Posted on 12/25/2024 5:20:14 PM PST by Bratch
Will that be before he starts WW3 or after? < /sarcasm >
I am not sure I agree with this. If anything, Trump will have surveillance on the Deep State. I believe that he wants to expose them.
Hey Bratch,
It isn’t big brother,
it is Democrats.
They are the threat!
Dept of Homeland Security - a present of George W. Bush, along with the misnamed “Patriot Act.”
So true, wouldn’t be a bit surprised if the Elons and Viveks of the world use some AI programs to audit thousands of fed employees and dozens of agencies. The MSM suggests that the dems/deep state will corral all the good guys when in fact it may be the other way around. The fed employees should be shaking in their boots - so much so it is fair to bet that many of them come forward to avoid prison time.
Oh won’t this be fun, Alcatraz has plenty of room.
But Inner Party members can turn off their telescreens.
Democrats = Big Brother.
That which we call a rose......
“The Pentagon and CIA intel agencies sweeping outside the U.S. and the DHS sweeping inside the U.S.”
Wrong... They are all three sweeping inside the states. The CIA and military are even sweeping inside the states from locations based in other countries.
Everything will grow, surveillance state, DOJ Jackboots, IRS, Mil-Ind Complex, ALL OF IT.
Trump will everything put in front of him especially Spending Bills, hell he told you by wanting the debt ceiling lifted.
With or without a false flag, everything deep state grows!!!
“Some are starting to awaken to this issue. I have recently seen commentator Laura Loomer begin questioning the motives of Thiel, Musk, Ellison, Ramaswamy, Sacks and crew. However, no one has yet noted the strategic insurance policy, JD Vance.”
Thiel is a long time mentor to Vance... Thiel is 100% CIA. They have surrounded Trump with deep state again.
I’m sure. Against actual terrorists, like ANTIFA and the ones not from here, other illegals and DS types.
The “Patriot Act” was where I lost complete and utter trust in our government.
This time they’ll get the filth that needs to be gotten?😎
Bkmk
We usually can only last about 20 seconds before we are both laughing too hard to continue.
Eff them.
There are many people on this forum who dislike Sundance. I am not one of them.
But I disagree with him on this. I believe he is correct to view the Department of Homeland Security as he does. I would agree it should be dissolved.
On a personal note, I did not object to the creation of the Department of Homeland Security at the time for two reasons: I believed we were at war (we had just had 3000 Americans murdered in cold blood only months before) and I believe that really being at war inherently means an infringement on Freedom of Speech. But the powers that it imparted on our fellow Americans with their hands on the levers of power regrettably showed just how wrong it was to accept that implied restriction that I did at the time.
While I understand fully that my views on the issue of wartime censorship are anethema to some Freepers, and I wholly understand their rationale, my views were not cooked up on the spot.
My views prior to the creation of The Department of Homeland Security were based on historical events which dated back to 1942 after the Battle of Midway. After the victory at Midway, the Chicago Tribune had a reporter who had been on the USS Lexington during the Battle of Coral Sea and while there, found out that the Japanese Imperial Navy code had been cracked, and that we were reading their mail. After Midway, the Chicago Tribune was going to publish an article from that reporter stating that we had advance knowledge of the Japanese attack.
The government was rightly angry that someone was going to tell the Japanese that we cracked their code to the degree we did, and was going to prosecute the paper and reporter under the Espionage Act, even though there were people who said it would just draw more attention to it. In the end, the government dropped its charges, the article was published, and either the Japanese didn’t see it or didn’t reach the obvious conclusion that the advance notice came from their compromised encryption. They didn’t change their code immediately, and it was that same advantage that allowed us to determine that Admiral Yamamoto was going to be flying out to Bougainville at a given date and time, so we ambushed and killed him.
So, in that case, all’s well that ended well.
However, with respect to First Amendment rights, I do believe it would apply today in certain military contexts. So that is why I believe that in wartime, there are inherent restrictions. I am willing to discuss this with anyone, as it is a worthy subject.
