism.

[-] 2 points by OneVoiceInMany (91) 13 years ago

Read as "Full money pat down" seems equally accurate.

[-] 2 points by skizzy (445) 13 years ago

You are so right ... But why is nobody saying or doing anything about it ... I am starting to think we the American people have become docile pets

[-] 3 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

What do you think the TSA training is all about? Submit. Spy on your neighbors. No one is to be trusted except the government. Anyone is a potential terrorist.

Have you seen cops taking blood samples without consent so that they can run your blood for drugs and alcohol with no probable cause??

[-] 1 points by misunderstood101 (68) from Los Angeles, CA 13 years ago

some people are part of the plan which has been around for years...no movement can't work unless you have people to support it...try reading up on New World Order books.

[-] 1 points by skizzy (445) 13 years ago

I know ... And I understand this is still getting started ... I am a supporter ... Been Read up ... but allot more people need to wake up allot faster ...I know more people will after the austerity measures that are coming

[-] 2 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

The bad part is they will blame the problems on the banks and Wall Street, instead of with our corrupt government.

Like I've said many times elsewhere on this forum: Wall Street doesn't have guns, bombs, radiation machines, and drones to make you submit. Washington does.

[-] 2 points by gtyper (477) from San Antonio, TX 13 years ago

It's scary because it's so 1984-Orwellian and Nazi Germany rolled into one.

When you are asked to spy on your neighbor and instill a distrust and further divide among the American populous -- we will not have the political courage to stand up when they really start altering our liberties.

[-] 3 points by skizzy (445) 13 years ago

really they have start to alter our liberties ... That's what is happening ...We have lost our freedom

[-] 2 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

The thing that makes it even more scary than Orwell and the Nazis is that we now have the technology to track, identify, and spy on anyone, anywhere. The FBI just announced today that they are rolling out facial recognition technology. Also they have been trying to get the fascist Real ID in place for years.
http://news.discovery.com/tech/fbi-face-recognition-system-111010.html

Have you noticed the number of cameras on street corners going up? Maybe this is just a big city thing. Baltimore has them everywhere.

Fox News wrote this disgusting, fawning piece on the hummingbird-sized drone http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/02/18/robot-hummingbird-spy-drone-flies-minutes-spies-bad-guys/

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 13 years ago

Proponents of the USA Patriot Act were waiting to go long before that day. Similar antiterrorism legislation was enacted in the 1996 Antiterrorism Act, which however did little to prevent the events of 9/11, and many provisions had either been declared unconstitutional or were about to be repealed when 9/11 occurred.

James X. Dempsey and David Cole state in their book, "Terrorism & the Constitution: Sacrificing Civil Liberties in the Name of National Security," that the most troubling provisions of the pre-USAPA anti-terrorism laws, enacted in 1996 and expanded now by the USAPA, "were developed long before the bombings that triggered their final enactment."

Dempsey is the former assistant counsel to the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Civil and Constitutional Rights and Deputy Director at the Center for Democracy & Technology, and Cole is professor of law at Georgetown University and an attorney with the Center for Constitutional Rights.

Looking back at the 1996 Antiterrorism Act, Dempsey and Cole declare that "the much-touted gains in law enforcement powers" under that Act, "produced no visible concrete results in the fight against terrorism." They add that the principles espoused in the Act "were shown in case after case to be both unconstitutional and ineffective in the fight against terrorism." And importantly, the authors comment that the United States government has not shown that the expanded powers it has asserted in the USAPA are necessary to fight terrorism.

[-] 1 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

Absolutely. Did I see anything in the initial 'working list of demands' by OWS calling for another investigation of 9/11? I thought it was in there, but I haven't looked at this list in weeks.

It's really obvious when you look at some of the evidence that a number of people knew about it in advance; yet even more importantly, the physics of the collapse would have been impossible without controlled demolition. To me, Building 7 was the smoking gun.

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 13 years ago
[-] 1 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

truth to power, Public!

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 13 years ago

an investigation of 9/11 into OWS demands - ABSOLUTELY

The chair and vice chair of the 9-11 Commission have written a book about it, "Without Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission."

Former Sen. Max Cleland resigned from the 9/11commission and called it a sham and a disgrace.

[-] 1 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

Like I said, - I thought that it was in the demands, but haven't checked lately. Have you?

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 13 years ago

not sure . . . will have to watch this . . .

[-] 0 points by seaglass (671) from Brigantine, NJ 13 years ago

But, they are wonderful to have if your corrupt and power crazed aren' t they?

[-] 1 points by hs4265 (107) 13 years ago

boy are YOU correct. Good for you mgiddin1

[-] 1 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

We have to wake people up to this.

I know the libs and the libs (libertarians and liberals) can unite on the fight against fascism. This is so very wrong!

[-] 0 points by seaglass (671) from Brigantine, NJ 13 years ago

"The war on terror is a sham. The real goal of the Patriot Act was always to spy on the American people, take their freedoms away, and train people and their children to 'submit' to authority - anywhere, at any time." I agree, scary bunch of fascist minded thugs. I had the great displeasure of working with them once. I wasn't TSA. The whole Homeland Security thing is un-American as hell.

[-] 1 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

I took the 'red pill' last year and it sure as hell makes everything about America look a lot different.

[-] 6 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

I'm sure you guys know that with the Patriot Act, they can read all of our emails, listen in to all phone calls, monitor our whereabouts in real time via cell phones and without any warrant??

Did you know that?

http://www.pinewswire.net/article/usa-patriot-act-makes-your-cell-phone-a-tracking-weapon/

http://macdailynews.com/2011/05/11/apple-open-to-lawsuit-over-location-data-collection/

http://www.civilfreedoms.org/?p=4973

[-] 4 points by MiMi1026 (937) from Springfield, VA 13 years ago

I am positive they are monitoring me right now.I don't care. Im entitled to my freedom of speech. I will go to jail for. Its my right...as well as yours and everyone on this board.

