Name the Freedoms!

It has come to this. Everywhere I turn on ATS I see a number of members constantly talking "police state" and non-chalantly playing the "stripping of our freedoms" card. Unfortunately, when someone like myself asks these people exactly what freedoms have they lost, either the question is ignored, or the reply basically boils down to a series of "what ifs" surrounding new and current laws that could someday be morphed into lost freedoms.

So consider this an open challenge. If the motto of ATS is "Deny Ignorance" then let's have a little ignorance denial exercise. Apparently I'm ignorant on exactly what freedoms we have tangibly lost in this country and I'd love to have the oportunity to correct that (if it is really the case.) If, as so many ATSers shout, we're losing freedoms right and left here in America, then it shouldn't be at all difficult for them to actually lay out these MIA freedoms and defend their position that we're losing them. Hell, I'll even settle for some of the "what ifs" surrounding these Constitution under attack conspiracies... IF you're actually willing to offer a defense of your position. By that I'm hoping to avoid the post and dash tactic of just parroting a position and then refusing to offer anything that supports your claim. Seriously guys, I'm actually open here and I'm trying to educate myself at the risk of the end result being a drastic change in what I believe. That's a pretty big step to even admit for a guy that's got alot of faith in our president and lawmakers by and large. Help me out here.

I have actually been wanting to post the exact same thing.

This should get interesting

reply to post by Hugues de Payens


From the AP.. Freedoms we have lost under G.W Bush... This is just the tip of the iceberg.

FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION: Government may monitor religious and political institutions without suspecting criminal activity to assist terror investigations.

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION: Government has closed once-public immigration hearings, has secretly detained hundreds of people without charges, and has encouraged bureaucrats to resist public records questions.

FREEDOM OF SPEECH: Government may prosecute librarians or keepers of any other records if they tell anyone that the government subpoenaed information related to a terror investigation.

RIGHT TO LEGAL REPRESENTATION: Government may monitor federal prison jailhouse conversations between attorneys and clients, and deny lawyers to Americans accused of crimes.

FREEDOM FROM UNREASONABLE SEARCHES: Government may search and seize Americans' papers and effects without probable cause to assist terror investigation.

RIGHT TO A SPEEDY AND PUBLIC TRIAL: Government may jail Americans indefinitely without a trial.

RIGHT TO LIBERTY: Americans may be jailed without being charged or being able to confront witnesses against them.

reply to post by bknapple32

Are you going to provide proof or at the least a link to back up those comments or should we just take your word for it.

reply to post by WhatTheory


Three words...

The Patriot Act....


no need to provide a link. its all in that document.

Originally posted by bknapple32
reply to post by WhatTheory

 

Three words...

The Patriot Act....


no need to provide a link. its all in that document.

Sorry, but that does not cut it.
What specific freedoms does it take away? It's easy to talk in generalizations, but I think the OP is looking for something more specific. Please show from within the Patriot Act which freedoms it has taken from you.

I realize it's probably difficult for you to think for yourself and to provide this info instead of relying on liberal talking points but please try and give it your best shot.

[edit on 23-6-2008 by WhatTheory]

reply to post by WhatTheory


Well thanks for resorting to the usual ' you cant think for yourself liberal'' insult. Its the usual talking point from someone who doesnt want to have intelligent discourse.

Im sorry you havent had time to look at the patriot act, why dont you... What, do you need a link to a page containing the patriot act? This isnt a result of me thinking for myself or not. If you want to jump to the usual Bill O'reilly talking points, then debate with you is flawed and a waste of time.

I did a search to confirm any of this, including a source. What I found is an apparent cut and past from a list put on the internet by one, Chuck Baldwin, who attributed the list to the AP. That's about as far back as I could trace these items... however I certainly found a slew of hits that were direct copy & paste jobs of his original work (almost all of them credited the AP rather than Mr. Baldwin, BTW.)

An actual source for this list as well as some examples or even a citing of what legal provisions passed by this administration leading us to these lost freedoms would be helpfull.

reply to post by burdman30ott6


Just look at the actual print of the PAtriot ACT. The guy quotes the AP because the AP got it from the actual document

Originally posted by bknapple32
Well thanks for resorting to the usual ' you cant think for yourself liberal'' insult. Its the usual talking point from someone who doesnt want to have intelligent discourse.

Im sorry you havent had time to look at the patriot act, why dont you... What, do you need a link to a page containing the patriot act? This isnt a result of me thinking for myself or not. If you want to jump to the usual Bill O'reilly talking points, then debate with you is flawed and a waste of time.

Thanks for not posting any details of what exactly in the Patriot Act has denied you any freedoms? Typical.
You do realize that the Patriot Act is a huge document right?
So please point out where in the Act it has denied you some freedoms. It's a simple request that apparently you cannot handle because you have not actually read the entire document. Instead of spewing talking points please try and focus and give some evidence to support your claim because the Patriot Act has denied you nothing.