That case described above turned out well, but it was due to the Japanese never picking up on the story which was happenstance. If they had, and changed their code, Yamamoto would never have been taken out, not to mention other things that we were using the broken communications for. It wasn’t because it was right to allow that Chicago Tribune reporter to publish that story. It just turned out that way because the Japanese couldn’t read every newspaper all the time and never acted on it.
And that is just an example of why I believe there ARE and SHOULD BE restrictions on our rights during a time of war (at least with respect to the First Amendment) and I believed we were at war in late 2001. I fully admit I didn’t foresee that America somehow WOULDN’T be considered to be at war after 3000 of our fellow citizens were murdered (and that is what it came to in a short period of time) and that was an error on my part.
Also, having never lived through an attack on our nation that killed 3000 Americans, I thought the Department of Homeland Security creation was par for the course. Of course, I was wrong about the scope and breadth of what it was to start out and what it became in the hands of malignant actors. I fully believe that kind of power over a set of humans cannot be entrusted to humans of any kind no matter how well intentioned, because we, as humans, are eminently corruptible. Lord Acton described it best in his famous quote: “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely”.
No question. And that is what we saw with the Department of Homeland Security. It is one thing to say rightly, knowing the quote of Lord Acton, that it never should have been created in the first place.
However, it is quite another thing altogether (in impact alone) to consider how the inherent corruption of that power to corrupt was put on steroids during the Obama and Biden Administrations who leveraged it for political purposes, proving Lord Acton was pointedly prescient.
And I believe Sundance is correct to rightly consider that WE (on the Conservative side) can be just as bad actors as those on the Left have proven they are.
But his saying that its power and scope will be expanded under Trump, and therefore worse, is wrong and unfounded IMO. He bases this on the history and comments of the members of the Trump Administration who will have a bearing on that department and how it will be run.
He makes the fair criticism of the well-meaning of “good people” who will run the system with the underlying premise not that the whole system is bad, but that it was being run by bad people.
He also says that it will create a tiered system of surveillance as an unavoidable side effect of maintaining the system, but goes further to say that people like Elon Musk,Peter Thiel (Palantir), Elon Musk (xAI, SpaceX), Larry Ellison (Oracle), David Sacks (among others) stand to benefit financially from a technologically efficient Surveillance State because their companies and their AI software products are the targeting tools within the DHS surveillance system itself. That is a fair criticism.
Where I differ with Sundance on this is that he believes people like Devin Nunes, Kash Patel, and others like that will simply pick up where the Left stopped, and carry the ball further. I don’t believe that, knowing what I know about Trump, Patel, and others like him.
I also didn’t like his comment: “Even when given the opportunity to join or align with the elite group, I decline. I am an American, of no greater or lesser value than any other American. Unfortunately, my internal compass viewpoint is not carried by those who are currently building or will operate the system.”
It is one thing to have zero responsibility for the life and death of others and piously make that statement. It is quite another to be responsible for the lives of American citizens, and be expected to have that point of view. They don’t have that luxury, because the tools to do that are not only available, but are expected to be employed to protect us.
There are two famous Americans who have been quoted that we see often: Benjamin Franklin said: “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” and John Adams who said: “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
I am inclined to view Adam’s quote as the most fully accurate of the two, because when reduced to its foundational premise, it is true, and has been shown to be true in government today. Franklin’s quote is also true, but is not foundationally true when boiled down, as the First Amendment rights in a time of war are an example in my opinion where Franklin’s quote is not absolute.
I understand fully this puts me at odds with some Freepers who view Franklin’s quote as absolute. I agree with it, but do not see it as absolute. I am willing to debate this in a civil fashion.
We have already reached that point, with the horrific appointment of Indian-supremacist and advocate for unlimited Indian H1-B immigration, Sriram Krishnan as Senior Policy Advisor for AI at the Office of Science and Technology Policy.
Trump never pretended to be a libertarian. He never was and never will be. If you can’t deal with that, you’ll be griping for the next four years.
BKMRK.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.