[-] 5 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

Yes, I will too - if it comes down to that. But the point in question is not whether you are entitled to freedom of speech.

It's that we are being subjected to unreasonable search and seizure without probable cause or without a warrant.

[-] 1 points by MiMi1026 (937) from Springfield, VA 13 years ago

I agree with you.

[-] 3 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

Ever since the ridiculous radiation machines and enhanced pat-downs came about, I refuse to fly at all. I will not get on a plane, on principle.

[-] 4 points by MiMi1026 (937) from Springfield, VA 13 years ago

Exactly my reason. My husband and kids laugh about my refusal to fly. However my reasons are that I will no longer subject myself to an illegal pat down of my person when I am not guilty. The government is trying to take away my basic human right...my body! I can't or won't let them totally invade my privacy.

[-] 4 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

Same here! My family and my fiance sort of poke fun at me, too. I really don't think they understand how far we have already fallen down the back side of the slippery slope of tyranny.

I think it is hard for average Americans just going about their day to realize how far our government has gotten out of control. I really think they have had a certain amount of faith in government for so long that it seems way out of the normal to think that the Patriot Act, the TSA, Homeland Security, etc. is all going to be turned on us, regular U.S. citizens.

They take it for granted that we are being told the truth. We are not. On many things.

[-] 1 points by crone (8) 13 years ago

Except that the current law allows you to be scanned, searched, whatever - anywhere, not just in airports.

[-] 1 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

Agree. My non-participation in flying is only a temporary stop-gap measure.

[-] 1 points by MeAndWeThePeople (59) from Chicago, IL 13 years ago

Just typing a keyword, say "North Korea" or "Moonster" (ultra secret alien refueling station on the far side of the moon - the side we can never see from Earth) pops up a red flag at NSA and they assign you a point. Accumulate enough points and that banging in the radiator you hear at night, that freaks out all the European tourists, which Popular Mechanics told you were just water droplets are actual voice recording mini borgs working their way from Central Heating.

[-] 1 points by LibertyFirst (325) 13 years ago

If we go down the path of historical totalitarian regimes, jail will not be the outcome. They'll just shoot you.

[-] 1 points by skizzy (445) 13 years ago

You got it ... Obama's buddy said it easier to kill a million people then it is to control them

[-] 1 points by hs4265 (107) 13 years ago

yes I know. I will not be deterred

[-] 6 points by reddy2 (256) 13 years ago

America is a POLICE STATE.

Anyone who can't recognize this is in complete denial.

The police force has been incrementally militarized.

The police are not there to keep the peace and serve the people.

But to treat Americans like terrorists and criminals.

And most people think this is ok ?!

The war on terror is designed to keep you in fear to readily accept the erosion of your freedom and personal liberties.

[-] 5 points by RufusJFisk52 (259) 13 years ago

our expanding police state is prob he biggest problem we have right now

[-] 5 points by VivaLaRev (120) 13 years ago

Well said! I've been pointing it out for years that the police force is too well funded and militarized for peace keeping. The TSA will force you into an illegal search, and punish you dearly if you refuse. That is TYRANNY to the TEE!

[-] 4 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

Hey, the Constitution is a living document, right? Just screw the 4th amendment:

Bill of Rights U.S. Constitution

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

[-] 4 points by Nicolas (258) from Québec, QC 13 years ago

And it's not even a very good police state. I mean, it's all well and good to have over equipped, overeager policemen busily witch hunting for terrorism across the land, but they could also put at least some minimal effort into punishing rampant and large scale white collar crime.

[-] 6 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

My point exactly. See what's wrong with this picture? Who is the force being used against, besides all of these middle eastern countries who just-so-happen to have oil, and the American people.

War on terror has even less legitimacy than the war on drugs. And it's costing us a helluva lot more in lives and $$$$.

[-] 3 points by MiMi1026 (937) from Springfield, VA 13 years ago

Here in N.VA its a total police state.

[-] 1 points by skizzy (445) 13 years ago

Oh ya ... Nova is the belly of the military industrial complex ...

[-] 5 points by MadAsHellInTX (598) from Shepherd, TX 13 years ago

WTF? Talk about abusing power!

As usual, the real crooks and terrorists get away while joe public gets harassed, then gets stiffed with the bill.

[-] 5 points by mserfas (652) from Ashland, PA 13 years ago

Somebody call the Republicans --- we just found something to cut and some people to lay off! Seriously, people are supposed to accept cuts to their Medicare to pay for this?

[-] 5 points by thebeastchasingitstail (1912) 13 years ago

Exactly. The TSA and DHS are enough to put me on board with the "small government" crowd, as long as this is the kind of govt they want to do away with.

[-] 5 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

damn straight, beast!!!

[-] 4 points by VivaLaRev (120) 13 years ago

I'm a very strong supporter of small government, but that "crowd" IMO has been usurped as well by a bunch of neo-con talking-head-bandwagoners who are just after votes. There is only one small gov. candidate that has the reputation to be trusted.

[-] 4 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

A small government doesn't have the largest military in human history and wage war on 7 fronts.

We are not just the policemen of the world, we are a morally bereft, bullying and decaying empire - not much different from Rome.

[-] 3 points by thebeastchasingitstail (1912) 13 years ago

..and the largest population of incarcerated & CJ-system-monitored people in the world.

[-] 4 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

Yes - and you know who is in jail? All the little guys who stole some sneakers and got caught smoking weed.

Meanwhile, I could name at least 15 government officials right off the bat who should be doing the perp walk, NOT TO MENTION the CEO's who should be right there with 'em. And don't forget the crooked judges either...

[-] 1 points by thebeastchasingitstail (1912) 13 years ago

aw, we have to look forward and not back, after all

excuse me while I go vomit, brb

[-] 1 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

too late for me, it just came up the back of my throat... : p

[-] 3 points by VivaLaRev (120) 13 years ago

I believe we have the highest ratio per capita of detainees in not just the present, but in the history of the world, with over 50% of them being non-violent.

