Posted on 07/17/2002 6:38:19 PM PDT by ninenot
U.S. government doesn't trust Americans
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted: July 17, 2002 1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2002 WorldNetDaily.com
We're supposed to have a government of the people, for the people and by the people.
In fact, Americans are largely supposed to govern themselves in the system devised by our brilliant founders.
That is no longer the case because the U.S. government in Washington doesn't trust its citizens.
This sad truth has become crystal clear in the wake of the terror attacks of Sept. 11. Instead of enlisting Americans to fight this evil as past governments have in times of war, this administration, with at least the tacit approval of Congress, has used the attacks as an excuse to clamp down on the civil liberties of Americans and to keep closer tabs on law-abiding citizens. At the same time, the government has demonstrated, time and time again, its own startling inability to use its vast resources to prevent massive attacks on the people and even to recognize and identify from where the threats emanate.
The latest example of the government's alarming plans to target the entire population for more scrutiny is the Terrorism Information and Prevention System, or TIPS. Interestingly, the program came to light not through the reporting of any U.S. press outlets, but through a report in the Sydney Morning Herald in Australia and linked by WorldNetDaily.
Under plans outlined on the government's Citizen Corps website, a pilot program launching next month will enlist some 1 million domestic informants in 10 cities to spy on the people. That could mean, if the plan is carried out nationwide, there will be a government snoop for every 24 Americans.
What that means, the Sydney Morning Herald points out, is that the U.S. would have a higher percentage of citizen informants than the former East Germany through the dreaded Stasi secret police. At least 4 percent of Americans would participate in TIPS, under the government's plan.
The TIPS snoops will be recruited by the Department of Justice from among citizens whose work provides access to homes, businesses and transport systems – such as letter carriers, utility employees, truck drivers and train conductors.
The informants' reports will enter databases for future reference and possible action within the Justice Department, related agencies and local police forces. Of course, the targets of such spying will have no knowledge of the dossiers being maintained on them.
All this, of course, also comes in the context of other ominous legislation such as the Patriot Act, which permits a person's home to be searched without his or her knowledge. Bugs can be planted, papers can be seized – all prima facie violations of the Fourth Amendment.
Is this America?
What's going on here?
The government hardly has a sterling track record with its paid employees. What makes it think it will get good information from a network of voluntary informants? What's to prevent these people from acting out on grudges with neighbors? How can the information, to be widely shared within government circles and agencies, be verified and ascertained to be legitimate?
These are just some of the questions raised by this dangerous trend toward government non-accountability.
Government plans demonstrate we are clearly moving to an us-against-them mentality. These plans are not designed to protect the citizens of the United States, they are designed to protect government from the people.
Besides making all of us more fearful of our own government, this plan will have the added effect of making us all suspicious of those around us – our mailman, our meter reader, even the friendly train conductor. That's what happened in East Germany and in other totalitarian countries that instituted such draconian plans.
No matter how friendly a face the government attempts to put on this program, it is not going to fly in the USA. Let the word go out now to one and all who might be tempted to participate in such a program – we don't like domestic spies in the United States. We don't like rats. We don't like snitches. We don't like snoops. We don't like them and we don't need them – not here. Not in America. Not now. Not ever.
I have no problem with people thinking my opinions are wrong. Why? At times they have been wrong! I can admit to that. However it irks me when certain Freepers can only reply using vitriol and not even have the decency to explain their point. And to make it worse they leave the burden of proof to me ....an example of this si someone reacting to your post by telling you to furnish 'proof and links to the proof, and that proof better not be from any media outlet or website or news outlet!' (That was NOT from Vbthang by the way ...it was from another Freeper who went as far as to ask for links ...and the funny thing is that when i , together with several other Freepers, provided the link and furnished him with proof he still would not accept it, and when other freepers joined in he went to the system administrator and reported it ....thankfully the admin had a brain and so that Freepers rubbish for what it was).
Thus i have experience with crazy/weird/vitriolic Freepers (one was calling me a hellenist hashebivist, claiming to know my 'secret identity' and threatening to reveal it, and asking for help in locating a 'red bull' so as to fulfil some hebrew prophecy concerning the messiah). They do not bother me since obviously other Freepers can read my statements, and then read theirs, and come to their own opinions. (For example in my post in 67 there was only one Freeper who shall remain 'un-named,who due to whatever myopic reason, thought i was being a 'liberal conduit.' Having only one person think i am being 'liberal' does not bother me as long as everyone else agrees with my post). Hence it does nto bother me (although it bothers me when 'someone' takes one choice part of my post and uses it to make a point against my post! See post 99 for an example of this).
Anyways that's that!
