Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

Palomar · 2005-06-29 07:28:08

But what if it isn't all made up nonsense? I'm not saying I believe the bulk of the allegations, but once a seed is planted it tends to grow. What if as this war against terrorists proceeds these things do start to happen? More arrests of US citizens, held without trial in secret locations. A network of clandestine interrogation facilities at the disposal of a shadow government, all in the name of fighting the vaguely defined "terrorism" that threatens us. Concentration camps, secret police, de facto repeal of the Bill of Rights.
Who would believe the warnings when they've already been sounded so vigorously over trifling things? The UN and the American media are at the moment running through the streets crying "Wolf! Wolf!" at the top of their lungs over nothing but a Wolfowitz. Who will listen when the real thing comes around?
If they're outright making it up, they're just fanning the flames of war for their own short-term gain. If there really is some terror beginning in America the overzealous screeching and flinging of wild accusations only serves to mask it when it truly appears.

*Yep.

Unfortunately all the short-sighted sheeple out there wouldn't get the points you made.

--Cindy

clark · 2005-06-29 07:53:31

But what if it isn't all made up nonsense? I'm not saying I believe the bulk of the allegations, but once a seed is planted it tends to grow. What if as this war against terrorists proceeds these things do start to happen? More arrests of US citizens, held without trial in secret locations. A network of clandestine interrogation facilities at the disposal of a shadow government, all in the name of fighting the vaguely defined "terrorism" that threatens us. Concentration camps, secret police, de facto repeal of the Bill of Rights.

Well, there have been more arrests of US citizens, held without trial, and without charges, in secret locations. Those that are charged are not allowed to see a great deal of the evidence against them.

There are a network of interrogation facilities at the disposal of the government in Iraq, Afghanistan, Cuba, central Asia, and third party nations that will interrogate prisoners for the US. All done in the name of fighting “terrorism”.

Concentrations camps? Isn’t that what we have with Gitmo? Secret Police? Not quite, but FBI and CIA have been expanding their power under the Patriot Act, which by the way, is a de facto repeal of the Bill of Rights.

Sure, we could make this sound better than it is, or worse, depending on your own agenda. But these things are happening. America is doing ugly things for little gain.

People yell and scream about it now in order to prevent it from getting worse, or getting to the point where the only solution is the one generally advocated by you CC. Most people don’t want a revolution, thus, they try to prevent the slide into a situation where it is our only option.

Cobra Commander · 2005-06-29 08:09:46

Ah clark, I knew you'd bite at my carefully crafted wording.

Yes, we have the beginnings of all sorts of things that could get real ugly. Or they could die down after the initial panic. The internment of Americans of Japanese descent comes to mind.

But if the intent is to sound a warning to prevent the slide into tyranny a calm and reasoned approach is called for. Frantic hysterics and wild accusations do nothing to stop it, they only force government to be less transparent in justified activities and the people to pay less heed to future warnings.

Those shouting with the shrillest voices that the current Administration is perpertrating all manner of evils are doing nothing so much as acting as the harbingers of those very evils in the future. They've paniced and are now in stampede. They can be steered in whatever direction those who recognize it desire.

Palomar · 2005-06-29 08:14:20

Yes, we have the beginnings of all sorts of things that could get real ugly. Or they could die down after the initial panic. The internment of Americans of Japanese descent comes to mind.
But if the intent is to sound a warning to prevent the slide into tyranny a calm and reasoned approach is called for. Frantic hysterics and wild accusations do nothing to stop it, they only force government to be less transparent in justified activities and the people to pay less heed to future warnings.
Those shouting with the shrillest voices that the current Administration is perpertrating all manner of evils are doing nothing so much as acting as the harbingers of those very evils in the future. They've paniced and are now in stampede. ---They can be steered in whatever direction those who recognize it desire.---

*There is a lot of wisdom and needed words of warning in your post, Cobra.

Unfortunately some folks still won't get it (deliberately or otherwise) and will miss/ignore the Bigger Picture you're trying to point out.

--Cindy

(Emphasis in the quote mine)

clark · 2005-06-29 08:41:32

Ah clark, I knew you'd bite at my carefully crafted wording.

Yeah, I’m predictable that way. I feed trolls too.

Yes, we have the beginnings of all sorts of things that could get real ugly. Or they could die down after the initial panic.

We have the beginnings, and that is enough. We have a continual progression of increasing negative behaviors that are moving against basic rights and acceptable behavior.

As time develops, we uncover more abuse, not less. We see less reform, and more spin and secrecy. We are told this is necessary, but given no justification for why.