[-] 2 points by VivaLaRev (120) 13 years ago

Exactly!

[-] 2 points by Nicolas (258) from Québec, QC 13 years ago

It's bigger than that. I mean, just look at the curves for GDP per capita and deficit. Wonder at how you can somehow be wildly richer than ever, while also being more in debt than ever and now unable to pay for social programs you could afford ten years ago.

The whole "we must seriously reevaluate what we can afford as a society and make terrible but necessary cuts" is a transparent excuse to weaken government so it can't get in the way of corporations and banks while they siphon away all the wealth. The state really only needs a nice army and police force, so it can keep the rubes down when they get too loud for their creditors.

Incidentally, that's the problem with the big government/small government dichotomy. Neither is really the solution. You want a government that's big only in the right places. Big on protecting citizens from bank abuse, but small on large, oppressive police forces.

[-] 1 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

No Nicolas - who are the NYPD protecting? Why did JP Morgan give them $4.6million this year? Do you think they're a little nervous about OWS having an impact?

The government is the only entity that can FORCE us to do anything. They have the guns, the courts, the jails, the cameras, the IRS.

Corporations and banks cannot FORCE you to buy their product. Neither can they FORCE you to invest in their stock, open accounts, or borrow money from them. True, they have been committing fraud and putting liabilities on the backs of the taxpayer. But, whose fault is that? Why are these people not in JAIL??

Is the government doing its duty in prosecuting fraud and regulating these industries? Or are our leaders lining their own pockets for the next election and golden parachute?

[-] 2 points by Nicolas (258) from Québec, QC 13 years ago

Oh I fully agree that the whole thing isn't set up as it should be. There is no point in having a government that's all the right size in all the right places if it simply doesn't stand between private power and the people, but rather is in cahoots with private power to exploit the people.

Indeed, the government is the only one that can force anyone to do anything. That means that however big JP Morgan gets, the government can always put the CEO behind bars. And that's good, as long as the government is "for the people and by the people". And has some fucking balls.

[-] 2 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

Agree 100%. That is why the real culprit here is our own U.S. government, NOT Wall Street. Don't blame the thieves robbing everyone if there are no consequences to stealing. Blame the frigging sheriff for taking kick-backs from the crooks!!

[-] 2 points by Nicolas (258) from Québec, QC 13 years ago

I don't know. Sure the laws may be inadequate, and the sheriff might not be serving justice as he should. The crooks are still crooks.The thieves and murderers are still assholes. "Look, OF COURSE if they don't forcefully stop us, we'll do all sort of immoral and irresponsible shit. It's their fault for not restraining us. We're really victims here!" is not an acceptable defense.

And at the end of the day, once they start working with each other, the distinction becomes artificial. There isn't the government on one side and the banks on the other. There's just a con being run by two accomplices.

[-] 2 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

No it isn't. I'm not letting the crooks off the hook. But if stuff is there for the taking, and there is no consequence, but in fact - a huge monetary benefit - for stealing, then maybe it is human nature to take it. If the government is the only entity big enough to lower the hammer, and it is the government's responsibility (no, duty) to do it, then they are the ones who have ultimately failed.

[-] 2 points by Nicolas (258) from Québec, QC 13 years ago

Or invalidated themselves as government. I basically agree. But it's normal to rally against the free running criminals and not the useless sheriff. Eventually though, we do need to set about the serious business of hiring a new one.

[-] 2 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

Tru dat, tru dat, my friend.

Unless the current one declares martial law and decides he'll appoint himself as sheriff indefinitely....

[-] 5 points by Misguided (373) 13 years ago

The TSA is just another way corporations are taking our money and in effect taking our rights through government regulation. Why are the Airlines not paying for their own security? Why are more police agencies needed to other than to conduct illegal searches. The NYPD does a great job of conducting illegal searches daily with their stop and frisk program why do we need more federal cops to do the same?

[-] 5 points by VivaLaRev (120) 13 years ago

That's a good question. I've noticed the border patrol all over the place in the last couple of years also, and I live south of the Canadian line. They're not on the border! I've also heard that the IRS has it's own militarized special force as well, although I don't know how credible that story is.

[-] 4 points by MiMi1026 (937) from Springfield, VA 13 years ago

The story on the IRS is credialbe. They've been in full force for the past 33 yrs.

[-] 4 points by TheFred (43) from Clinton, IL 13 years ago

I believe you are correct about the IRS. I've read that, too.

[-] 3 points by thebeastchasingitstail (1912) 13 years ago

Here's an article about the IRS purchase of big guns and creating a unit of 60 agents to use them:

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-irs-arms-60-of-its-investigators-with-12-gauge-pump-actions-guns-2010-2

There's a link to the Federal govt website where they were seeking vendors to supply the guns.

[-] 4 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

Wow!! Totally frigging scary. I thought I knew about most of the abuses by government agencies, but I'd never heard of this one.

[-] 2 points by VivaLaRev (120) 13 years ago

Very scary! What does the IRS need guns for?

[-] 1 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

Gee there didn't used to be a debtors' prison in America. Well - I guess if you have guns, you're not planning on necessarily taking someone to jail. Maybe you're just planning on taking them down.

[-] 2 points by thebeastchasingitstail (1912) 13 years ago

Close to the border? You are living in a Constitution-free zone, my friend.

http://www.aclu.org/national-security_technology-and-liberty/are-you-living-constitution-free-zone

[-] 2 points by VivaLaRev (120) 13 years ago

Wow, I've never seen that before. Thank you for the link! That explains a lot.

[-] 1 points by DCResident (70) 13 years ago

Airlines don't pay for their own security anymore because they royally screwed everything up before 9/11. They used to hire folks for a little above minimum wage and provide them little to no training. In fact, it was often said that folks in the food court were paid more than airline "security" officers.

I don't agree with much of the "police state," but I don't think it serves anyone's purpose for airlines to pay a few hood rats minimum wage in order to wear a blue button-up shirt and pretend they are security guards.

