To people who believe "The Left" is "stealing your freedom"....

I would like to ask you a few simple questions. I would appreciate not asking questions as a response, or misdirecting my target by finding some supposed transgression of "the left' that proves your point. Just Simple answers, and a justification if you can provide one, will suffice.

1) Were you as outraged during Bush's term at the assault on freedoms? (PATRIOT Act, illegal wiretapping, torture, etc.) Because the outrage I hear today about "being forced at gunpoint to pay my taxes" DROWNS out any and all opposition I heard to the PATRIOT act. In fact, I heard arguments FOR the illegal and unAmerican use of torture. Saying Americans can now be illegally searched and then tortured seems like stealing American freedoms, doesnt it?

2) During the Bush years, "leftish" protesters were forced to be in "free speech zones' during the RNC and the inaugaration. Has there been any such curtailing of freedoms of perhaps Tea Party Protestors? Were they forced into "Free Speech Zones" by the left? Who is stealing freedom here?

3) Bush invaded two countries, at the cost of trillions of dollars. The people I hear bitching most about taxes are those who listen to Beck and Oreilly....Those guys supported the war, and the huge tax increase that the wars meant. As I seem to remember it, I didnt hear CRAP about how we were going to PAY for the war, from these guys that now are analyzing every cent in social programs that can be cut. In 2001-2003, were you as concerned about how much the government was spending? If so, why were you not as vocal about adding 3 trillion or so to the national debt?

I dont want to seem like a cheerleader or apologist for the left or democrats, because they certainly have their faults. But at the same time, these right winger cheerleaders are demonstrably lying and changing positions, which wouldnt be a problemv(freedom of speech), except so much of America is buying into this brainwashing that it is literally ripping our country apart....just what "they" want.

reply to post by aching_knuckles


The people in power have no left or right they just do what they are doing, and america is planned well in advance, not in 4 year stints. How could you run a country in 4 year stints anyway? Just think about it.

Thats why america never seems to change from one to another.

Like you said gw bush increased gov and so does obama. No difference.

reply to post by aching_knuckles


To the best of my ability and remembrance....

The patriot act and wiretapping still required a judge to administer a wire tap with some proof and allowed foreign lines to be tapped whenever. I don't mind torturing bad people, and I enjoy hearing about torturing terrorist. Your idea that Americans can be illegally searched and tortured is because you either heard wrong or OK with repeating lies.

The left protesters are LOUD, DISRESPECTFUL, and wouldn't allow a speaker to be heard(which is there right as well), this idea that someone can protest and in the process take away someone else's right is absurd. You have to be objective and not look at one side.

Wars are expensive. If you support the cause then you justify the means, if you don't support them you don't see a justification. That is a more personal opinion than policy matter.

That what I think.

reply to post by 11PB11


So not to nit pick but if I did a little research and found a case where the Patriot Act was used without a judge would you recant your statement. And just recently I heard a story where the FBI and can willy nilly monitor you in you car. Well not everybody because I think it was in California.

reply to post by American-philosopher


I just repeating what I read in the ACT and what I heard. They still needed to get a warrant or at least get a judges approval. I'm not saying that is always what happened, there are rogue people in authority everywhere but that's what it was supposed to do. If there are cases where that wasn't followed then it wasn't the ACT that did it, it was the person.

reply to post by American-philosopher


I think the OP would have handled it better if he posted where it says in the ACT if allows authorities to illegally search and torture so we would have something to go off of instead of his opinion or what he "heard."

reply to post by 11PB11


So I know this might be a different discussion and "off topic" but are you in favor of the patriot Act as a law??

Originally posted by 11PB11
reply to post by aching_knuckles

 

To the best of my ability and remembrance....

The patriot act and wiretapping still required a judge to administer a wire tap with some proof and allowed foreign lines to be tapped whenever. I don't mind torturing bad people, and I enjoy hearing about torturing terrorist. Your idea that Americans can be illegally searched and tortured is because you either heard wrong or OK with repeating lies.

The left protesters are LOUD, DISRESPECTFUL, and wouldn't allow a speaker to be heard(which is there right as well), this idea that someone can protest and in the process take away someone else's right is absurd. You have to be objective and not look at one side.

Wars are expensive. If you support the cause then you justify the means, if you don't support them you don't see a justification. That is a more personal opinion than policy matter.

That what I think.

Just shows how thick the brainwashing is I guess.

It doesnt matter how LOUD OR DISRESPECTFUL, as per the Constitution, they have the right to peacably assemble. Or does the Constitution only matter when YOU want it to?

As far as "laughing" when you hear about a tortured terrorist, will you be laughing when some tea partier blows something up, and tea partiers are being arrested and tortured? Something tells me youd be screaming foul and waving the Constitution around.