Originally posted by bknapple32
reply to post by burdman30ott6

 

Just look at the actual print of the PAtriot ACT. The guy quotes the AP because the AP got it from the actual document

No, he did not. That's the point.
You are taking the word of some guy you don't know. Please show us in the Patriot Act where these quotes were taken. Again, it's a simple request and should be able to prove it. If not, then move along.

[edit on 23-6-2008 by WhatTheory]

After the ratification of the Constitution and original bill of rights.Each successive "lesser" law passed by congress abridged someones freedom.
Take for example the use of marajuna,according to personal letters archived in the library of congress.The father of our nation was an avid pot smoker.Thomas Jefferson also reported himself to indulge from time to time."Life,liberty and the pursuit of happiness"were some of the tenants that this country was constructed upon.However our government has taken the responsibility unto themselves to deny legality of a natural substance.The freedom to choose.As a soverign citizen of majority age the legality of it's use should have never been in question.Ergo the right to freedom of choice is denied. I do not advocate the use of any mind altering substance.I do however advocate the personal right for one to choose for themselves.

The second amendment right to bear arms.As a soverign citizen of the soverign state republic of Tennessee I have the right to openly carry firearms whenever I so choose(as ratified and adopted by the state of Tennessee 1796) Yet there are federal laws and state laws that have been issued that curtail that right.To carry a firearm you must have a license issued by your state of residence.( License-The freedom to deviate from strict conduct,rule or practice generally permitted by common consent.-Websters new world college dictionary) In other words,granting permission to undertake something that would otherwise be illegal.
If you have the right to bear arms as stated in our Constitution,and they require a license of you to excercise that right.Either the constitution is unlawful,or the license to carry law is unlawful.I contend that the lesser law,the license to carry law is illegal.It is a definite infringement on personal freedoms.
Ok there are two lost/infringed freedoms that you can ponder.There are many more if you care to dig just a little.

Originally posted by bknapple32

Im sorry you havent had time to look at the patriot act, why dont you... What, do you need a link to a page containing the patriot act? This isnt a result of me thinking for myself or not. If you want to jump to the usual Bill O'reilly talking points, then debate with you is flawed and a waste of time.

I actually just got done reading the Wikipedia page on the Patriot Act, including the text of the act, itself. I also did a little looking into the Bill of Rights Defense Commitee's website: www.bordc.org...
They have an interesting list that, aside from specific applications of the federal wiretapping law and what they are calling torture (albeit against non-US citizens), seems to be full of those "what if" type issues I previously mentioned.

My problem here is, try as I might, I'm just not seeing it. Technically speaking, any law passed by the government could very easily turn into a liberties nightmare for "We the People"... assuming a "what if" scenario panned out. For example, the Sunshine Act signed by Jimmy Carter fits this perfectly as it directly relates to your freedom of information issue you feel is a current example. Basically every "freedom" I've seen listed as a violation of freedom of information can be traced back to the Sunshine Act as an issue in which the law did not allocate that information to be mandatory for public disclosure.

(Also, though I really don't want this to become a partisan politics thread, Bill Clinton first authored much of the Patriot Act... not Bush. Bush got it through Congress, but technically speaking, many of these supposed "stolen freedoms" he can't claim ownership of. Just an FYI and one of the reasons I refrained from even mentioning Bush in the opening to this thread. I would assume the answers to my questions surpassed partisanship, though it does seem that most who are complaining about this the loudest don't recognize the bills they hate were the product of multiple presidencies and both parties, so maybe I set my goals too lofty in this thread...)

How about the Military Commissions Act?

If gives the President the power to designate anyone a "terrorist", and as such, lose all habeas corpus protections.

One more little one: "Free Speech" Zones.

reply to post by daddyroo45


Thank you! This opens a different can of worms, actually. If the issue was purely one of freedoms lost to the course of history, then I'd sure agree with these folks. I agree with you on marijuana, and I certainly agree with you on our second amendment. Old No. 2 has been the target of more attacks than all of the others combined, yet it has probably recieved the least defense from organizations like the ACLU, who curiously are leading the charge against today's laws. Both of these are assaults that have directly violated American CITIZEN'S rights in a tangible manner.

Anyway, you got a star.

reply to post by daddyroo45

You make some good points and I have no choice but to agree with you.

The way the U.S. Supreme Court has been dishing out rulings lately, I am really worried about their upcoming ruling on gun rights. I have a bad feeling that the 5 liberal judges will again legislate from the bench instead of ruling on the law. The # will hit the fan if they rule that the 2nd Amendment does not apply to individuals.

I dont now about you but i've lost the freedom to travel to Phoenix by air or Florida without someone seeing my teeeets and my ars.
Does that count?