[-] 4 points by LibertyFirst (325) 13 years ago

The TSA is doing the same thing. Low wages, very little training. And I'm pretty sure that training does not cover the constitutional rights of their fellow citizens.

[-] 4 points by Misguided (373) 13 years ago

Oh agree they were failing horribly at providing their own security but that should have been taken care of by the demands of the public in the aftermath of 9/11. What I mean is that no one would have flown airlines that didn't step up security after the fact and it's patently unjust to leave the taxpayer holding the bag for airline security for them simply because they failed, it's essentially a bailout of a different color. On top of it all the "hood rats" were replaced by stormtroopers that we pay instead of the airlines and then the airlines raise the prices of flights to boot.

[-] 0 points by DCResident (70) 13 years ago

Contrary to what the economic textbooks say, the free market doesn't take care of everything. In reality, airlines - left to their own devices - likely would have kicked up security immediately after 9/11, but scaled it back as the public outcry faded away. That's typically how corporate America deals with crises; via massive PR efforts with little substance.

Also, I think most Americans tend to think that the U.S. government should have a role in providing airline security. Many dislike the way TSA has handled that role, but I doubt you would find too many folks who would want to hand the reins back to private airlines.

[-] 4 points by thebeastchasingitstail (1912) 13 years ago

Reinforcing cockpit doors went very far toward eliminating the threat of another 9/11 ever happening.

Also - the 9/11 hijackers were screened and did pass security on 9/11.

TSA consistently fails its own testing where undercover testers attempt to bring weapons onto a flight.

[-] 1 points by DCResident (70) 13 years ago

Yes, the hijackers passed airline-funded "security guards" who were paid a little over minimum wage. The ease with which they boarded a plane with knives should give you a clue as to how lax security measures were before 9/11.

I don't agree with TSA's excesses, but I think most would agree with their mission.

[-] 2 points by skizzy (445) 13 years ago

Do You really think that four guys with box cutter not even a real knife but box cutters could hold back 20-30 people form just beating the crap out of them... Go try to Rob a group of 10 guys with a box cutter ...

[-] 5 points by thebeastchasingitstail (1912) 13 years ago

I agree. The "VIPR" unit how appropriate, they are snakes.

[-] 4 points by VivaLaRev (120) 13 years ago

Indeed appropriate. I'm so freaked out right now, I don't even know what else to say. I never wanted to believe it would come to this, and now it's here. We've given our freedom and liberties away to feel safe, and now, soon, the TSA will have their groping hands down everyone's pants to prove they're not guilty of terrorism. If you refuse, you will be beat down and imprisoned.

[-] 4 points by thebeastchasingitstail (1912) 13 years ago

Before OWS, and since about 11/2010, my online political-junkie time was primarily taken up with monitoring the TSA protests and new developments in TSA activities.

The "Safety & Security" forum over at flyertalk.com is a central place to monitor what's happening.

Our freedom is being usurped bit by bit. I actually care about this more than I do finance reform, although there's a big "crony capitalism" element to the TSA and Homeland Security in general.

We can choose not to fly, but once they are in the bus & train stations and on our highways, there is just nowhere to run.

This needs to be stopped.

[-] 8 points by VivaLaRev (120) 13 years ago

I argued with my brother not long ago about how I didn't believe they were infringing on our Constitutional right to free cross state lines, because you had the choice not to fly. Now, my foot is in my mouth, because it's clearer now, more than ever, that our Constitution doesn't mean shit to our government.

[-] 4 points by thebeastchasingitstail (1912) 13 years ago

yup, I've had many of those "don't fly, then" arguments. And here we are.

[-] 2 points by nobody (11) from Beeville, TX 13 years ago

lawlessness is when the law breaks the law and the people become aware and then the law looses is power!

[-] 1 points by hakuin (12) 13 years ago

Terrorists Attack United States ! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s87Fk23H5Ok

[-] 2 points by VivaLaRev (120) 13 years ago

The police are the biggest street gang in the nation!

[-] 6 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

They call it the 'totalitarian tiptoe' - take away one liberty at a time. If there is an outcry, pause for a while. But you never stop in your progression towards the goal: total control over everyone's life.

[-] 4 points by MiMi1026 (937) from Springfield, VA 13 years ago

I choose not to fly some years ago.Tired of being treated like a criminal in my own country. Train is the best transportation. But if the TSA shows up there... I will just drive the distance.

[-] 2 points by skizzy (445) 13 years ago

Even getting on the subway now they have random checkpoints and even if they don't search you ... You get intimidated by military looking police ... And now with the undercover and secret police it gets even scarier ... I never thought this could happen to the USA but here we are ... And not very many people dare challenge it

[-] 2 points by MiMi1026 (937) from Springfield, VA 13 years ago

This is true. When I catch the metro into DC the police are there on high alert days.

[-] 2 points by pissedoffconstructionworker (602) 13 years ago

But if you're not a terrorist, you have nothing to fear, don'tcha know.

[-] 2 points by skizzy (445) 13 years ago

Lol funny.... Shoot him and sprinkle some cocaine on the body .... Also remeber the DC madam Deborah Palfrey ... Convenient suicide

[-] 2 points by VivaLaRev (120) 13 years ago

You sound like my dad, lol. He's one of the brainwashed sheep that just won't wake up. He's old, and tired though, and probably doesn't have the energy to fight. Unfortunately, his vote still counts.

I know you're just being sarcastic though :P

[-] 2 points by pissedoffconstructionworker (602) 13 years ago

I'm old, tired....and sarcastic. ;)

[-] 4 points by uslynx81 (203) 13 years ago

Well if you want to stop it Ron Paul. Cause he will cut TSA, let the airlines take care of security, they would let the pilots have guns. Example - terrorist with box cutter vs pilot with a 45 acp - Winner -45 acp -

[-] 3 points by Wildcat682 (178) 13 years ago

Just read the articles and it points out the ridiculousness of the US government. The government has determined that terrorists can come into the country through more than just an airplane.(No shit sherlock. What's surprising is it took the feds this long to figure that out.) So now, the government needs security officials everywhere that terrorists may be.........IT'S CALLED LAW ENFORCEMENT JACKASSES. No need to have police officers AND TSA officers pulling people over.