Remember, prior to all of the revelations, the executive branch declared that they needed certain powers in order to better protect us. We were told to trust that even with a lack of transparency; the executive branch would uphold rights and the rule of law. We accepted the limited or non-existent judicial oversight (a usual check to executive power) in the name of security, and because we wished to give the executive branch the benefit of the doubt.

The benefit of doubt has been squandered by a policy of torture and abuse of the powers granted to the executive branch.

It is precisely because we have instituted a policy and process where by the executive branch can act with impunity, without oversight, without transparency, that our future is imperiled. This process and policy will be in place after Bush leaves office, and it can be abused by some unknown future executive branch. The detention centers will still exist after he is gone. The policy of torture will still be in place after he is gone. The procedure to detain individuals, American citizens, indefinitely, without charges, without evidence (just suspicion) will still be in place.

As you have often pointed out, the war on terror is generational. All these things that we are doing will not end in a few years, and eventually, they will become instutionalized. They will become accepted by society, the same way everything else is, because it seeps into the fabric of our life. The slow slide into tyranny and oppression is how we lose our rights and freedoms.

You should see this since you are more predisposed to compare how far we have wandered from the original intent of the US Constitution. The change happened over 200 years, not overnight.

This is primarily, at least as I see it, why people are clamoring now. Because honestly, in a few years time, people will become used to the new status quo, and they will accept the new level of limited freedoms (the same way they accept the level of taxation).

But if the intent is to sound a warning to prevent the slide into tyranny a calm and reasoned approach is called for. Frantic hysterics and wild accusations do nothing to stop it, they only force government to be less transparent in justified activities and the people to pay less heed to future warnings.

Both sides scream, and both sides are hysterical. This isn’t just a one sided affair. WMD’s on stand by in Iraq is a good example of “hysterics”, so is it any wonder that people pay less heed to what the President says now?

Perhaps I don’t see as well as others here, but I do know that what I see, I don’t like.

Cobra Commander · 2005-06-29 08:58:56

We have the beginnings, and that is enough. We have a continual progression of increasing negative behaviors that are moving against basic rights and acceptable behavior.

Quite right. We also have nutbars running around comparing those beginnings to the height of Soviet or Nazi atrocities. The vast majority of people look at the accusation versus the present reality, dismiss the accusation as the lunatic ravings they are, and forget about it.

and forget about it. That's the key. The critics discredit themselves before examination or debate even begins. They couldn't do a better job of furthering the things they claim to oppose if they were on the payroll of whatever despot seeks to rule with impunity.

Remember, prior to all of the revelations, the executive branch declared that they needed certain powers in order to better protect us.

Also a case of people panicing and making decisions for emotional rather than rational reasons.

As you have often pointed out, the war on terror is generational. All these things that we are doing will not end in a few years, and eventually, they will become instutionalized.

Which is the entire point. If we don't deal with it now it will become much harder in the future. The problem is that running around screaming the sky is falling when it just started to rain doesn't help. It makes it that much easier for those in power to dismiss the critics as crackpots and enough agree to marginalize them to irrelevance.

I don't want revolution either and I certainly don't want tyrannical government, but if these screeching mudslingers are the best hope for preventing that tyranny, I suggest a visit to the local non-licensed back alley gun dealer and a transfer of funds into transportable assets. Screaming like stuck pigs over a dropped Koran only makes it worse.

Edited By Cobra Commander on 1120057225

clark · 2005-06-29 09:06:51

I'm not going to defend the words and actions of the nut jobs. I do that for myself, and that's a full time endeavour.

There are moderates that call for sensible reform, without the accusations, yet even their voices are ignored by the administration until their back is against a wall.

Gitmo is an example- nutjobs screaming about all manner of abuses. Denial, denial, denial from the administration.

It wasn't untill the moderate voices simply said, "let us see for ourselves, to prove your side, and disprove the nutjobs," that something happened.

You think the morons in charge might have figured this out on their own. But no, there knee jerk reaction is to deny, and to hide, and to not give an inch on anything. Every hill becomes one more hill to die on. It is senseless and gives more credibility to the nut jobs who scream about all manner of abuses.

The administration is doing this to itself, creating the atmosphere for the nutjobs to be taken seriously. More evidence that this administration simply isn't up to the task of leading an effective campaign against terrorism. [shrug]

Cobra Commander · 2005-06-29 09:19:50

Gitmo is an example- nutjobs screaming about all manner of abuses. Denial, denial, denial from the administration.
It wasn't untill the moderate voices simply said, "let us see for ourselves, to prove your side, and disprove the nutjobs," that something happened.

