Amercians give up Liberty for Safety

[Varmit]

It's Official: A Majority Of Americans Would Give Up Liberty In Order To Be Safe From Terrorism
The Truth
January 15, 2010

"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security."
-Benjamin Franklin

It is now official.  A majority of Americans are willing to give up liberty in order to be safer from terrorism.  A stunning new McClatchy-Ipsos poll has found that 51 percent of Americans agree with this statement: "it is necessary to give up some civil liberties in order to make the country safe from terrorism."

Only 36 percent of those polled agreed with this statement: "some of the government's proposals will go too far in restricting the public's civil liberties."

So are Americans really this stupid?

Have they really been brainwashed into willingly giving up their essential liberties just so they can feel a little safer?

Maybe they have.

After all, a new USA TODAY/Gallup poll says that 78 percent of Americans approve of the new full body scanners that the U.S. government wants to install in all U.S. airports.

So almost 4 out of 5 Americans are perfectly fine with letting airport security officials gawk at their naked bodies just so they can feel a bit safer from terrorists.

How sick is that?

The truth is that when Americans allow themselves to become so wimpy and so fearful that they are willing to throw many of their most important freedoms out the window, those responsible for the terror scares have won.

In fact, Amerika (formerly America) is very quickly becoming a brutal police state where privacy is a thing of the past and where free speech and alternative points of view are openly repressed.

For example, in a 2008 academic paper President Barack Obama's appointee to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs advocated "cognitive infiltration" of groups that advocate "conspiracy theories".

Infiltration of groups with alternative viewpoints that the government doesn't like?

Do we live in East Germany?

Apparently we do.

Americans do not care about their freedoms and liberties anymore, so now they are being taken away.

And apparently the message of the most recent polls is that Americans are perfectly fine with that.

[Diane Amberg]

Could you be mixing up freedom with convenience? I suppose you consider road checks for impaired drivers "anti freedom" too. Nobody is preventing you from flying. It's just not as simple as it used to be. The airlines own the planes, they want to attract customers, so they try to keep the customers safe.. You show up on a no fly list, then yes, you have lost a freedom, probably for good reason!

[Sarah]

Can they actually see the naked body in those things?       Or just the skeleton or just metal? 

You can count me in with the 36%.  It annoys me that cops look in your car to see if you're wearing your seatbelt or not.  To me, that's the same as looking in the windows of my house to see if I might be doing something illegal. 

[sixdogsmom]

Well Sarah, when I was younger, I got undressed by somebodys' eyes all the time. Now the only danger is if the person operating that machine would die laughing, or worse, get sick!  No kidding though, I would not be reticent to use one of those machines if it makes everybody safer. Heck to those people it would just be another carcass in a long line of carcases on just another day. I can't see that it is a loss of freedom, just an inconvenience so the idiots can be foiled.

[Varmit]

The scanners, while not in color, provide full body detail to include the genitals.  Frankly, I don't care if somone sees me naked, however adults are not the only ones having to go through these scanners.  Are you honestly ok with TSA agents viewing naked images of children in the name of so-called safety?  Frankly, I think it is sick.



As for D.U.I checkpoints, yeah I have an issue with them.  If I'm not doing anything wrong than the police have no right to stop me. 

As for ending up on a no fly list, heres one for ya....

The article is about an 8 yr. old boy that wound up on a suspect list simply because he has a similar name with a suspious person.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34855425/ns/us_news-the_new_york_times/from/ET

So I ask you Diane, what good reason could there be for infringing on this child and his family??

[srkruzich]

well unfortunately the airport screening is useless as tits on a boar hog.  The terrorists aren't going to attack us that way again like they did on 911.  They know they can't get through to do such a thing.
the next attack on our soil will be bigger than 911.  It will involve many major cities all timed to go off at the same time and will happen in places that inflict maximum casualties like stadiums, malls, things like that.  Think about the impact of 10 of them going off at the same time.

And they don't have to sneak into the US now to do it. They already have muslims that have been raised here all their lives, know the customs of americans, an habits and they will be the ones that carry out terror.

There was a test done a while back. briefcases were set down in public in 5 different cities.  The test was to see if anyone alerted 911 or the authorities.  Not one call came in nor were these unattended brief cases investigated. 1 briefcase in chicago was stolen promptly by someone.

What should have happened is that civitzens should have alerted someone, in fact someone should have yelled unattended briefcase, evacuate.  THis is how the irish, english both keep from getting blown up over there.   IF it were to happen there, the whole area would be cleared by the citizens, not the leos. They would then contact the appropriate authorities to come investigate it.

Another thing thats going to happen is cities that have rush hours.  what better place to carry out attacks. all one would have to do is place 100 IED's in the center divider of the interstate and wait til rushour hits and everything is standing still. Then detonate.  In atlanta that would most likely kill over 100,000 people since the interstate usually has over 500,000 drivers on it at rush hour.

[Sarah]

The scanners, while not in color, provide full body detail to include the genitals.  Frankly, I don't care if somone sees me naked, however adults are not the only ones having to go through these scanners.  Are you honestly ok with TSA agents viewing naked images of children in the name of so-called safety?  Frankly, I think it is sick.

I agree that's sick and I would have a fit if they scanned my children.  I don't care if people think that these guys see bodies day in and day out and don't care.  Hog wash.  Some perv would get that job so that he could look. 

[Varmit]

Srkruich, I'm not so sure that the next attack will be bigger.  If I was in their shoes I wouldn't plan it that way.  I think a series of smaller attacks throughout the country would be not only easier to plan and carry out but would also have a better psychological effect.  When an attack occurs people will automatically avoid places like malls and stadiums, but what if the first series occured in places like schools and hospitals then moved on to retail outlets then transportation hubs.  They wouldn't need to be that big to scare this country to a standstill.

[frawin]

I amazed at all of the comments about the TSA airport scanners, it is much faster, easier and more accurate. It takes just a few seconds. Tulsa Airport is one of the locations that has had one for sometime and my wife and I both go through it probably 1 to 3 times a month. My wife has a pacemaker and I have a Titanium Knee joint, 2 steel rods and 12 screws in my back, before they had the full body scanner we had to both be hand patted, we like the scanner much better and it is much quicker.
  They don't see anything that is sexy or wild to look at. To me it is no different than when I have had Nurses or X-Ray techs x-ray me, or a nurse in the room helping me after the surgeries I have had.
I hope the TSA keeps on checking all of passengers on all of the flights, we have to do everything we can to reduce the possibility of hijackings and/or terrorists attacks.
I travelled overseas for many years and on two trips in the Middle East I was stripped search, the first time it happened I said what if I refuse and I was promptly told I would not be allowed to board the plane if I refused. It didn't take me long to undress.

[srkruzich]

well the thing about airports is that they are usually international airports.  IF thier international, they don't fall under one country's law. They follow an international law.   For example, if your escorting a prisoner and fly from tulsa to Atlanta, and that prisoner escapes from you in the airport, you as a law enforcement agent can go after them anywhere in the world. There are not extradition treaties needed to go aprehend that suspect and bring them back.

So basically the screening falls under international law.  I suppose you can say a airport is like a world embassy. 

YOu do have a choice. So technically rights are not being violated, by using the airport, your submitting your rights in order to fly.  And the flight is that of a private corporation which is not subject to constitutional rights.  The constitutional rights we have are between Government and the people, not corporations and the people.

Now where the problem lies is that since the government has taken over the security screening, then the constitution can come into play.  But being that it is done on international territory i don't know if the constitution can hold authority over that piece of real estate.

its a complicated mess.