[-] 3 points by anotherone773 (734) from Carlyle, IL 13 years ago

This is way out of hand. This is turning into a police state. Time to take back this country and get rid of the dictators.

[-] 3 points by Abridge3141 (117) 13 years ago

What the F#%K!

[-] 3 points by dankpoet (425) 13 years ago

Bump for the anti-fascist thread.

[-] 1 points by VivaLaRev (120) 13 years ago

Hoozah!

[-] 2 points by ChristopherABrown (550) from Santa Barbara, CA 13 years ago

Another great reason we need an Article V convention.

Congress is very afraid of it, only way to deal with ohs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_to_propose_amendments_to_the_United_States_Constitution "Congress acted preemptively to propose the amendments instead. At least four amendments (the Seventeenth, Twenty-First, Twenty-Second, and Twenty-Fifth Amendments) have been identified as being proposed by Congress at least partly in response to the threat of an Article V convention."

Our first right in our contract is Article V, the right to have congress convene delgates when 2/3 of the states have applied for an amendatory convention.

A power point by Lawrence Lessig that shows why congress is afraid.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gpbfY-atMk

Article. V.

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

Lots of facts here about Article V. http://algoxy.com/poly/article_v_convention.html

[-] 2 points by thebeastchasingitstail (1912) 13 years ago

Related post on the state of the American police state:

http://occupywallst.org/forum/naomi-wolf-in-her-own-words/

[-] 2 points by slinkeey (244) 13 years ago

Michael Savage warned us!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubKszdycvTQ

They force people to remove leg braces and etc...

[-] 3 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

Michael Savage is a syncophant and he is an angry shill who makes a living berating other people.

[-] 1 points by slinkeey (244) 13 years ago

He actually make more sense than that windbag, Limbaugh, or that conspiracy nut, Glen Beck.

He donates to many animal funds.. Puts his money where his mouth is.

You will not hear Democrats bad Republican Good from him all day.. He is smarter than that!

[-] 2 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

I think all of those right-wing ideologues are going to continue to lose market share, just like the liberal mainstream media is bleeding viewers at this point. I say that - and I used to listen to talk radio religiously and consider myself to be hardcore republican. Now, I consider myself to be libertarian.

People are waking up to the hypocritical lies spewed forth by the left, middle, AND right - in all forms of media. Did you see that Sean Hannity called OWS 'unamerican'? What an arrogant, self-serving prick! Ofcourse the democrats are no better - trying to use OWS to prop up their own worthless campaigns and spout out "I feel your pain" cliches.

The truth is what will ultimately resonate. Nothing can stop an idea whose time has come - Victor Hugo

[-] 1 points by slinkeey (244) 13 years ago

That is why Savage will survive. He isn't a cheerleader for the right.

Glenn Beck already went to the sideshow.

[-] 2 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

And talk about spewing hatred - did you see Beck's comments about how OWS is violent and that we are going to kill everyone?

He is one scary dude. Talk about evil propaganda...

[-] 1 points by slinkeey (244) 13 years ago

That was a little goofy... I think it was attempt to buy listeners.

[-] 2 points by FuManchu (619) 13 years ago

TSA has to get bigger so the companies making equipment for TSA can sell more. It also creates more jobs. Is there a union for TSA?

[-] 3 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

Umm, yes. It's the one that has been protecting the child molestors, thieves, and general thugs who they like to employ over there at the TSA.

http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1884&Itemid=69

Look, the union offers free legal assistance: http://tsa.afge.org/

Guess they'll need it.

[-] 1 points by FuManchu (619) 13 years ago

The Union doing its good work!

[-] 2 points by sudoname (1001) from Berkeley, CA 13 years ago

“People generally associate the TSA with airport security…but now we have moved on to other forms of transportation, such as highways, buses and railways,” said Kevin McCarthy

McCarthyism?

Just kidding. Probably just another government agency trying to expand and justify itself.

[-] 1 points by RufusJFisk52 (259) 13 years ago

What we need as well as ows is to Occupy Washington to end the Patriot Act, Dept of Homeland Security, and the TSA. Truthfully i am all for cutting back the CIA to a much smaller size. The ATF too, operation fast and furious. Easy demands actually....make a nice poster and simply say "We want our bill of rights back fascists!"

[-] 1 points by RufusJFisk52 (259) 13 years ago

This issue is prob slightly more important than any other but everyone seems to ignore it. Freedom is dying very quickly.

[-] 1 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

So the company that is making the spying street cameras with motion detectors and P.A. systems for announcements tried to pull its own promo video once it was linked to Drudge. The fact that it tried to disable the video after people figured out it had Motherland Security applications speaks volumes.

http://www.activistpost.com/2011/10/promo-video-for-dhs-backed-spy-street.html#more

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 13 years ago

There just isn't enough work that needs to be done to employ the people

so that make up jobs with any justification they can

[-] 1 points by phasing (72) 13 years ago

If you care you will write your Congress person, leave this forum and go do something about this problem

[-] 1 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

Here's another great one:

Our government has 'smartlights' that will use our tax money to make announcements, record data, detect motion on the street, etc. Gee this will make it really easy to enforce curfew once they get sick of OWS

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuWdBgOHLSk&feature=player_embedded

http://www.activistpost.com/2011/10/new-street-lights-to-have-homeland.html

[-] 1 points by seaglass (671) from Brigantine, NJ 13 years ago

The TSA is a real threat to freedom no doubt about it. This is a Dept. of the fascistic Homeland Security cancer that along with the huge MIC has turned this country into a Police State.

[-] 1 points by jart (1186) from New York, NY 13 years ago

If the highway is a police state, then what's the ghetto?

[-] 2 points by VivaLaRev (120) 13 years ago

Training ground?

