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.

 

non-flame questions to liberal americans

page: 6
4
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 29 2008 @ 07:30 PM
link   
EDIT: double post due to exceeding quote number limit and accidentally reposting when trying to edit this one.

[edit on 5/29/2008 by AceWombat04]




posted on May, 29 2008 @ 07:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by dragonseeker
Originally posted by ybab hsur
i am not flaming you - so do not flame me.

I am a conservative, i have been having other debates in other forums on other topics, and i have come up with a list of questions that the people i've been debating with refuse to, or cannot, answer. Again - no flames.

1.) Give me ample examples of which rights of yours have been stripped by bush since 9/11

2.) How is Iran's president ahmenijad (sp?) not practicing hate speech when he's talking about jews

3.) Except for ending Slavery, Nazism, Facism, and Communism.....
WAR HASNT SOLVED ANYTHING

hmm my reply got erased..


[edit on 29-5-2008 by dragonseeker]


Well that's what you get for disagreeing and not being part of the cult of personality
----SARCASM

[edit on 29-5-2008 by jfj123]



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 07:35 PM
link   
I am termed "liberal" by those who know me, but I personally abhore labels. Nonetheless, I'll do my best to answer your questions from my own perspective, though I doubt I make a good representative for those who entitle themselves as liberal.

1.) I can cite no literal or current examples of my legal rights having been abridged, limited, or eliminated. I can imagine a hypothetical scenario in which, due to the relatively broad definition of terrorism under current legislation, I might be falsely accused of a terrorist act of some sort (I take part in no activities which are harmful to myself or others, but the possibility, however small, remains) and denied the right to normal legal counsel and representation. That's only hypothetical, though. I should stress that I do harbor a great deal of unease and concern regarding several articles of legislation that have been passed since 9-11 and their potential uses under specific circumstances. Those circumstances have not occured, however, and so technically none of my legal rights have been removed (at least none that I can think of.) I make a distinction between literal legal rights, and what I believe should be rights, but if I go by the latter, then I've never had them to begin with in our society.

2.) Personally, I believe anyone casting judgment on any person or people on the basis of nationality, creed, ethnicity, religion, gender, age, or sexuality, particularly if such judgment is accompanied by rhetoric indicative of violent intent, whether purely rhetorical or not, is hate speech.

3.) No, nor would I seek to. I would never argue that war has not resulted directly in certain positive change. It is the means by which that change was achieved with which I disagree. I do not have a preferable alternative that would have achieved the same results, however I have a faith (perhaps unfounded) in humanity that options exist in all scenarios... it's just a matter of whether or not we find them in time. It would seem that, for whatever reason, we did not, and still have not. It's akin to people arguing that the Hallocaust was a positive thing because it taught the world the potential magnitude of unopposed atrocity. It did teach us that, but I certainly don't believe that we couldn't have learned that lesson by some other means. I oppose war out of personal opinion, emotion, and conscience, but I recognize and respect that others have different life experiences, perspectives, and outlooks which cause them to support war for the very same reasons. I don't have all the answers. I think anyone who purports to is likely to be incorrect. Still, like anyone, I can only go with what I feel, and I feel that war is not the correct means of solving the above past challenges, or those we face today. I would never deny that it is a means, however.


4.) I actually agree with you in this instance. What's good for the goose should be good for the gander. I personally don't trust the CIA in either case.

5.) I don't know that he had or didn't have WMDs, and wouldn't claim to be certain of either possibility.

EDIT: The post initially erased the majority of what I wrote. I had to remove the quotes, as apparently more than three quotes is not allowed.

[edit on 5/29/2008 by AceWombat04]



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 07:58 PM
link   
reply to post by AceWombat04
 


well so far, a few people have stepped up to bat.

But i gota be honest, im getting bored. Once my enthusiasm rises again, ill come back here and post some more


*yawn* time to get some sleep

Until then, remmeber :

No matter how much you disagree, you should never flame America. All you do in this case is further our enemy's agenda and embolden them further.



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 08:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by ybab hsur
reply to post by pieman
 


your other comments are garbage too. Not a flame.
Im just really...serioulsy tired about defending this country to people who hate it but exploit it. (like you and other liberals)

If you dont like it here, leave. If you liek it here , then accept it as the worlds greatest country and shut up. I never said it was perfect, i said the greatest.

I've been talking with people just like you for the last 3 days. Im looking for answers, not conjectures and inquisitions of your own.

If i say "Is ahmenijad liek hitler?" Thats yes or no. Its not open for debate. You either think he is or isnt, and a creidble reply is not "Bush is hitler!!!!"