And you know why that is? Reasonable, moderate critics have to be addressed on the same terms or you look like you have something to hide. Raving nutjobs on the other hand can be dismissed as. . . raving nutjobs and hardly anyone gives it another thought. When the nutjobs are in the spotlight the moderate critics have to try that much harder to make their case while distancing themselves from the nutjobs who more often than not have no valid point.

Short of it is, raving nutjobs help the guy they oppose more than anyone else.

You think the morons in charge might have figured this out on their own. But no, there knee jerk reaction is to deny, and to hide, and to not give an inch on anything.

Of course the Administration doesn't want to change, no one does. If you were at work and I came barging in pointing out everything you were doing wrong in as shrill and insulting a way as possible with no evidence to back it up and no suggestion for alternatives it would annoy the hell out of you right? It wouldn't really prompt you to change would it?

Well, there we are. "You're an idiot and a Nazi" isn't going to open the door to compromise or rational debate.

Edited By Cobra Commander on 1120058422

clark · 2005-06-29 09:28:10

I don't create policies on limiting freedom or torturing people. It's not one of my job functions.

I'm not an elected represenative.

I'm not accountable to the nation.

I don't speak for America.

Bush, well, no one made him run for President. The complaints come with the job. The responsibility to respond to the complaints come with the job.

Cobra Commander · 2005-06-29 10:06:45

Bush, well, no one made him run for President. The complaints come with the job. The responsibility to respond to the complaints come with the job.

If the complaints are valid, they usually do get addressed. If they revolve around specifics they get addressed. Not always in the manner the complainer wants, but everyone has to give a little. Unfortunately much of the complaining is of the "you're doing everything wrong and you can't do it right cuz you're stupid" variety. What answer can one give but to ignore it or an equally meaningless and childish "uh uh! You are"?

Unfortunately we're unlikely to get an honest national debate and any straight answers because the critics aren't interested so much in civil liberties (which their ilk have had their way with on occasion) or human rights as they are with making Bush look bad.

clark · 2005-06-29 10:11:07

Bush is the only one making himself look bad. He is not a victim.

His underlings have failed him, and he has failed us by listening to them. I question his judgement based on the results I have seen to date.

Cobra Commander · 2005-06-29 10:22:38

Bush is the only one making himself look bad. He is not a victim.

Exactly, that's my point. In their desire to make Bush look bad the nutbars not only fail but partially discredit the cause they claim to be fighting for.

If they want to make Bush look bad all they have to do is point out every time he makes a glaring mistake and explain how it could have been avoided and more importantly what to do about it now. They either can't or won't.

His underlings have failed him, and he has failed us by listening to them. I question his judgement based on the results I have seen to date.

And on many levels I agree, he's blundered on numerous occasions. But that doesn't really have anything to do with the creep of tyranny nor does it give credence to the nutjobs.

Also note that now we've both started referring to the extreme critics of the Administration as "nutjobs", see how I did that. :;): Repeat, repeat, repeat just like the nutjob media. Pretty soon it's accepted. "Nuclear option", "quagmire", "Bush lied", "worst economy in 50 years", on and on. Same thing.

Lifting the shroud of obfuscation to reveal the blinding light of truth.

So yep, in alot of ways Bush sucks. But thus far those nutjobs have offered nothing but a high pitched wail and flying spittle. No wonder Bush won re-election.

Grypd · 2005-06-29 11:04:12

As an impartial observer of the affairs of the internal USA. It does appear to me that the USA is a lot darker place than the one I grew up or recognise pre 9/11.

It is this perception that allows the not so friendly to the USA people in the likes of the UN etc to paint what ever they like about the USA.

And having a war like the war on terror and the invasion of Iraq though a necassary leads to the USA's actions allways being reviewed in the court of world opinion. In this court the USA is not doing so well. It may be succeeding in Iraq but with the journalism that is present giving instant coveradge of each act of terrorism and setback and pretty much ignoring the good it is easy to understand why.

Being top dog amongst the pack and being focused on external matters does lead to ignoring the home front or when you do pay attention you use the same big stick that was used abroad. And in times of war people are more willing to allow personal liberties to be reduced to allow your country to be "safer". The fun begins after the war ends or if you are totally paranoid that it never ends.