[-] 1 points by weatherman (30) 13 years ago

So when do they start activating the FEMA internment camps? For those who don't know what I'm talking about; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0P-hvPJPTi4

[-] 1 points by jordankratz (33) from Portland, ME 13 years ago

We need to get rid of these asshole Democrats and Republicans.I was reading about this BS on the TSA being able to stop Motorists. 1984 is here i guess or well on the way to that awful scenario.This kind of krap must be stopped.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

I would argue that freedom is already dead in the form of biometrics, domestic surveillance, VIPR units, motherland security, and so on...

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by enlightened (177) 13 years ago

Yeah let's all watch each other and gaurd each other and pray together and just hope a terrorist isn't hiding in our closet

We all need to fear, fear government, fear not enough government.

Oh heck just try to be afraid as often as you can

[-] 1 points by VivaLaRev (120) 13 years ago

WTF? "We need to fear...government..."? Are you serious?

[-] 1 points by enlightened (177) 13 years ago

Ha, Ha I was just being absurd about the obvious

When they start doing random searches on a highway, yes you should start fearing your government

How do you feel about random searches of your house, say today right now somebody knocks on the door and say hey {random search}

[-] 1 points by RichardGates (1529) 13 years ago

drug sniffing dogs to fight terrorists. Papers please?

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by Jonas (71) 13 years ago

God forbid the police enforce some form of protection. Either they profile and stop people who are possible suspects, and you (including everyone else) whines about them being racist, or they do random spot checks to appease your poor little needs in order to guarantee that atleast something is being done.

[-] 1 points by VivaLaRev (120) 13 years ago

They don't enforce protection, they oppress, provoke and terrorize. That is not my idea of security.

[-] 1 points by Jonas (71) 13 years ago

Have you any idea what you are talking about? Or do you just spew what everyone else yells? Generalization isn't fact.

[-] 1 points by VivaLaRev (120) 13 years ago

You're right, I've never encountered an American police officer in my life. You obviously know my experiences better than I do.

[-] 1 points by Jonas (71) 13 years ago

And your experiences account for all of law enforcement? Again I say, generalization isn't fact.

[-] 1 points by VivaLaRev (120) 13 years ago

And, what of all the documented stories, and videos on the internet. I'm not just talking about from the OWS protests either. Do a little searching, and you'll find thousands of accounts of abuses by the police. It's far from generalization. Further evidence is in the ultra militarization and expanding powers of the police force. You are either blind or ignorant to what is going on around you. It's time to wake up!

[-] 1 points by Jonas (71) 13 years ago

I could spend a year searching for said videos and you are right, i would find thousands! probably hundreds of thousands!

unfortunately, you are too ignorant to understand that in a day, the police serve over one million people. So maybe one hundred thousand examples of police brutality over three hundred and sixty five million cases isn't exactly the best statistic to rely on for generalizations.

[-] 1 points by VivaLaRev (120) 13 years ago

Oh, I see what you're saying. To use an analogy to try to understand, you're saying that when a deadly disease breaks out and only kills 100,000 people around the world, we shouldn't be concerned because there are 6 billion people in the world, and since statistically that's only 1 in 60,0000 it's not pandemic?

You agree that there are quite possibly 100,000 + cases of police brutality in a population of approximately 310,000,000, that's 1 in 310 people. According to 2009 overall crime rate there were 3,466 crimes for every 100,000 people. That's a mere 3.5% rate. So, of those 310 previously stated, only 11 of them faced criminal handling by the police force. That's roughly 10% of all cases subjected to brutalization. Statistically, that is a serious epidemic problem sir.

Thanks for playing the statistics game. You lose.

[-] 1 points by Jonas (71) 13 years ago

I understand that you're a slow learner, but atleast try to ask me to articulate clearer before typing so much useless information.

I said that 100,000 out of 365,000,000 isn't the best statistic to rely on for generalization. IE, how can all law enforcement be terrible if only 1 out of every 3650 is concerned with brutality?

Also, in your analogy, its 1 out of 3100 people, not 310. Perhaps you should work on your mathematics before you venture into politics.

Thanks for playing.. highschool education? I guess you lost. I'm not really sure at this point.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by VivaLaRev (120) 13 years ago

Oh no, I failed to carry a zero, I'm so uneducated. FYI Mr. Einstein, "atleast" and "highschool" are two words each, not one. I'll not mention several other grammatical errors you've made since we began this discussion.

1% is still statistically significant with a problem like police brutality. 100,000 cases is a horrendous number. I'm assuming you're using 365,000,000 as the population of the U.S., but as of yesterday, it only has a population of 312,434,000; I rounded down. You're also making a completely fallacious assumption that the police interact or engage every single person in the population on a daily basis. If that was the case, then there would be a thirty-fold increase in the total number of cases.

It is completely appropriate to "generalize" upon the entire police force with the type of crimes committed against the citizens of this country when they go unnoticed, unpunished and are protected by the so called "good cops" on the same police force. Aiding and abetting is a crime under U.S. criminal law.

Clearly, you're OK with living in a country where your rights can be taken from you without due process, you can be beaten or slain without recourse to the executor, but many others and myself are not. You're not going to convince me that there isn't a serious problem, and obviously you're too much of a sheep (or I'm beginning to speculate, you're one of the corrupt cops) to take notice.

[-] 1 points by Jonas (71) 13 years ago

To the figment of manhood that finishes his argument with walls instead of good argument (exemplified at the end of this string of replies); There are plenty of problems in the world, many of which, in one way or another, involve you - yet you deal with many of them because certain sacrifices are made in order to maintain some sort of balance. That balance being appropriate to each individuals lifestyle. So, again, i say, 1% is a problem. Would i love to see that 1% resolved? Yes. Would i love to see gas prices go down? Yes. Would i love for crime rate to go down? Yes. But none of that instigates any type of equilibrium if i'm gathering said balance in the force of my shove. Logic applies to science and we're in the dwelling of minor cogitation, where neither fact nor fiction takes place. At the pace of your lost of control, it is seemingly obvious how infuriated you are at how simple my ideas are and how hard it is for you to grasp them. You may end this or push for your deep rooted need for the last word, but in reality, I'm simply having a discussion, while you, on the other hand, are seething.

