SG, I’m not a demolitions expert but I’ve never heard of any kind of liquid explosive that is so powerful that just 12-20 ounces would take down a plane. And if it would, I think it’s unlikely that such a powerful explosive could be safely transported in a Coke bottle in someone’s carry-on bag without blowing them up in the process.
As for a small hole bringing down a 747, that’s a movie myth. Makes for fun movies but it takes a lot more than a tiny hole, a broken window, etc. to bring down an airplane. (Here’s a fun video from the Mythbusters if you want to watch it http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fi1_1l7M8FA )
Anyway, my point isn’t so much about airplane safety although we can certainly start a thread on that if you’d like. My point is that—as a law-abiding citizen—I RESENT being treated like a criminal everytime I walk into an airport or a government building. If Homeland Security’s antics were more about real security and less about the ILLUSION of security, I’d feel differently. But, at this point, I’ve seen nothing about confiscating random laptops or throwing away baby formula that has anything to do with safety.
And this is tied directly to the topic of “shrinking freedoms”. Sure, this doesn’t prevent me from flying. So, by one definition, some people will say, “Well, Tony, you’re still free to fly so I guess your freedoms are still intact.” And, on that level it’s true. But, on the level of someone being able to simply fly from Point A to Point B without submitting to search and seizure.....well, that’s most definitely not the level of freedom that we’ve enjoyed in the past.
So, call it what you want. But there’s no mistake about it: America looks more like a police state than it ever has. I’ll be glad when George Bush is history.
Since SG and Deon asked for some other examples, here’s a list that was compiled by a friend of mine. Perhaps it will shed some light on the “shrinking freedoms” we’re talking about:
1. Presidential Executive Order 12958 (March 25, 2003), The National Security Agency (NSA) may read any email without warning, warrant, or notice. They may do this without any judicial or legislative oversight.
U.S. Commercial Remote Sensing Policy [Supersedes Presidential Decision Directive 23] (April 25, 2003) The fundamental goal of this policy is to advance and protect U.S. national security and foreign policy interests by maintaining the nation’s leadership in “remote sensing” space activities, and by sustaining and enhancing the U.S. remote sensing industry. United States Government use of commercial remote sensing space capabilities.
Bush Signs Bill Expanding FBI Authority (December 14, 2003) AP: “The bill expands the number of businesses from which the FBI and other U.S. authorities conducting intelligence work can demand financial records without seeking court approval. ... Under current law, ‘national security letters’ can be issued to traditional financial institutions, such as banks and credit unions, to require them to turn over information. The bill expands the definition of financial institution to include other businesses that deal with large amounts of cash.” (Don’t you love how cash is made to appear dirty or evil in this quotation? LOL)
2004 Authorization Bill for Intelligence Agencies, (Nov. 19, 2004) The measure gives the Federal Bureau of Investigation greater authority to demand records from businesses without the approval of a judge or a grand jury. While banks, credit unions and other financial institutions are currently subject to such demands, the measure expands the list to include car dealers, pawnbrokers, travel agents, casinos and other businesses
Homeland Security contract to KBR (January 24, 2006) for construction of “detention centers” across the U.S.-- detention centers, capable of holding 5,000 people each. Halliburton’ s subsidiary KBR (formerly Kellogg, Brown and Root) announced it had been awarded a $385 million contingency contract by the Department of Homeland Security to build detention camps in the United States.
In 2002 Attorney General John Ashcroft announced his desire to see camps for U.S. citizens deemed to be “enemy combatants.” On February 17, 2006, in a speech to the Council on Foreign Relations, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld spoke of the harm being done to the country’s security, not just by the enemy, but also by what he called “news informers” who needed to be combated in “a contest of wills.” (TRANSLATION: this mechanism provides legal police action against anyone who simply holds and distributes an opposing opinion. DANGER)
According to a press release posted on the Halliburton website, “The contract, which is effective immediately, provides for establishing temporary detention and processing capabilities to augment existing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Detention and Removal Operations (DRO), or to support the rapid development of new programs. Jamie Zuieback, spokeswoman for ICE, declined to elaborate on what these “new programs” might be.