BWhite · 2005-06-29 11:11:57

Gitmo is an example- nutjobs screaming about all manner of abuses. Denial, denial, denial from the administration.
It wasn't untill the moderate voices simply said, "let us see for ourselves, to prove your side, and disprove the nutjobs," that something happened.
And you know why that is? Reasonable, moderate critics have to be addressed on the same terms or you look like you have something to hide. Raving nutjobs on the other hand can be dismissed as. . . raving nutjobs and hardly anyone gives it another thought. When the nutjobs are in the spotlight the moderate critics have to try that much harder to make their case while distancing themselves from the nutjobs who more often than not have no valid point.
Short of it is, raving nutjobs help the guy they oppose more than anyone else.

Cobra, expend merely 25% of your energy condemning those who say Hillary arranged Vince Foster's murder and that Chelsea Clinton was conceived during a rape and perhaps we can start building consensus.

Bush has not suffered a fraction of the crap thrown at the Clintons.

Cobra Commander · 2005-06-29 11:22:36

Cobra, expend merely 25% of your energy condemning those who say Hillary arranged Vince Foster's murder and that Chelsea Clinton was conceived during a rape and perhaps we can start building consensus.

I'd never heard that last one.

But I've not condemned the Clintons, except to disagree with some of that Administration's policies and cite him as a weak, poll-following President. When those more vile allegations were being flung I found them to be just as counter-productive as those against Bush today.

And that's all the effort I care to spend on something long since passed and without much relevance.

Bush has not suffered a fraction of the crap thrown at the Clintons.

Accepting your premise for the sake of discussion, so what? Immaterial.

No one's saying either side's hands are free of mud, but that's not the issue.

Grypd:

As an impartial observer of the affairs of the internal USA. It does appear to me that the USA is a lot darker place than the one I grew up or recognise pre 9/11.

This I can agree with entirely. Unfortunately.

Palomar · 2005-06-29 11:29:46

As an impartial observer of the affairs of the internal USA. It does appear to me that the USA is a lot darker place than the one I grew up or recognise pre 9/11.

*It seems to me the entire world is darker than pre-9/11.

From my POV, a lot of the current anti-U.S. sentiment is of the "methinks they doth protest too much" sort. Sorry if that's shocking to some, but honestly: To me, it is (and has been for some time now) carrying on the flavor of extreme (and questionably founded) guilt induction. A child being repeatedly told over and over how bad, naughty, terrible, unruly, unmanageable, unacceptable he/she is will usually eventually rebel against the barrage of criticism and seek to find the goodness and worthiness in his or her heart. That, or cave in to the pressure and become whatever is wanted/expected by others.

It seems a good portion of the world I've been familiar with imploded after 9/11.

Do I believe everything the U.S. gov't says? Of course not.

That also goes for the UN, the popular media, etc.

Keeping reason always in sight and trying to find a balance, a sane middle ground...that's what I'm working for.

Everyone has an agenda. How do I know/why should I trust some entities out there (Western) -aren't- using 9/11 and its aftermath to try and guilt-induce the U.S. to the breaking point, simply and only because we are the most powerful nation on Earth; just for that reason alone, and -not- based on any moral issues?

So many questions, huh?

--Cindy

Grypd · 2005-06-29 12:44:08

From my POV, a lot of the current anti-U.S. sentiment is of the "methinks they doth protest too much" sort.

But there are things the USA does that do deeply trouble the world.

Heres an example.
http://www.terradaily.com/news/energy-t … Terradaily article

The gist is that the countries that form OPEC are concerned that a new law that the congress is considering would allow US citizens to sue OPEC countries, freeze their assets and have members of the cartel like the energy ministers arrested for allowing Oil prices to get too high.

With oil prices going up due to the increased demand and reduced production OPEC could be in an American court for not being powerful enough to actually keep the prices low.

It does appear to be the USA lording it over every other smaller country, not a good position to be in and more or less produces hostility for the USA in smaller countries.

clark · 2005-06-29 13:38:11

If we're going to mix bad metaphors...

America is like a woman who got raped. So she wants justice, and the world agrees and understands that she wants to go and bring the violators to justice.

Except now, after getting them, she starts to accuse and attack anyone she thinks is out to harm her, or might one day harm her.

We have a policy of preemptive action. Of invading other countries, apparently based on faulty intelligence and mere suspicion.

Is it any wonder the world grumbles?

Put the shoe on the other foot.

If some other country behaved as America has been doing, do you think our politicans and our people would be understanding?

We end up saying we are fighting for democracy and human rights, then proceed to violate human rights. What the hell do we stand for? What are people dying for?

liberty at home? the same liberties that are being curtailed by the White House and a compliant Congress?

We have spent billions and thousands of lives, for what? Illusionary WMD's and so Bush can play King Maker in the sand?