Ignorance costs this country more money than all other problems combined. And that is a fact you can take to the bank.

Im done on this topic. You can start at the beginning and read to the end, and you will see that i've been repeating myself over and over, and when i bring up very valid points that disprove liberal ideologies, they get ignored and passed over.

if you cant answer it, fine, but stop pretending that you care.


I answered all of your questions with what I feel are valid points with no response. I am curious as to why you believe that individuals who disagree with your views or believe that there may be problems within our current governement hate this country.



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by ybab hsur
reply to post by AceWombat04
 


Until then, remmeber :

No matter how much you disagree, you should never flame America. All you do in this case is further our enemy's agenda and embolden them further.


I guess what you are saying is everyone should just keep quite, never mind how many lives are lost or how much poverty is created. Everyone put on there happy face our so called enemies our watching...

Sad. The individuals that first envisioned this nation and the ideals they had in mind would be appalled. After all if I am not mistaken it was there belief that it is up to the people to keep the government in check. But what you are calling for is complacency and an unchecked government. I can't think of anything more anti-American.



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 09:19 PM
link   
In answer to your questions:


1)

-Peaceful protest. (See: Free Speech Zones)
-Privacy. (See: Warrantless Wiretapping)
-Life. (See: 9-11)
-Economic Prosperity. (See: War Cost $3 Trillion)
-Freedom from Slavery. (See: Income Tax)
-Freedom from Debt. (See: Federal Reserve Fraud)
-World Trust/Respect for USA. (See: Illegal War, Occupation, Invasion)
-Legal Defense. (See: Writ of Habeus Corpus)
-Freedom of the Press. (See: FCC)
-Freedom of Locomotion/Travel. (See: No-Fly List, Driver License, Passport)


2)

He can practice all the hate speech he wants. Who cares? Why would anyone want to listen to a crazy nutbag?

If he's a "threat" then put up your "shields". But the America I grew up with doesn't start wars, we only go to war in defense. All this talk of attacking Iran is absolutely contrary to the America I grew up with and love. If pre-emptive war is permissible in this country, at what point do you draw the line? An argument can always be made that we "must" attack some country or other because they might pose a future threat to us. There would be wars until the end of time, or until the end of our country... whichever comes first.


3)

Slavery isn't over. You buy products at Wal-Mart produced with slave labor. Nike (a corporation that started in the USA) now hires workers in asia at 80 cents per day. Many of them are suffering from malnutrition. Yet the shoes still cost $50-$150.

The Nazis were defeated, at least in the eye of the public. After the war, however, many Nazis were imported to work in the United States under a program called "Project Paperclip". Among them was the scientist who developed the technology for the V2 - a rocket-propelled bomb used by Hitler to terrorize europe and kill thousands. Many of these scientists lived out their years in the US without any criminal prosecution.

Fascism is the alignment of corporate money interests with government. Look around you... is fascism not alive and well in America today? Just look at things like Halliburton, KBR, Blackwater, etc... This government today has merged itself with military power and force, at the expense of the economic prosperity of the country, and threatens the well-being of humans all over the world, including HERE. It's like Mussolini's Italy all over again... Mussolini said fascism should be called corporatism... in this world the corporations exert far more influence on government than the voters do. Human beings suffer because profit is king. Slave labor, perpetual war, funding of military at the expense of the worker at home, continual warmongering propaganda. It's everywhere.

Communism - read the communist manifesto. Here are the 10 planks:

1. Abolition of private property and the application of all rents of land to public purposes. See something called "eminent domain". Happening in America.

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. OMG do we already have that!

3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance. See "death tax".

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels. The IRS can confiscate your property BEFORE you've been found guilty of any crime. Today a "rebel" is defined as someone who thinks the government is getting out of hand.

5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly. See "Federal Reserve".

6. Centralization of the means of communications and transportation in the hands of the State. The NSA has a floor all to itself at AT&T. They monitor all US telephone communication. The roads are government owned. Many now toll roads, even though they've already been paid for with taxes.

7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state, the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan. How much land does the government now possess? How much do the people?


8. Equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
Americans call it Minimum Wage and slave labor like dealing with our Most Favored Nation trade partner; i.e. Communist China. We see it in practice via the Social Security Administration and The Department of Labor. The National debt and inflation caused by the communal bank has caused the need for a two "income" family. Woman in the workplace since the 1920's, the 19th amendment of the U.S. Constitution, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, assorted Socialist Unions, affirmative action, the Federal Public Works Program and of course Executive order 11000.

