It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Things Are Definately Changing....I'll Tell You What I've Noticed

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:
df1

posted on Aug, 4 2005 @ 10:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by KamikaziSorry man, but I actually perfer the No smoking ordinances.


It is not governments business. I have no problem with the owner of a restaurant making it no smoking and you should have no problem with another restaurant owner making his a restaurant that allows smoking. You can frequent the non-smoking restaurant and smokers can go to the one that allows smoking. Obviously the concept of adults being allowed to make their own choices is foreign to you.

It is people like you that allow government to nickel and dime away our liberties.
.




posted on Aug, 4 2005 @ 11:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by df1

Originally posted by KamikaziSorry man, but I actually perfer the No smoking ordinances.


It is not governments business. I have no problem with the owner of a restaurant making it no smoking and you should have no problem with another restaurant owner making his a restaurant that allows smoking. You can frequent the non-smoking restaurant and smokers can go to the one that allows smoking. Obviously the concept of adults being allowed to make their own choices is foreign to you.

It is people like you that allow government to nickel and dime away our liberties.
.


I agree with you 100%. It is not government's business as to what private, adult citizens put into their own bodies (same goes for wearing seatbelts, IMO). However, there is nothing wrong with a business owner either splitting up the smoking from non-smoking areas, in order to get business from both, or a private homeowner saying that they prefer that you smoke outside. But however the adults prefer to handle it, government has much to much other REAL things to be worrying about than things that belong in people's private lives!



posted on Aug, 4 2005 @ 11:58 PM
link   
I'll just do these in point form, I'm interested to see who agrees or not. I'll also state that I'm 23 years old, for the record. These are all things that I have seen occur in my lifetime. I'll try not to comment on whether I think these are good things or bad things (although in most cases I think my opinion can probably be seen, anyway). I'll do the first ten that come to mind.

1-cell phones are now everywhere. Think about it, how few people don't have one now, (I don't, but I'm in the minority) and how many people had them, say, ten years ago?
2-personal computers are everywhere. I still remember clearly in grade one, my teacher asked our class how many people had computers at home. Me and one other kid out of about thirty did. Now they are like TVs; everyone's got one.
3-the internet is everywhere. I remember the first time I used the internet (it was at my dad's office) was for a science fair in grade 7, so about 1995. No one I knew had internet at home; most people didn't even know what it was. Even 2-3 years later, it was an integral part of school. By about 2000, most ppl who had a computer, had internet at home.
4-nontraditional families (single parent, stepparents, same-sex couples, common-law couples) are much more common, and (especially in the case of gays/lesbians), more open and less stigmatized than before.
5-children in grade school (at least in my city) can no longer be failed a grade; they can only be withheld a year with parents permission. This began when I was in about grade 5 or 6, so maybe 93/94?
6-debit cards. Everyone's got them, even teenagers.
7-personal loans. People seem to be taking out loans for so many different purchases now, whereas in times past it used to be only for really big things that you absolutely had to have, like a house. Now it's cars, boats, computers, furniture, or even month-to-month expenses like food or rent. Whether people are getting poorer, or getting worse at money managing, or something else, I'm not sure.
8-respect for traditional news sources. People seem to have less respect and trust for news sources like newspapers, television, radio, and magazines, and turn increasingly to the internet (like us, who regularly check out ATSNN), partially because of public debacles, like Steve Glass the journalist (who admitted to lying) or Dan Rather the news anchorman (who I don't think lied, but goofed bigtime).
9-morality. Obviously defined in many ways, but I'll give a few examples of what I mean. Sex is everywhere; on TV, the internet, and media in general, any time of day. Kids younger and younger are experimenting with casual sex of all sorts. Profanity is everywhere; on TV, in our music, and on the lips of kids too young to attend kindergarten. I distinctly remember when I heard the f-word for the first time. I was six years old, and an older kid used it at me when I walked through their baseball game at lunchtime :p I've heard it said that the only dirty word that effort is still made to keep off mass media is the four letter C word, and it is the only nasty word I can't recall ever hearing in a movie or a song, even now.
10-strangers. It seems like people are a lot more leery of strangers than they used to be. With things like 9/11, increasing numbers of pedophiles on the streets, gangs, school shootings, suicide bombers, terrorism, and so on, we just don't trust people like we used to.
(OK I lied, I just thought of an 11th one)
11-gender roles/stereotypes. While the really big changes in these occurred before my lifetime, there still have been subtle changes in society, I think. There is less distinction between the roles of men and women. We have more male nurses, more female engineers, men who wear drag, women who wear jeans, and so on. Women can now vote and run for political office in Iran. Similar gains in gender equality have been realized in other countries.