Josh Cryer · 2005-06-29 13:45:37

Proposal Made to Seize Souter's Property

WEARE, N.H. - Following a Supreme Court ruling last week that gave local governments power to seize private property, someone has suggested taking over Justice David Souter's New Hampshire farmhouse and turning it into a hotel.

"The justification for such an eminent domain action is that our hotel will better serve the public interest as it will bring in economic development and higher tax revenue to Weare," Logan Darrow Clements of California wrote in a letter faxed to town officials in Weare on Tuesday.

Souter, a longtime Weare resident, joined in the 5-4 court decision allowing governments to seize private property from one owner and turn it over to another if doing so would benefit a community.

The letter dubbing the project the "Lost Liberty Hotel" was posted on conservative radio show host Rush Limbaugh's Web site. Clements said it would include a dining room called the "Just Desserts Cafe" an a museum focused on the "loss of freedom in America."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050629/ap_ … r_property

Beautiful.

clark · 2005-06-29 13:49:42

Well done Josh. :laugh:

Is there an echo in here?

Josh Cryer · 2005-06-29 14:01:56

Ahh, you posted that 7 freakin' hours ago. Heh. Sorry.

This thread moves too fast, and I'm still not in the whole being back at NewMars thing yet.

Palomar · 2005-06-29 14:05:17

It does appear to be the USA lording it over every other smaller country, not a good position to be in and more or less produces hostility for the USA in smaller countries.

*I certainly don't agree with nor defend everything the U.S. does or has done. It has done it's share of wrong, certainly.

What I was referring to was this sudden and dramatic outpouring of bile and hatred towards the U.S. immediately after 9/11; a disorientingly high level of it.

Before 9/11, sure there were gripes directed against us (some of them certainly justified). But generally we were liked (even if somewhat begrudgingly).

Shortly after 9/11 "the knives are out" for the U.S. from nearly every quarter.

Can you understand how unsettling that is? Such a rapid and near-total shift of positive to negative. How sincere were all those smiles and welcomes prior to 9/11? I find it difficult to believe that matters could have THAT swiftly and surely devolved in the space of mere months. I can't help thinking a lot of masks dropped after 9/11...and some of that dizzying shift in the perception of America hasn't yet been adequately accounted for IMO.

No, I'm not seeking to exonerate America of its wrongs, mistakes, etc. But neither am I willing to blindly listen to and heed increasingly endless criticism.

Trying to find the middle ground (it is difficult)...

--Cindy

-*-

Bush has not suffered a fraction of the crap thrown at the Clintons.

Aren't there more important things than trying to play "get even in the Oval Office"?

clark · 2005-06-29 14:09:50

We could give you periodic updates, as follows:

CC waved the flag for the Right, and then called for it's overthrow.

Bill waved the flag for the Left, and then called for sensible moderation, followed by CC calling for an overthrow.

Cindy asked some questions, was upset with media/business/government/people/right/left and then complemented CC for saying something.

CC and I agree to throw wrenches instead of overthrowing anything.

Non-US newmars posters comment about the EU, american newmars posters show little interst, continue with diatribes about the world, the US, and each other.

CC once again calls for the overthrow of the government, but followed by some goat roasting.

You repost something that has already been posted.

The end.

Caught up?

Josh Cryer · 2005-06-29 14:32:55

Yeah, I am. Well done. Can I help overthrow a government now?

clark · 2005-06-29 14:36:28

Well, Afghanistan and Iraq are in the rebuilding phase.

However, I hear that you can have your choice of Syria, Iran or North Korea in the very near future.

Where do you want to kill terroists today?

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#76 2005-06-29 07:28:08

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#77 2005-06-29 07:53:31

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#78 2005-06-29 08:09:46

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#79 2005-06-29 08:14:20

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#80 2005-06-29 08:41:32

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#81 2005-06-29 08:58:56

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#82 2005-06-29 09:06:51

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#83 2005-06-29 09:19:50

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#84 2005-06-29 09:28:10

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#85 2005-06-29 10:06:45

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#86 2005-06-29 10:11:07

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#87 2005-06-29 10:22:38

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#88 2005-06-29 11:04:12

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#89 2005-06-29 11:11:57

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#90 2005-06-29 11:22:36

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#91 2005-06-29 11:29:46

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#92 2005-06-29 12:44:08

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#93 2005-06-29 13:38:11

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#94 2005-06-29 13:45:37

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#95 2005-06-29 13:49:42

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#96 2005-06-29 14:01:56

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#97 2005-06-29 14:05:17

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#98 2005-06-29 14:09:50

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#99 2005-06-29 14:32:55

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#100 2005-06-29 14:36:28

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

Board footer