If i get sweaty and nervous at the airport, look out, i might be a terrorist.

Have a panic attack someplace and get tased (sp)- that not cool.

Try to have a conversation over the phone about the status of the world and there's a damn good chance somebody is listening. How about that one?

Bush and his corporate buddies are keeping me at home because its not all the time that i can afford $5/ a gallon for gas.

Cameras everywhere. Big brother. The NWO is out to get us. The want us dead.

"Its such a pretty day today...
Look at the sunshine......"



Everyone talking in whispers...shhhh....shhhh..... dont even mention politics....shhhhh........
freedom of speech- FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION when you are not happy with your current government- you just keep your mouth shut- or else there will be hell to pay.

How about my right to eat a great big steak? thats gone too because it costs more to kill the cow, it costs more to transport the meat due to big corporations & our awesome government, bla bla bla.

MY health has deteriorated because of depression because of this governent. That qualifies as having my health taken away, i think.

I could write a book. Please.

Now, OP, you can write circles around me because you are obviously a good writer.
But i have more common sense.
Take That!

reply to post by dgtempe


Thank you for the writing compliment. However, after reading your list I see only one potential "rights" issue on your entire list, that being the eavesdropping concern. Nothing else you listed falls under any rights or freedoms and it would be a stretch to even consider most of them liberties or privaleges. Cheap gas, cheap steaks, convenient air travel, these are all great things, but status quo doesn't equal a freedom. It's a fact of living in a capitalist society that the price for goods and services will go up, which is what we're seeing in the pricing for everything. Of course there are external factors that play a role, chief among them commodity speculation which has affected the market prices in an unnatural way. Government action is needed there, BTW.

As for security checkpoints at the airport, again... this isn't a new thing. We've had security scrutinization in other places throughout the history of this nation and they have withstood challenges in court to determine their constitutionality and whether they are a violation of your freedoms. Again, convenient air travel isn't a freedom.

I completely disagree with anyone who claims we've lost freedom of speech. At no point in this country's history did Americans enjoy the right to be a disruptive ass. I have yet to see anyone arrested for what they were saying, only the manner in which they were saying it. If that's a violation of someone's rights, then it basically means every public nuissance law is in violation of the Constitution and needs to be thrown out. Every man, woman, and child in America still has the right to make a statement, even if it should be distastefull or in opposition to the government, and that right remains unchanged.

It seems to me that somewhere between the chaos of the Vietnam war protests and the sharp party line division of Red state/Blue State we've managed to bring up a couple of generations of people who believe the first ammendment gives them the right to disrupt anyone and anything the so desire. I see "Free Speech" zones being ripped into as a violation, Hmmm... do you believe Fred Phelps' group should be allowed to carry on their demonstrations standing right next to bereaved loved ones on the astroturf surrounding the casket of fallen soldiers? I would certainly hope there are far more "No, that wouldn't be right and would actually violate the rights of the bereaved." answers than not on that question. Now, aside from the different magnitude of emotions surrounding the two, how is that scenario any different from one in which you have protesters getting into the face of anyone attending an event at the door, or actually bringing the event itself to a grinding halt by disrupting it from inside the venue? Remember, the people have a right to peacefull assembly... that includes the people protesting AND the people being protested against. If one group is allowed to disrupt then rights have been violated. Thus, "Free Speech" zones actually are doing exactly what the name suggests, protecting BOTH groups right to free speech.

Until we see a repeat of McCarthyism in this country, we are nowhere near the loss of that freedom. Until we see a repeat of Japanese interrment camps (and remember, they were ALL gathered up... not just a small handfull of suspects like we've seen with the government's collection of terrorists.) we haven't come close to seeing Americans losing their freedoms.

I'm more than a little disappointed that we only had two people actually mention one of the few freedoms we've seen eroded in a tangible, and unconstitutional fashion. The Second Ammendment has been destroyed over the decades and it's fascinating to me to see how often the people who complain about phantom attacks on the other 9 ammendments in the Bill of Rights so often seem to either agree with any assault on firearm ownership or ignore the issue entirely as if the ammendment never existed. Like Kodos said: "Abortions for some, tiny American flags for others." and thus everyone walks away only concerned with their pet issue and caring not a bit about anything else... myself included, it would seem, as I still haven't seen anything that convinces me we're "less free" than we've ever been.

If your (our) government has 'secrets' from the people that it servers then there can never be Freedom, only a pale representation of it.

Also, if you believe that you have freedom then try and opt out of paying TAX's and see where you get with exercising this freedom?

Well the one FREEDOM we are fixing to lose is the ability to prosecute and hang the guilty of 911 .... seems there is a bill that will let the guilty off the hook.... call you congressman and tell him -- that if bush - cheney walk then the rest should follow him... because criminals in this land are prosecuted - tried - and Justice delivered.