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 12:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by shorty
I think you are making more refference to huge pharmaceutical corperations than governments.



[edit on 4-8-2005 by shorty]


but the pharmaceutical companies pull alot of strings in government.



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 12:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by wOOdhAk
"For instance, for some reason, for our "protection" I'm sure, they have now taken regular OTC allergy and flu medicines off the shelves.."

There's a good reason for this measure, certain ingredents in the OTC cold remedies are needed in the production of meth..aka: crank, crystal, ice...it's gotten way out of control..around here , central florida, people ride around with mobile meth labs in their cars, there have been numerous home lab busts in the last 2 years, it's really crazy , not to mention dangerous. I'm sure many other states are facing this same problem.

I'm the last person that wants more restrictions but this seems to be the only way to stop..err slow down the prodution of this highly addictive drug.



you make a good point about the meth problem. I think the only reason they are cracking down on it is because of profit loss. since meth is so easy to cook up at home the gov. is being cut out of the action. add this to the fact that alot of coc aine addicts have made the switch, furthering the loss. same reason they wont legalize pot. they make more having a monopoly on importation than they would off taxation.



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 04:23 AM
link   
I remember when. . .

We didn’t have to lock our doors or our cars
Car keys were left behind the visor
Auto insurance meant you drove safely
We could safely walk the streets at night
People didn’t use profanity in public
We respected our government leaders
Going steady meant you held hands, and maybe kissed
A pregnant teen was seldom seen

What I see now. . .

Alarms on homes and cars
Only idiots leave their keys in their car
Mandatory auto insurance
It’s unsafe to walk the streets at night in most places
Profanity is everywhere
Few government leaders deserve respect
Dating usually means having sex with
Pregnant girls going to elementary school



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 09:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by df1

Originally posted by KamikaziSorry man, but I actually perfer the No smoking ordinances.


It is not governments business. I have no problem with the owner of a restaurant making it no smoking and you should have no problem with another restaurant owner making his a restaurant that allows smoking. You can frequent the non-smoking restaurant and smokers can go to the one that allows smoking. Obviously the concept of adults being allowed to make their own choices is foreign to you.

It is people like you that allow government to nickel and dime away our liberties.
.


Hey bud, look at you, smokin super hero and voice of the people. Preach on! Get a f-ing clue - (people like me) gimmie a break, did you even read my post, or just the first sentence, dont come on here starting # if dont even read anything first. Go back and read my entire post, then you will have a right to say something to me.


df1

posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by KamikaziHey bud, look at you, smokin super hero and voice of the people. Preach on! Get a f-ing clue - (people like me) gimmie a break, did you even read my post, or just the first sentence, dont come on here starting # if dont even read anything first. Go back and read my entire post, then you will have a right to say something to me.


I read your entire post and it served no purpose for me to repeat your pro-government control position in quoted form. I have no doubt that you rationalize to yourself that you are a defender of individual rights, but anyone that reads your words can plainly see that you know absolutely nothing about liberty and freedom.

Feel free to beat your chest till your heart is content, but none the less your words make it clear that you are just one more government pawn that favors imposing more government controls on the people.

Please do not call me "bud". People such as yourself which support more and more government intrusions into my life are no "buds" of mine.

df1, takes a deep puff on his cigarette and blows it in your face.
.

[edit on 5-8-2005 by df1]



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 10:34 AM
link   
"Yeah, i agree, few people go outside and do stuff anymore. I believe that one day we'll all just be put into computers at birth and not move at all for the rest of our lives. Then anyone can just take over and we wouldn't even notice"

Sounds like the matrix to me...