[-] 1 points by VivaLaRev (120) 13 years ago

My inference that you lack deductive reasoning was derived from the contrary and fallacious nature of your arguments. I am disinclined to reiterate a synopsis for someone who has done nothing but comeback with inflammatory remarks in each and every comment.

I am, however, impressed that you've almost learned to punctuate, spell and use big words to string together ridiculously pretentious sentences, e.g. "But none of that instigates any type of equilibrium if i'm gathering said balance in the force of my shove". I'd be more impressed if I didn't believe it took you the last nine hours to come up with that drivel.

As for the matter of who will have the last word and who is seething; your hypocrisy is superfluous.

[-] 1 points by Jonas (71) 13 years ago

This was atleast one of the funniest things you've written. It's only entertaining that you failed to carry a zero because it's one of the simplest and basic forms of mathematics. So yes, you are unintelligent. My typing has mannerisms, and everything I type, I type intentionally. I'd rather combine a few words than not know how to do the simplest versions of first grade math.

You are earnestly just unintelligent. I don't mean to offend you, but it's like you read one sentence of my post and then rant off on something completely different.

I'm using 365,000,000 as the amount of cases that the police handle per day of the year. That's 1,000,000 cases a day which was a number I pulled out of the air, but one i suspect is easily true. So 1,000,000 cases of law enforcement involvement and there's 365 days of the year. that makes 365,000,000. (Just explaining things, because it's apparently hard for you to catch up on something that I've already explained twice.)

1% IS a problem, i never said it wasn't, you ignorant brat. I said it's not enough for a generalization, for the last time.

There's a higher percentage of crimes, yet you don't seem to be generalizing all Americans to be murderers and thieves and plan for their extinction? Now do you understand? I'm simply informing you that 1%, leaving another 99% of successful cases, isn't a statistic in which you can rely on for generalizations of an entire establishment or culture.

I never said i was okay with that, I said i was okay with having law enforcement, and that 1% brutality is a sacrifice i'm willing to make for the atleast 98% of the time when they're out saving everyone's life. Brutality is a serious problem, but it isn't all of law enforcement, and it isn't 100% of the time, and there are bigger problem than whining about this.

If you didn't know, complaining about law enforcement is the movement of the people, not defending them, which would make you the follower. and at the last bit, I can only laugh at you. If I was old enough to be a cop, I still wouldn't be one. I'm beyond trying to convey to you such simple ideas. It's like talking to a brick wall of propaganda. You're entirely ignorant and most incredibly pathetic at this point of our discussion. If you say anything else, please, for the sake of your own dignity, try to actually understand what is being said to you so your reply will atleast carry some mark of intelligence. Anyone who reads this will see one man in one train of thought, and another spewing and fuming over nongermane theories that have nothing to do with what the first was theorizing about, and it's just making you look entirely senseless. So please refrain from your blind rage long enough to have a civilized discussion, otherwise, run along.

[-] 1 points by VivaLaRev (120) 13 years ago

"1% IS a problem, i never said it wasn't" And yet you condone* it; "1% brutality is a sacrifice i'm willing to make". My point is made. I think you should look at yourself before calling ignorance. I'm done entertaining your one dimensional and illogical arguments, as it's clear your simple mind can't wrap itself around the bigger problem, or even the simplest of academic disciplines, i.e. English or logic. Have a nice life comrade.

*Condone - to give tacit approval to, to disregard or overlook, to pardon or forgive

[-] 1 points by number2 (914) 13 years ago

I know how: cut the funding for the department.

[-] 1 points by Space (79) 13 years ago

This is total bull shit. The federal government has no business patrolling the states.

[-] 1 points by JCroft (5) 13 years ago

Y'know, it's surprising TN is laying down for this...

[-] 1 points by JCroft (5) 13 years ago

Milking the last dollars out of the country and further slave training. Also, gives more avenues for the TSA perves to get their rape on.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by Wildcat682 (178) 13 years ago

We asked for it. When towers fell and the evil terrorists were hiding under the beds of Americans, all everyone wanted was for someone to protest them. NOW, people are worried about too much protection?

[-] 2 points by VivaLaRev (120) 13 years ago

On the contrary, I don't recall EVER being given the choice. Where and when were the polls opened to vote on any of this BS?

[-] 1 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

There is no poll when you create these agencies by executive fiat. Janet Napolitano doesn't answer to any of the plebes.

Thank you, George Bush, for the Patriot Act. And thank you Obama for continuing the charade.

[-] 1 points by Wildcat682 (178) 13 years ago

I don't recall anyone going up in arms over it and protesting either. If anyone had a problem with it, they should have spoken up. Listen, contrary to the beliefs of 99% of the people in OWS, this country is not a democracy. It is a representative republic. The federal government does not have to ask for your individual vote on each matter that it takes up; however, that does not mean that your voice has to be lost. In our current system, you can voice your concerns both in public and to your senators and representatives.

[-] 1 points by misunderstood101 (68) from Los Angeles, CA 13 years ago

its been the criminal courts motto for a long time'''guilty until proven innocent''' It just just got full blown...there will be a take over of a Nazi style on this country with some chilly add-ons....''religious/technology etc..so be prepared cause the real problem is looking right at you.

[-] 1 points by TroubledYouth45 (71) 13 years ago

I read this conspiracy which I didn't believe. It said the Government will accuse all protestors of being terrorists and kill them for population control! I read this post now I am a little sketched.

[-] 1 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

Well, the ACLU notes that there are now more than a million of us on terrorist watch lists. Sounds a little high, doesn't it?

http://www.aclu.org/technology-and-liberty/terror-watch-list-counter-million-plus

[-] 1 points by TroubledYouth45 (71) 13 years ago

Oh. My. Gosh. That is sketch!