As far as the war....so as long as it is blowing up someone, its OK to spend a couple trillion, if its for unemployment, its not cool to spend a couple trillion? Is that about it?

Originally posted by 11PB11
reply to post by American-philosopher

 

I just repeating what I read in the ACT and what I heard.

Originally posted by 11PB11
reply to post by American-philosopher

 

I think the OP would have handled it better if he posted where it says in the ACT if allows authorities to illegally search and torture so we would have something to go off of instead of his opinion or what he "heard."

Are you kidding? So, if YOU hear it, its gospel, if someone else hears it, its hearsay!! LOL

reply to post by aching_knuckles

Originally posted by aching_knuckles
1) Were you as outraged during Bush's term at the assault on freedoms? (PATRIOT Act, illegal wiretapping, torture, etc.)

ABSOLUTELY! One need only look to my posting history to see the substantial extent of it.

Originally posted by aching_knuckles
Because the outrage I hear today about "being forced at gunpoint to pay my taxes" DROWNS out any and all opposition I heard to the PATRIOT act. In fact, I heard arguments FOR the illegal and unAmerican use of torture. Saying Americans can now be illegally searched and then tortured seems like stealing American freedoms, doesnt it?

2) During the Bush years, "leftish" protesters were forced to be in "free speech zones' during the RNC and the inaugaration. Has there been any such curtailing of freedoms of perhaps Tea Party Protestors? Were they forced into "Free Speech Zones" by the left? Who is stealing freedom here?

3) Bush invaded two countries, at the cost of trillions of dollars. The people I hear bitching most about taxes are those who listen to Beck and Oreilly....Those guys supported the war, and the huge tax increase that the wars meant. As I seem to remember it, I didnt hear CRAP about how we were going to PAY for the war, from these guys that now are analyzing every cent in social programs that can be cut. In 2001-2003, were you as concerned about how much the government was spending? If so, why were you not as vocal about adding 3 trillion or so to the national debt?

Here is an example of the kind of post that simply drives me nuts.

Obviously all of the outrageous things that happened under the Bush administration occurred because people failed to effectively object to them then. The same is happening now! But you inexplicably seem to somehow think otherwise.

I know you asked not to get links, but some people just need to see them... Where are we NOW on any of these subjects?

- The Patriot Act --->

Congress quietly prepares to renew Patriot Act

- Torture --->

In Torture Cases, Obama Toes Bush Line ...and... Obama’s Torture Loopholes

- Warrentless Wiretapping --->

The criminal NSA eavesdropping program: "In Warrantless Wiretapping Case, Obama DOJ's New Arguments Are Worse Than Bush's."

- Free Speech Zones --->

Obama Campaign in South Carolina Causes Row Over Free Speech Zone ...or... Obama takes his disdain for free speech on the road. ...or... Police: Obama protesters arrested after leaving ‘free-speech zone’
...or... Protesters make their own free speech zones at Obama's UW rally

ADD...

government controlled health-care...

the continuing wars...

the continuing spending...

the continuing bailouts...

the continuing takings in taxes and other assets...

the continuing regulation in all kinds of personal and business areas...

the calls for further restrictions on political speech...

restrictions on travel...

restrictions on ownership....

and so on...

and so on...

and so on...

Originally posted by aching_knuckles

I dont want to seem like a cheerleader or apologist for the left or democrats, because they certainly have their faults. But at the same time, these right winger cheerleaders are demonstrably lying and changing positions, which wouldnt be a problemv(freedom of speech), except so much of America is buying into this brainwashing that it is literally ripping our country apart....just what "they" want.

I think you need to ask yourself who is brainwashed, here.

You're so surrounded by government intrusion into your life, you think it's normal.

I'm mean no disrespect, but really? WAKE UP, already.

My gawd will you people stop with this partisan BS? The only party who is "wrong" are the brainwashed people who choose to label themselves and continue on with this nonsense.

You're all corporate patsies. My 2 cents.

Left, right, stupid.

You're either for liberty or you are for tyranny. Those are you're only options.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by aching_knuckles


SIGHHHhhhh - You are missing the elephant in the room.

WHO controls LIBERAL media?

U.S. Congressional Record February 9, 1917: J.P. Morgan interests bought 25 of America's leading newspapers, and inserted their own editors, in order to control the media. www.mindfully.org...

JP Morgan: Our next big media player? (April 13, 2010) JP Morgan controls 54 U.S. daily newspapers,and owns 31 television stations. www.newsandtech.com...

Media Conglomerates, Mergers, Concentration of Ownership: www.globalissues.org...

Who controls the media www.nowfoundation.org...