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries, gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equitable distribution of population over the country. Monsanto comes to mind.

10. Free education for all children in public schools. Combination of education with industrial production. When the state teaches your children, the parents have less influence. Today's purpose of education is to produce obedient and productive workers. Not happy and safe human beings.


4)

You seem to have a very firm belief that there are two "poles" of humanity - conservatives and liberals. I submit to you that these labels are irrelevant. Today, there are two types of people - the top 1% who own all the secrets, money, weapons, media, and production in the world. Their goal is to further their class interests. The other 99% are those who are fighting to retain what little they have left. Label them what you will.

Every act committed by those people at the top is a carefully calculated move to further their goals, which if you or I knew what they were really doing and why, we would be outraged. I believe you have yet to consider the possibility that rulers lie. Their intelligence and military apparatus lies. All in the interest of power.


5)

What right do we have to knock down the door of another country and have a look around? Would we let Saddam come over and inspect our facilities? Of course not. So who decides which countries have the right to do these things, and which do not?

If you don't believe in sovereignty and a right to privacy and freedom from harassment for every nation, you believe in those rights for none. If it's a fair rule, it must apply to everyone.

It's hypocritical to say that we can have wmds, but no one else can. If its wrong to possess them, then why are we allowed?



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by ybab hsur
reply to post by AceWombat04
 


well so far, a few people have stepped up to bat.

But i gota be honest, im getting bored. Once my enthusiasm rises again, ill come back here and post some more


*yawn* time to get some sleep

Until then, remmeber :

No matter how much you disagree, you should never flame America. All you do in this case is further our enemy's agenda and embolden them further.


I would never flame America, nor you or your beliefs. It would be hypocritical of me indeed to espouse a belief in peace and tolerance, only to condemn you for your views. I may disagree with you, but I respect your opinion and your right to it, as well as the feelings and intentions behind it.

EDIT: typos

[edit on 5/29/2008 by AceWombat04]



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by ybab hsur
well you've got 2/5.


2.) Freedom of speech? need i remind you about hitler and his freedom of speech and what it led to?




So are you saying that you are *against* the freedom of speech?

If you are against the freedom of speech, any speech, then I am afraid you would be, by definition, anti-American.



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 11:57 PM
link   
JSOBecky


Many venues, including transportation and public buildings, have had security detectors long before Bush or 9/11.


If you'll notice, I made no mention of security detectors, as you call them. Metal detectors, sensors that screen for explosive residue, and camera surveillance are all perfectly legal and constitutional as far as I'm concerned.

What I (and many others) object to is random, warrant-less searches of my physical person - all this 'take off your shoes and bend over so I can shine a flashlight up your rear end' business...

This is a clear invasion of privacy, and no thinking populace would submit to such measures unless they had first been scared witless by a propaganda machine working overtime to fabricate an external enemy.



What is wrong with that? Acting on intelligence in the sense of being diligent and aware is not a crime. And the practice has been followed since there were law enforcement agencies. Carried to the extreme, it's called "profiling".


Being diligent and aware is one thing, having an excuse to harass, search and/or detain every student, artist, homeless person, and tourist in the city limits is quite another.

I believe the correct term for this sort of behavior is self-destructive fascist paranoia.



Where in the US is this happening? (checkpoints)


Did you read the 911 Commission report?

www.youtube.com... There's a video for you.

Also, I believe they now do this 'randomly' in the NYC subway system (but I haven't been back in years), and I know for a fact that checkpoints, be they DUI or Border Control, have multiplied exponentially across the Southern states since the Patriot Act.



I'd like to know where the words "right to privacy" appear in the Constitution.


You're looking for a justification based on the letter of the document, and I'm trying to petition thinking people to adhere to the principles of a free and just society, of the sort the founding fathers had in mind. It's no wonder we never see eye to eye.

The right to privacy is, in my opinion, inferred by the 4th Amendment.

Nevermind all that business about the blessings of liberty though, right? (That's from the preamble, right?)

[edit on 29-5-2008 by WyrdeOne]



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 12:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by harvib

Originally posted by ybab hsur
reply to post by AceWombat04
 


Until then, remmeber :

No matter how much you disagree, you should never flame America. All you do in this case is further our enemy's agenda and embolden them further.


I guess what you are saying is everyone should just keep quite, never mind how many lives are lost or how much poverty is created. Everyone put on there happy face our so called enemies our watching...