[-] 1 points by VivaLaRev (120) 13 years ago

That would spark a bloody revolution. I don't think anyone wants that.

[-] 1 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

If you are in your exclusive gated community with private armed security detail, what do you care if the guillotine gets fired up?

[-] 1 points by TroubledYouth45 (71) 13 years ago

whew good point

[-] 1 points by Wildcat682 (178) 13 years ago

yeah, I think most of these OWS'ers are a bunch of psychos, but if the cops/army just started firing on them, I'd have to join the revolution.

[-] 1 points by ChrisArnold (68) 13 years ago

wow....thats crazy. Heres a figure i'm spreading around

As of 2010

Estimated Wealth of U.S.A. is 56.8 trillion Estimated population of U.S.A is 280,218,971 people for 2011

If wealth where evenly split, everyone would have an estimated $2,026,986.24

[-] 1 points by VivaLaRev (120) 13 years ago

I'm not too much of an supporter of the equal wealth distribution camp, but it would be interesting to see, in the short-run, what would happen if every American had that much money to spend tomorrow. Demand would go through the roof initially, and then prices would inflate out of control, and then, eventually the economy would stagnate, because everyone's disposable income would be pretty much the same. I personally think that would have terrible consequences.

[-] 1 points by ChrisArnold (68) 13 years ago

What that means you could have a working system where if you try, you will benifit. Rather than a system of gambling, if you try...it does not mean you will win. The point is a system which looked out for the people who contribute could be created in a way which rewarded more for being things like doctors, but still taking care of the people that take the trash out.

And allthough construction dosen't require brains, it does require hard work, and should be rewarded as hard work. Slackers could be prevented by gettign paid by the hour, a fair price for what you do, so if you do nothing, you earn nothing.

[-] 1 points by VivaLaRev (120) 13 years ago

I absolutely agree with those who do nothing, get nothing, except there are those groups that are incapable of doing much if anything. I would not see them go empty handed. There is a point where we must show humanity.

[-] 1 points by ChrisArnold (68) 13 years ago

yes...that would be the point of creating a system....i haven't created one. Thing like that would be took into account. Retirement, Disabled.

[-] 1 points by pissedoffconstructionworker (602) 13 years ago

If there's an issue that should unite left and right, this is it.

[-] 1 points by AmericanArtist (53) from New York, NY 13 years ago

Lets Build It Together ! History is still being written . . . We are I T

For The Love of God , We are the Art . . .

http://www.wikioccupywallst.org

Wiki Occupy

Now is the Time

Liberty Eternal

[-] 1 points by JohnB (138) 13 years ago

There is a silver lining in all of this. The militarized capitalist systems that are financing this are coming to an end. Given where things are going with the economy and the financial system, this means all of these agencies will have a finance problem in the near future.

[-] 1 points by thoreau42 (595) 13 years ago

The Federal Reserve will destroy the currency, and the economy, at the same time in order to keep funding.

[-] 1 points by JohnB (138) 13 years ago

If they destroy the currency and the economy then there is no funding.

[-] 1 points by thoreau42 (595) 13 years ago

Seems like a real roundabout way to go about stopping the funding when all we have to do is legally turn the spigot off.

[-] 2 points by JohnB (138) 13 years ago

End the Fed. Money and in turn value creation should come from the people directly (all people). No single person, group or agency should ever control the money supply again. If we haven't learned that yet, we're in trouble.

[-] 2 points by thoreau42 (595) 13 years ago

We're in trouble because most people haven't learned it yet.

[-] 1 points by thoreau42 (595) 13 years ago

"more likely on the interstate"

according to who?

[-] 2 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

According to Big Brother, that's who.

Actually no - Big Sis. Remember her pounding the 'lone wolf' drum??

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by ArrestAllCEOS (115) 13 years ago

Damn conservatives....um...er....oh wait isn't the majority of the government democrat right now? How could this happen?

[Removed]

[-] -2 points by HCHC4 (-28) 11 years ago

The state is completely out of control at this point.

Dont want your kids baby formula radiated before going on a plane? Forget it!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iuG30df_EE8

[+] -4 points by skander (10) from Leesburg, VA 13 years ago

Big exaggeration from the comments. All TSA is doing is looking at the outside of trucks looking for suspicious activities. People want to believe terrorists don't exist, they do, there is not a lot of them. Not that there are not people sympathetic to the cause, there are, just most of them are not ready to give up their lives. You forgot only two months ago in Norway one guy killed like 70 people most of them teenagers and almost killed the Prime Minister? One person is all it takes to make complete tragedy. Your liberty is for unreasonable searches. Going through airport security to make sure you don't have a bomb is not an unreasonable search. The reason that was put in the bill of rights was political protection not so you can go though airport security faster or more comfortably. It was there so the political party at the time can't come and harass you at your home for no reason. Something that was done by Monarchs against nobles they thought were untrustworthy back in England. So, unless TSA starts searching in your houses,purposely harassing Obama's political enemies, or stopping you in your car for no reason and searching inside. Stop whining.

[-] 3 points by LibertyFirst (325) 13 years ago

The loss of our liberties is a far greater threat to this nation than terrorism. What the hell are we protecting if we're going to destroy the constitution and give up our rights in order to do so?

[-] 1 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

Ever notice the war on terror will never be over? It can never be won?

[-] 1 points by skizzy (445) 13 years ago

Do you work for the military industrial complex / TSA ... Look at the friendly police that look like military storm troopers ... Guess you haven't faced the random search getting on a subway or better nypd stop and frisk. Hitler had terrorists also ... Now we hear Home grown ? How do we know you are not a terrorist

[-] 1 points by dankpoet (425) 13 years ago

How would all this waste in money and man power have stopped a lone gunner? Unless you searched every person on every single road.

[-] 1 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 13 years ago

Isn't that the point, Comrade?

[-] 1 points by VivaLaRev (120) 13 years ago

I would suggest you read the links I posted. This thread has little to do with airport security.