Interlocking Directorates
Media corporations share members of the board of directors with a variety of other large corporations, including banks, investment companies, oil companies, health care and pharmaceutical companies and technology companies. This list shows board interlocks for the following major media interests:
www.fair.org...

WHO is stealing the wealth of the poor and middle class and STUFFING it into their pockets, and using it to BUY more and more power?

It is the central bankers and their dupes are the Left AND the right who they set at eachothers throats so no one bothers to look for the REAL ANSWERS!

For some unknown reason the Liberals seem to think the Bankers are Capitalists. They are not, they HATE Capitalism and have killed it in the USA. Capitalism is taking and investing REAL wealth (the result of your labor) to increase productivity - make MORE products and services. Bankers lend fiat fairy dust debt and siphon off the real wealth of a country into their pockets - BIG DIFFERENCE

WHERE is all that money going???

This is my answer when asked a similar question on another thread:
quote]
What does the Fed do with all the money it receives?


The simple answer is the FED pays interest to the banks who have "shares" in the Federal Reserve. After paying that interest and paying for "operating costs" the Fed gives the rest to the US treasury. This is the candy-coating on the scam. The politicians can say look the US government get some of the money TOO. Yeah right, AFTER the looters take what they want FIRST!

How much of the national debt is owned by the Federal Reserve?
40.6%
By the banks outright? 4.2%
by Foreign and International interest? 22.7% SOURCE

The real scam is not the Federal Reserve loaning the US Government counterfeit money it creates on the spot and collecting taxpayer wealth as principle and interest on the “loan”, although that is bad enough. It is all the rest of the counterfeit made with a key stroke money that is lend every minute of every business day. Think of it, every mortgage loan, every business loan, every student loan and every credit card loan is not the savings (wealth) from Joe Sixpack and Mary Schoolteacher reinvested in the US by the banks as we are lead to believe. Instead the loan money is fiat fairy dust money created on the spot!

We are TOLD part of the money is real savings and that is how Fractional Reserve Banking works, but in reality the "fraction" is not 60% or 40% or 10% it is actually ZERO! That is correct - the ENTIRE amount is created on the spot because US Banks are Operating Without Reserve Requirements!

So What are the bankers DOING with this HUGH river of unearned wealth? As G. Edward Griffin said:

...You are led to the question of where is this river flowing? ...They're not accumulating it at all. What are they spending it for? The answer may surprise you..... When a person has all the wealth that you could possibly want for the material pleasures of life, what is left? Power. They are using this river of wealth to acquire power over you and me and our children.

They are spending it to acquire control over the power centers of society. The power centers are those groups and institutions through which individuals live and act and rely on for their information. They are literally buying up the world but not the real estate and the hardware, they're buying control over the organizations, the groups and institutions that control people. In other words, to be specific, they are buying control over politicians, political parties, television networks, cable networks, newspapers, magazines, publishing houses, wire services, motion picture studios, universities, labor unions, church organizations, trade associations, tax-exempt foundations, multi-national corporations, boy scouts, girl scouts, you name it. Make your own list of organizations and you will find that this is where those people have been for many decades spending this river of wealth to acquire operational control particularly over those institutions and individuals, those organizations that represent opposition to themselves. That's a critical area for expenditure on their part... www.bigeye.com...

Is there any proof that Mr Griffin is correct? YES!

U.S. Congressional Record February 9, 1917: J.P. Morgan interests bought 25 of America's leading newspapers, and inserted their own editors, in order to control the media. www.mindfully.org...

JP Morgan: Our next big media player? (April 13, 2010) JP Morgan controls 54 U.S. daily newspapers,and owns 31 television stations. www.newsandtech.com...

Just look at the four Rockefeller Foundations!
Sourcewatch

Activist Cash #1
Activist Cash #2
Activist Cash #3
Activist Cash #4
Activist Cash- J. P. Morgan Charitable Trust

Here is a Chart of the banking Families. You can use activistcash.com and sourcewatch.org to see for yourself if Mr. Griffin is correct.

Oh and remember the much hated Monsanto? Guess what 85% of the stock is voted by financial interests because 85% is held by mutual funds and Institutional (financial) Holders. For example Divisions of Fidelity hold 7.15%. The Johnson family controls most of Fidelity. Edward C Johnson 3rd is chairman of the group. Remember investors in mutual funds and pension funds are not the people who VOTE the stock the financiers controlling those funds ARE!



An excellent resource (135 pages) on exactly what is going on with the FED is:
A PRIMER ON MONEY: by US House Committee on Banking and Currency (1964)

What amount of Government securities have the private banks acquired with bank-created money?
“On January 31, 1964, all commercial banks in this country owned $62.7 billion in U.S. Government securities. The banks have acquired these securities with bank-created money. In other words, the banks have used the Federal Government's power to create money without charge to lend $62.7 billion to the Government at interest.