What do you think they will be doing come 2004? Whatever people think of the DemocRats one thing is for certain ...they are well versed when it comes to subtle indoctrination. They can use the media to their advantage ....and as long as the White House continues giving them ammo (see post 67 for what i mean) they have a big chance of pulling it through. By stating this i am not a democrat conduit or whatever ...just stating a valid point (and in case Vbthang is reading this ...yes, i think the public is fickle and pliable enough to swallow hook line and sinker what the democrats havce to spin. All the democrats need is a candidate who has more charisma than Mr internet Gore ....think of a Klington character).
And if you think the DemocRats are silly enough to have 'plaster face' Gore run again you are wrong. They are not that stupid!
And again i reiterate ....what happened to George Bush the senior might happen to GW. The senior Bush also had sky high approval points due to the Gulf War, but due to a failing economic scenario as well as an uber-charismatic DemocRat presidential candidate (Bill Klington) he lost the race for his second term! The same can easily happen to GW if the following events happen (or continue to happen) :
1) The economy continues to head down (even though i know all it is doing is adjusting itself most people who lose jobs and lose fortunes will have a very sour taste in their mouths).
2)Another terrorist attack occurs (and as i have said the White House will find it very hard to convince voters they have accomplished much because the simple fact is that most of our victories against global terror will be covert due to reasons of national security. Imagine Bush going in front of a televised debate against a DemocRat candidate and answering a question like this: " We have had victories against terrorism BUT i cannot tell you about them." Many will view it as escapism, especially if another attack takes place).
3) A charismatic DemocRat candidate decides to run against GW, and this candidate is everything Gore was not (think of a Klington clone).
All in all GW and the White House needs to hedge themselves better because currently they are exposing themselves to unnecessary risk.
No, in truth, call it SURVIVAL!
Thus obviously as long as there is a war on terrorism GW is seen as some sort of 'savior-king' who will defend us from the dragon Please, lose the hype already....only idiots think the way you are describing.... but my point was what if, come 2004, nothing has changed (in the eys of the public since to me it seems most of the victories against terrorism will be covert)? Or even worse what if another terrorist attack occurs to let's say a water treatment center that kills maybe 100.....or a 1000 or more? You got a million Al Gore "what if's"....to support your position.....What if Aliens land in Madison, Wisconsin and divuldge the secret formula for stopping a dirty nuke...lose all of the "what if's" and we can have a decent discussion....
Anyway that was my point. And maybe if you had looked at it before automaticaly jumping into your vitriol you would have noticed i am not against GW .....I didnt care much who you were for against....I didnt have to look long to see that you were against reasonable discussion based on cogent thought as opposed to Liberalistic "the sky just might fall" dreamweaving....
But i guess some people cannot stand contrarian statements. What I cant stand is wordy incompetence....dressed up as a valid point of view...
From Jet planes, to Israel to Politics....you always seem to come up short. If you arent lacing your posts with inaccuracies you are under the constant spell of supposition...give it a rest already....at first I just thought you were a normal guy with his own ideas that would eventually figure it out but you are looking more and more like a windbag full of ideas that are easily shot down.
When you sprout the Minerals to take me on yourself......slap yourself.
Acutally I used to think you had some modicum of intelligence ...but the more i read of your vitriolic posts the more it seems to me you are just another asinine injudicious sot who probably thinks GW can do no wrong and that anyone who thinks contrary is lacking necessary intellectual consistency. That is why your argumentative points are basically just acerbic rhetoric statements with no real POINT (maybe that is why other Freepers are saying you have a penchant for reacting instead of thinking)!
And by the way i know certain humans do not have the capacity of engaging in lucid debate without automatically reacting in reflex (just as the Pavlovian dogs in the experiments had no choice but to salivate when the bell was rung indicating food was being brought). So i am not annoyed with you anymore ....just saddened that one more conservative fits the stereotyped label of an asinine bayou bloke with no measurable level of sagacity! And i guess it was my fault for trying to assume you had the ability to not react against logic with visceral emotion leading to endless vitriol (in your case spiced with multi-colors).
As another freeper said 'some' peopel react to logic with emotion ...and thus it isto no avail to try to penetrate inside their myopic stagnated intellects and show them everything is not in black and white!
Acutally the only thing that shocks me now about you is that you have not started calling me a positivist hashebavist' or whatever and saying you know about my secret identity and my connections to some cabal of 'masonic wizards' like some Freeper with thought processes similar to yours was saying some weeks ago! Or maybe asking me for Red Heifers!
I kinda trailed off. I dont know if it was more of the longwinded whining or the thesaurus lexicon but one of'em put me to sleep.
Rt. 1 Box 195 Long Island, Virginia
Third Award Expert Rifle and Pistol.
Direct your hubris to someone who cant turn you off like a light from 1000 yards.
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.