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by df1

Originally posted by KamikaziHey bud, look at you, smokin super hero and voice of the people. Preach on! Get a f-ing clue - (people like me) gimmie a break, did you even read my post, or just the first sentence, dont come on here starting # if dont even read anything first. Go back and read my entire post, then you will have a right to say something to me.


I read your entire post and it served no purpose for me to repeat your pro-government control position in quoted form. I have no doubt that you rationalize to yourself that you are a defender of individual rights, but anyone that reads your words can plainly see that you know absolutely nothing about liberty and freedom.

Feel free to beat your chest till your heart is content, but none the less your words make it clear that you are just one more government pawn that favors imposing more government controls on the people.

Please do not call me "bud". People such as yourself which support more and more government intrusions into my life are no "buds" of mine.

df1, takes a deep puff on his cigarette and blows it in your face.
.

[edit on 5-8-2005 by df1]



Are you smokin crack or what, im not pro gov. anything. I was just in favor of the smoking law. Because now me, my wife, and our child, can go to the places that we like, and dont have to put up with the god awfull smell of cigarite smoke, because for one im allergic to it. When I was a child my Grandma had to quit smoking because I couldnt go over to her house without getting really sick. You guys are sure quick to judge people on here, fukin A.
You want to waste your body on cig's, that is everyone's choice, not the governments. They dont hunt you down and arrest you because your smoking a cigarite. It was because they did surveys with resterant chains on smoking, and 3/4 of the poeple in resterants dont smoke, and dont like being around it. Kinda like me. Did you ever take that into consideration. Or do you just like bashing on people that dont agree with you?


df1

posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kamikazi
Are you smokin crack or what, im not pro gov. anything. I was just in favor of the smoking law. Because now me, my wife, and our child, can go to the places that we like, and dont have to put up with the god awfull smell of cigarite smoke, because for one im allergic to it.

Oh brother. I will explain this one more time since you are apparently a bit slow.

Any business which desires to be non-smoking is ok with me, as is any business which wishes to allow smoking. This gives adults a choice.

1) You can frequent non-smoking businesses with your wife and child.
2) I can frequent smoking businesses with other derelicts such as myself.
3) The problem is that you support imposing non-smoking on all businesses via government regulation leaving smokers with no choice. This is a load of crap no matter how you justify it in your mind.

Which freaking part of this do you not understand?


Or do you just like bashing on people that dont agree with you?
It wouldnt make much sense for me to bash people that agree with me now would it.
.



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nathabeanz
"Yeah, i agree, few people go outside and do stuff anymore. I believe that one day we'll all just be put into computers at birth and not move at all for the rest of our lives. Then anyone can just take over and we wouldn't even notice"

Sounds like the matrix to me...

Difference: We're doing it to ourselves....



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 12:44 PM
link   
There is definitely too much information on me. The DMV has my number. My ISP has my number. These are different numbers, but they are surely traceable to me. Let's see... what was the first number that was assigned to me? Oh yeah, it's my Social-Security-Number. That is an ominous name for something. One would think that such a designation as security would makes us all a bit more secure.

The fact is that FDR, a thirty-third degree mason, was the progenitor of that particular number. I don't know if it is a coincidence or not, but it seems that every right that is removed from us, and every number that is added; each of those instances is the result of those WITH doing something to further impede those WITHOUT.

It is incumbent upon us all to question these changes that are occuring daily to our freedoms. But beware. I suppose that all the people who have been imprisoned since certain vicious acts, WITHOUT due process had a few questions too.

Also keep in mind that if there IS an insidious plot or two out there lurking around, they are liable to be monitoring these communications. Don't be surprised when the day comes that you will need a number to go online. Or perhaps they already have your number.

Dave Ravin


df1

posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dave Ravin
The fact is that FDR, a thirty-third degree mason,


How is FDR being a Mason significant to this topic?
.



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 03:01 PM
link   
Ever read the book "1984" by George Orwell?
If you haven't, you should because that is where the world seems to be headed.

Germany is already like London in "1984" in that neighbors turn neighbors into the authorities for anything and everything. But I guess you can't really blame them...considering their past.