On January 29, 1964, commercial banks had total assets amounting to $304.7 billion, and all of these had been paid for with bank-created money, except $25.4 billion which had been paid for with their stockholders' capital. In other words, less than 10 percent of the banks' assets have been acquired with money invested by stockholders in the banks.” [pg 46]


If the Government can issue bonds, Why can't it issue money and save
the interest?

A few clearheaded and firm individuals, such as Abraham Lincoln,
have insisted that the Government can.


The late Thomas A. Edison once stated the matter this way :

If our Nation can issue a dollar bond it can issue a dollar bill. The element that makes the bond good makes the bill good also. The difference between the bond and the bill i s that the bond lets money brokers collect twice the amount of the bond and a n additional 20 percent, whereas the currency pays nobody but those who contribute directly in some useful way. It i s absurd to say that our country can issue $30 million in bonds and not $30 million in currency. Both are promises to pay: but one promise fattens the usurers. and the other helps the people. [pg 47]


What are the sources of revenue of the Federal Reserve?
By far the largest single source of income of the Federal Reserve banks is interest on holdings of U.S. Government securities. In 1963, interest on Government securities accounted for 98.9 percent of the total income of the Federal Reserve. [pg 62]

How much of the Federal Reserve's earnings must be returned to the Treasury?
No law or regulation specifies how much of the Federal Reservoe earnings must be returned to the Treasury nor when payments must be made. In practice, the Federal Reserve spends all of its income that it cares to spend, pays dividends to its member banks on their "stock" and sets aside a large amount as "surplus." The remainder is returned to the Treasury a t the end of each year. Despite the fact that there is no limitation on how much the Federal Reserve may spend to meet "expenses," it usually returns to the Treasury an amount many times the amount of its expenses. In 1963, it returned to the Trensuiy $879,685,219. [pg 63]

That meant in 1964, they got $279.3 billion dollars for FREE!!! Now that you understand that consider the amount of money the bankers are collecting from interest rates of 5%, 10,% or 30% on the money they created out of thin air!!! On top of that the Federal Reserve pays the tab (with your taxes dollars) for any money transfers, you know the electronic transfers they charge YOU $25.00 for.

reply to post by aching_knuckles

When Bush signed the patriot act, I went and reregistered as an independent and threw away my GOP membership.

Ok man.... listen up, cause im not gonna repeat myself for a 3rd time! I read it... which means I read parts of the ACT that states what needs to happen.... You heard it... try to follow along and not pick pieces from what I said out of context to support your belief.

Do not give hypotheticals on what I would do.... to support your argument or give an example and pretend how I would react.

If you can't see how your types use the constitution to deprive someone else's right to speak then you are ignorant. READ EVERYTHING I SAY BEFORE COMMENTING ON IT.

Do not put words in my mouth... And don't give a hypothetical situation to try to prove your point. Sometimes, I feel like im debating with a teenagers on here, which is ok, but try to know how to debate if your gonna. Also, if your gonna ask opinions... don't get mad and cry me a river when you disagree, grow up!

reply to post by American-philosopher


I'm in favor of parts of the ACT... But like this OP, he hasn't read any of it.. LOL, he believes everything he's told and doesn't do his own research, as indicated by the OP. There's nothing there that supports the ACT and it shows by his blatantly ignorant points.

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
Left, right, stupid.

You're either for liberty or you are for tyranny. Those are you're only options.

 

Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

 

It never seems that simple to me. One of our most valuable and one of my personal favorite perveyors of liberty in the US is the national highway system. Without it, travel would be a nightmare and subject to other people's vehicles and schedules (trains and planes.) I love the highways because they liberated so many people and continue to offer us a way to enjoy the freedom to travel. That is right, the socialist, government instituted and run highway system. Not so simple already.

reply to post by beezzer

When Bush signed the patriot act, I went and reregistered as an independent and threw away my GOP membership.

I have always been a GDI

Freedom is the ability to do whatever you want, as long as what ever you are doing is not harming others or damaging their property.

The very existence of government destroys freedom, and government's entire purpose is to stop people from doing things that they want to do, even though no one has been hurt.

reply to post by Sinnthia

Originally posted by Sinnthia
It never seems that simple to me. One of our most valuable and one of my personal favorite perveyors of liberty in the US is the national highway system. Without it, travel would be a nightmare and subject to other people's vehicles and schedules (trains and planes.) I love the highways because they liberated so many people and continue to offer us a way to enjoy the freedom to travel. That is right, the socialist, government instituted and run highway system. Not so simple already.

So in other words, using your logic, any authoritarian regime should be ok as long as it can produce some public benefit?