War on Terror? What Terror?

Originally posted by Moon Puppy
I’m not saying this to pick a fight or anything but I want you to show me the actual legislation of the "Patriot Act" that dismantles the governing body of the US.

Have you actually read it? I hope you've got a couple of days free because it's that long. Of course it's phrased with political double-talk so it's impossible to pick out even one or a few passages in particular & still make a concise, definitive answer on these forums. Overall, it picks apart the basic Constitutional Rights guaranteed to citizens.
If you think you can stomach the whole thing, look here. If not, here's a few places that have provided some information on what the Patriot Act does: Here's a link with ACLU & Defending America. If you want more info & more viewpoints, remember that Google is your friend.
Yes, I've noticed that NoJustice gave you some specific examples but I've just given you some other paths to research as well.

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Who are these people, and what are they waiting for? They could have easily done it after WW2 when the people were much more trusting of the government.

The "Administration Advisors" appointed to the President's Office. Have you no sense of logic to realize that "behind the throne" refers to people who are very influential to the President but keep "smaller targets" on them than the one who "sits on the throne"? Since I'm not here to "entertain" only one person, look up thier names and public histories for yourself. You'll find that most of these people have been "powers behind the throne" for a long time & under multiple Presidents. Not only that, you'll find extremely questionable & suspicious activities connected to their names...For the past few decades. And perhaps you think that these people learned nothing of political tactics from those captured Nazis after WW 2?

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Ah, but it is working because the vast majority fail to see it happening. This country needs to have that majority to be aware of it, otherwise those tactics will just slip right by them & take effect.

Do you have examples or are you just stating your opinion?

One example: The polarization of public attitudes (You need to be able to access the Really Above Top Secret forum for this) has been cranked up to a nearly feverish pitch in the USA. What the government has done is to isolate the People into a wide variety of extreme opposing views; Christian vs. Muslim, Pro-War vs. Anti-War, Rep vs. Dem, on & on. We've been isolated into a large number of "minority groups". It wasn't done by law or enforcement of any kind...It was manipulated into public attitude. "Divide & Conquer", indeed! How can a majority be reached if the Public is so divided?

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
I'm 100% sure I know more about our constitution and our government than you. 100% positive. I would love however for you to show me examples of how the gov has totally disreagarded the Constitution.
Is there a reason why I should read the history and conditions surrounding legislation of amendments?

Yes, you should read about the history. History will repeat itself for those who fail to learn from it. One prime example is the whole Income Tax issue; If you read the Constitution, look at Article 1, Section 9, Clause 4. Then you'll be referred to Amendment 16. Income Taxes were instututed in response to the Great Depression era...Presidential Emergency Act got it started. Fine & dandy, no problem yet.
Amendment 16 was pushed through Congress during the holiday season, without an acceptable Quorum present. The ratification dates show that none of the States had ratification until the Amendment had already been pushed through & our Congress allowed the members to return from the holiday season. In short, that Amendment was legislated outside of the Constitutional guidelines for creating Amendments. This is an issue that is having great impact on current events; Check out here for an example of how the People are learning about how the government operates & beginning to refuse to put up with it. And how the government treats People who demand their Rights in response.
Now...can you use a bit more thorough research, a bit of logical progression & treat Google as your friend, or are you going to make me do all of your footwork for what I post? Why is it that you fail to understand so much when the other people at these forums have so much less difficulty with my posts? Most people can read what I post & use that to point their own research into whatever point I'm making. I'm not trying to be sarcastic here...I'm trying to understand you better. However I can't spend all of my time one just one person when there's a whole forum to communicate with. Just the two of alone have already taken up too much space with each posting because we've been quoting nearly every point. I want to stop doing that. As a matter of fact, I will stop doing that. The only time I normally enter a long post with lots of quotes is when I take my first read of a thread & simply make a post when I get caught up with the topic-matter.

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Go out on the street. Talk to a bunch of random people, and tell me what they think of our government. Then come back here and see how silly what you just said was.

That's what I was talking about when I referred to "soap-box speech"...Isn't that a concise description of your statement?

I think terrorism is a bit of a misused word. Definition of terrorism

terrorism n. the use of force or threats to intimidate, etc., esp. as a political policy

By that definition, a big handful of the world's governments that have used threats or force in the past, the US government included, would be considered terrorists.

It seems the definition of terrorism has been altered a few times to narrow it down to more or less people who are against interests of certain nations and their governments. The definition has also been altered to reflect only their style of "use of force," which often involves tactics like suprise raids, suicide bombings, roadside bombings, and targetting of civilians, while excusing the style of "use of force" by the governments themselves, which is perhaps a little less terrifying but still considered "use of force".

The way I see it, this has been done by some entity, maybe the government, to deliberately force fear and hatred of the people towards a certain rebellious group, while glorifying their own acts of terrorism (by old definition). A bit like the use of Newspeak and Goldstein (from 1984), if you will.

I think a better and more neutral term for those "terrorists" (by altered definition) would be maybe guerillas (meaning irregular soldiers/combatants)

[edit on 13-4-2005 by Taishyou]

Originally posted by MidnightDStroyer
Not only that, you'll find extremely questionable & suspicious activities connected to their names...For the past few decades. And perhaps you think that these people learned nothing of political tactics from those captured Nazis after WW 2?

You still have not answered my simple question. What are they waiting for? Is their whole purpose in life to go around doing suspicious things for their own pleasure? Surely at least 50 years of questionable activities should have lead to something by now, no?

One example: The polarization of public attitudes (You need to be able to access the Really Above Top Secret forum for this) has been cranked up to a nearly feverish pitch in the USA.

That thread (which I have posted in) has little to do with what you're talking about. Or...you're giving two different views.
The original statements were about the political tactics used by Hitler. Creating an enemy and uniting the people against this enemy to gain power. That's not exactly the same as splitting and creating divisions amoung the people.

What the government has done is to isolate the People into a wide variety of extreme opposing views; Christian vs. Muslim, Pro-War vs. Anti-War, Rep vs. Dem, on & on. We've been isolated into a large number of "minority groups".

1. No one is isolated.
2. What makes you think the government is responsible for splits? Why can't the people just have opposing views? Isn't that what America is about, being free to think whatever you want to think. Isolating people accomplishes nothing.
3. What's the selection process if this were true? How does the government decide which people will be Dems or Repubs? How does the gov. decide which people should be Christian or Muslim?

If anything, the government would want the opposite of what you said! Everyone together.....that way whoever is in power stays in power.

Why is it that you fail to understand so much when the other people at these forums have so much less difficulty with my posts? Most people can read what I post & use that to point their own research into whatever point I'm making.

You have to realize people who agree with your post agreed with your posts before you posted it. If I believe the world is flat, and others here also believe the world is flat, when I post a thread titled "The world is flat", they'll agree with what I presented. Doesn't mean I'm right, just because someone agrees with me.

That's what I was talking about when I referred to "soap-box speech"...Isn't that a concise description of your statement?

No. I was telling you to do a survey. It's simple.
"How do you feel about your gov.?"
I can guarentee you the majority will have negative comments (contrary to what you're suggesting)

I'm done with you too
You're going to believe whatever you're going to believe.
Hmmm.....Is that the governments fault?