The German government tells their people what to think and how to think - they don't trust their people to be able to think rationally for themselves (or at least thats what they want them to think.) The German government even determines what kind of products are sold in stores! Ever slept on a german bed or sat on a german couch? They are austere and uncomfortable to say the least - it would be just as comfortable to sleep on the bare floor. The furniture in "1984" is the same way...but the government in "1984" uses the uncomfortable furniture as a way of controlling the environment in which the people live - its a form of mind control, brainwashing. By controlling the environment, the government attempts to convince the people that they don't deserve any better.

The furniture in Germany may very well be like cement blocks for the very same reason - to convince the people that they have no rights, to convince the people to accept what the government tells them to have, do and think. The German government certainly can't have it's people thinking that they deserve more than the government allows them to have. I mean if the German people actually started to believe that they deserve a luxurious bed to sleep on, then that might lead them to believing that they derserve other luxuries...like freedom...or even an opinion of their own...

[edit on 5-8-2005 by checkers]



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 04:06 PM
link   
Didn't you all know that your all here to just be consumers and support your government? You didn't get the memo? They need to regulate everything so they can make money. The population has grown so much that someone got the bright idea that if the make you pay for things you used to do for free the the cash will role in. Your not gonna go to the supermarket and buy stuff? Get it free from mother nature, I think not, how can we tax that? Your gonna use drugs? Well it better be the ones we can tax. Don't worry we want you to live a long time, at least until you want to collect your social security, then you can drop dead.

As for smoking in private establishments, there is a wonderful concept to cover this. If a business owner loses money when none smokers stop going to his establishment, he has the right to make it a non-smoking establishment, and he/she will. Its not your right to eat at (insert resturaunt,bar,etc). Its not in the constitution. Free enterprise will take care of the situation if the government would just keep their noses out of it. But of course they won't.



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 09:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by wOOdhAk

I'm the last person that wants more restrictions but this seems to be the only way to stop..err slow down the prodution of this highly addictive drug.



The reason Meth is so prevalent is because of prohibition. The cost of other drugs price is super high because of prohibition. Education is the key not prohibition, kids are using harder drugs because the government makes them all seem eually dangerous. Then they try cannibis for the firs time and think... that wasnt so bad, and the same drug dealer that sold them the cannibis says hey this other drug isnt so bad either, and sells them something insidious that is more profitable for the dealer. Who is going to sell your kid drugs, some dealer or a store clerk. Make it so you supply a minor with drugs you get life in prison.

Meth is a perfect example of this failed war on drugs. Make some harder to get they will figure out a way to manufacter something from everyday things that is cheaper. People who are prone to use drugs will use them weather they are legal or against the law. Let the adults decide what they want to put into there bodies and put contros in place to keep it from the kids. Eduacate, prevent the kids from having access and drug use will go way down.

We will never, ever arrest our way out.



posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 12:27 AM
link   
edited by DR because I hit the post reply button, instead of the preview post button, and it was blank.



[edit on 6-8-2005 by Dave Ravin]


df1

posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 12:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by LoneGunMan
The reason Meth is so prevalent is because of prohibition.


You get a "way above" from me on this post.

Too many folks are willing to stop thinking and give up their rights to government. Unfortunately they are giving up mine in the process also.



posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 12:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by df1

Originally posted by Dave Ravin
The fact is that FDR, a thirty-third degree mason,


How is FDR being a Mason significant to this topic?
.


Upon review, I see that it may be of no significance. Perhaps it is significant that the only part of my post you cared to comment on was the insignificant part.

I think the reason I was thinking that, and it got into the mix, was that I really dislike those uber-masons. Everything I have read about the freemasons is really twisted, in my opinion.

The very ones who are making us all into numbers-in-a-data-base are the ELITE RICH. These elitists have many, many freemasons in their ranks. It is my belief that the New World Order is a very real threat.

One of the main goals of the NWO is to strip the citizens of the world of their basic freedoms. It is becoming a very real situation when we see those freedoms and rights being trashed by our current government. FDR was one of the first of the Elitists to come up with a way to keep track of each citizen. This was perhaps one of the most effective ploys ever to besiege the good people of America.

Upon further review, I see that it IS indeed of some significance.

Dave Ravin




top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join