Sad. The individuals that first envisioned this nation and the ideals they had in mind would be appalled. After all if I am not mistaken it was there belief that it is up to the people to keep the government in check. But what you are calling for is complacency and an unchecked government. I can't think of anything more anti-American.


at what point do you stop questioning? When do you draw the line for yourself and say "ya know what, maybe its me who is wrong. Maybe the way i see my govt acting is best for the country, even though it pisses me off ,because the govt isnt perfect, never has bene, never will be, and like everything else, cannot do 1 thing to appease all commers.

Thats my qualm with your statement. Im all about keeping them in check, but when liberals ONLY KEEP THEM IN CHECK when a conservative or republican is in office, it shows blind prejudice.

I could make 100 more posts about the things i hate about Bush (and probably will after watching this special i just seen on HBO)
but thats nto the point im after right now.

If you're going to ridicule your govt, then ridicule the govt ---- politicians. Don't ridicule on a partisan level because that's just dumb.

This is my last post here.
See you on my other topics



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 01:41 AM
link   




In my opinion it is the people’s job to always question the government. I am ready and willing to admit I may be wrong, and even when proven wrong it is still the peoples job to question. Power without accountability is dangerous as history has shown. Let us not forget absolute power corrupts absolutely.

I am curious as to what statement I have made that leads you to believe that I only wish to keep the government in check when a particular party is in office. I do not and have not as far as I recall ever identify myself as a member of a particular party or as being a liberal or conservative.

My friend, it is not I who have ridiculed on partisan level. I expect accountability and transparency from those making policies in my name. This does not change as does the political parties in office.

In my very humble opinion in regards to the lessons of history it seems to me that complacency on the part of the people has always led to bondage. Let us not be complacent in fear of being called unpatriotic but uphold our civil responsibilities to demand excellences from our government in all aspects. I know this is an expectation of us all regardless of our differences.



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 03:54 AM
link   
By the way, being a conservative is being liberal. Liberal and conservative are not opposites. You cannot claim people who question their governments are suddenly liberal by default - its not that simple, unless you are...

...ignorant.

Your base understanding of politics needs more thought = www.politicalcompass.org...

Communism is the polar opposite of liberalism not conservatism- liberalism is the thesis that people should be free to make their lives better or let them get worse and noone should help or hinder them. It works very well with capitalist economics.

Communism is when people believe that the priviledged have a duty to help those who "cannot help themselves". Most extremely, that noone has anymore wealth than the next person. (There has never been a true communist state - communism is one of the most misused words in the last 100 yrs).

The problem is you cannot argue the extreme liberal view that its everyone for themselves as it is the rich who work to ensure the poor remain poor and unempowered and therefore make for nice profits. And of course you cannot expect a world where noone can live better off than another to work either as it would discourage people to make any effort to make themselves better people. We'd struggle to main the medical profession...

Authoritarianism is the polar opposite of anarchism - anarchism being non-centralised government/self governance vs a single person telling everyone what to do.

Thanks for only reading half my post! Must have got too much for you...



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 04:08 AM
link   
Redmotion, that is totally inaccurate.

Extreme Liberalism IS Marxism and Marxism IS Communism.

Communism = bigger disfunctional government. The government provides for all its children.

Liberalism = bigger disfunctional government. The government provides for all its children.

Conservatism = Smaller government. Make your own way. Free enterprise and competition.

In all systems, there is the top "eilite" tier with most of the money and then there is the rest. In Capitalism it is the Corporate Officals at the top. In Communism it is the government officials at the top.



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 04:33 AM
link   
reply to post by WyrdeOne
 


And lets not forget the new scanners they're "testing" in airports which when someone walks through, does a virtual STRIP SEARCH. Invasion of privacy maybe??? But don't worry, only a trained professional will see you naked as you walk through the scanner and they don't record anything to share with their friends or use it later as evidence against you.....Yeah don't worry because they don't do that


 

Mod Edit: Deleted large quote and replaced it with Reply to:Mod Edit: Big Quote – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 31-5-2008 by GAOTU789]



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 04:34 AM
link   
reply to post by pieman
 


Yeah, rendition and gitmo are two words I missed because they mean nothing.

That has to be the single most insulting thing I've heard. So let me guess, you're the type that would rather get rid of the military and just have peaceful negotiations with countries that are hostile against us? Ok, let's see how that would work. Next thing you know America really is communist because we were invaded and conquered.

Fine, no one asked, but when the UN fails who is there to pick up the slack? WE ARE! And there is no job we can't do...just some we're not allowed to do...like Burma. But, Burma better hurry up and say "Come on in!" Cause I'm getting tired of waiting.



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 05:49 AM
link   
reply to post by ybab hsur
 


*snip*

I am a conservative, i have been having other debates in other forums on other topics, and i have come up with a list of questions that the people i've been debating with refuse to, or cannot, answer. Again - no flames.

Sure you have.

1.) Give me ample examples of which rights of yours have been stripped by bush since 9/11

With the "War Powers Act", the unelected, selected by the USSC figurehead has the ability to label an AMERICAN a "terrorist", and strip him or her of their Right to Habeas Corpus. Look it up, struggler.

2.) How is Iran's president ahmenijad (sp?) not practicing hate speech when he's talking about jews

How is Israel not practicing Gemocide against the Palestinians? Perhaps Iran's president is speaking the truth, and you are just a whiner that wants to cover his ears to the truth.

3.) Except for ending Slavery, Nazism, Facism, and Communism.....
WAR HASNT SOLVED ANYTHING

 

Deleted personal attack.

Mod Note: General ATS Discussion Etiquette – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 31-5-2008 by GAOTU789]



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 06:35 AM
link   


In all systems, there is the top "eilite" tier with most of the money and then there is the rest. In Capitalism it is the Corporate Officals at the top. In Communism it is the government officials at the top.


Except anarchism.

Marxism



Communism is a socioeconomic structure that promotes the establishment of a classless, stateless society based on common ownership of the means of production


Liberalism



Liberalism refers to a broad array of related ideas and theories of government that consider individual liberty to be the most important political goal.


It's like religion, no one follows a particular ideal to the letter, they use elements they agree with and toss away what they don't. Usually, for their own benefit, certainly not you. Check the huge number of variations just on communism or marxism or liberalism.

Like everything else, there is only opinion. But YOU need to read up about politics and then come back and pose a better arguement rather that the one spouted by your favorite propaganda spouting rag.

Liberalism = communism? - you really have fallen for all that claptrap hook line and sinker haven't you?!

[edit on 30-5-2008 by redmotion]



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 06:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by ybab hsur
Okay, ill take your advice and concentrate on one.

What im absolutely flabergasted by is this "slavery is still alive in the united states" because i'd really love to hear it, im not opposed to it, but i've never heard anyone say it before, even coming from discussions with black people about race.

Oh - and no - you dont have a constitutional right to a private phone call. As i said, the phone companies are not owned by the govt, and if you actually read your disclosure rights in your agreement with your phone company - it expresses that clause in there.


oh boy - I just posted numerous links on this very subject on another thread here goes....by some counts 27, 000,000 people are living as slaves in various parts of the world - The Sudanese government still allows this practice or at least gives it a pass...but the problem is global in scope...

www.notforsalecampaign.org...

www.infoplease.com...

usgovinfo.about.com...

berkeley.edu...

www.iabolish.org...


And just in case you don't bother to read the links - Slavery does exist in the United States - about 10,000 give or take a few thousand since it isn't a widely reported crime due to the difficulty of locating traffickers and their victims...many of whom are children sold for the illegal sex trade...

[edit on 30-5-2008 by realshanti]



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 07:25 AM
link   
I am going to repost this because you chose to ignore the more substantial part of my reply. I feel that my rights and protecting them are amongst the highest of my priorities at the moment. However that is not to say the other issues aren't very important as well.

So what do you have to say about the following evidence????

_______________________________


I am not a Liberal but thanks for asking.


1) Apparently we dont have the right to gather peaceably anymore.

See: www.abovetopsecret.com...

Also See: My reply to the same question in the following thread: www.abovetopsecret.com...



Apparently I no longer have the right to assemble peaceably on public grounds without first having to get a permit to do so.

Getting a permit to practice your right to assemble peaceably is evidence of the lack of care for our rights we have. By getting a permit you are allowing the powers that be to control where, when and how long you can practice your rights. Also by signing a permit you are inadvertently taking responsibility for every person at that assemblies actions. You will be labled the leader of this group whether you wish to be or not.

Please for the sake of our rights in this country don't ever get a permit to practice your rights!!! You already have a permit you don't need another.


Also according to an ALIPAC member I was arguing with about this permit nonsense, in North Carolina (I believe) you have to pay police officers to be present at a protest, rally, assembly, and the like according to NC law. I really hope that people aren't seriously paying and getting permits to practice our rights.....


And last but not least, view these 2 videos.

Note: I am not involved in any way with the people who are the subject of this video or the radio station.

youtube.com...

youtube.com...

If what is being said is true then these people are evidence of the erosion of our rights in this country.





[edit on 30-5-2008 by AnOldFriend]




top topics



 
4
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join