The Military Commissions Act of 2006. Just two weeks prior to the 2006 midterm elections, Congress passed legislation that permitted the administration to detain, at its own discretion, anyone the executive branch - specifically, Mr. Bush as the commander in chief - deemed to be a terrorist. Once the law was signed by Mr. Bush, both Congress and the commander in chief were on record as agreeing habeas corpus was another quaint and expendable formality. That was rather convenient and timely for the White House because it was becoming increasingly apparent by that time the administration had been sanctioning, even directing, illegal detentions for at least three years before Congress obliged them by providing after-the-fact, retroactive legal cover. (TRANSLATION: Our government had already been illegally detaining American citizens for various reasons for three years and implemented this Act retroactively to go “back in time” to make it legal. )
****John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (September 30, 2006) Empowers President George W. Bush to impose martial law in the event of a terrorist “incident” or if he or other federal officials perceive a shortfall of “public order” or even in response to antiwar protests that get unruly as a result of government provocations.
***National Continuity Policy*** National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive. National Security Presidential Directive/NSPD 51 & Homeland Security Presidential Directive/HSPD- 20 (May 9, 2007) Declares that in the event of a “catastrophic event”, the entire government is immediately taken over and sole power is given over to the Executive Branch, led by George W. Bush: “The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government.” This directive, given no scrutiny by Congress, gives the White House literal control over the government and the country, bypassing the US Congress and purging all remaining separation of powers. The directive also places the Secretary of Homeland Security in charge of all domestic “Security”. (This legal mechanism allows the President to effectively declare a dictatorship. Look it up for yourself before replying to disagree.)
Executive Order: Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq, (Tuesday 17 July 2007) “It is in the interests of the United States to take additional steps with respect to the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13303 of May 22, 2003, and expanded in Executive Order 13315 of August 28, 2003, and relied upon for additional steps taken in Executive Order 13350 of July 29, 2004, and Executive Order 13364 of November 29, 2004.” This order empowers/instructs “… officers and agencies of the United States Government ...” to assist in its enforcement, ultimately judgment is rendered to members of the executive branch, each of whom serves at the pleasure of Mr. Bush. Since the order seeks to circumvent both judicial and Congressional oversight, it renders unto the executive branch, and ultimately Mr. Bush, absolute power of law.
Homeland Security Presidential Directive/HSPD 23 (January 8, 2008) Computer Network Monitoring And Cyber-Security $6 billion built a system monitoring all U.S. communication networks, including all telephone, email, texting, video, Internet, chat, and the capability to record all keyboard strokes as citizens’ type personal documents in their homes.
Federal 4th Circuit Appeals Court gives the president sweeping power to deprive anyone—citizens as well as noncitizens—of their freedom. The designation “enemy combatant,” which should apply only to people captured on a battlefield, can now be applied to ANY people detained inside the United States.
Heroes Act of 2008, passed by Congress June 17, 2008. Stops your money—or at least a good portion of it—at the border, should you decide to flee the US. (The headlines in the press release about the law were about the increased benefits for veterans and families of deceased military). Anyone voluntarily giving up his or her citizenship will be taxed on ALL of his assets as if he or she had sold them.
Homeland Security Directive: Travelers’ Laptops May Be Detained At Border. (July 16, 2008) No suspicion required under Department of Homeland Security (DHS) policies. Federal agents can take a traveler’s laptop computer or other electronic device to an off-site location for an unspecified period of time without any suspicion of wrongdoing, the Department of Homeland Security recently disclosed.
You’ve done a good job throwing out a bunch of executive orders and policies, but you still have yet to site how any of these policies have made you give up any freedom. The only thing you’ve done is point out how it is an inconvenience to you. Secondly, at 40,000 feet (note the test you sited was done on the ground), cabin decompression can bring down a plane.
Here is a short list of some flight accidents caused by it.
BOAC Flight 781 de Havilland Comet Accident Explosive decompression Metal fatique
South African Airways Flight 201 de Havilland Comet Accident Explosive decompression[7] Metal fatique
Korean Air Lines Flight 007 Boeing 747-230B Shootdown Rapid decompression Missile
Aloha Airlines Flight 243 Boeing 737-297 Accident Explosive decompression[8] Metal fatique
China Airlines Flight 611 Boeing 747-200B Accident Explosive decompression Metal fatigue
Japan Airlines Flight 123 Boeing 747-SR46 Accident Explosive decompression Structural failure of rear pressure bulkhead
United Airlines Flight 811 Boeing 747-122 Accident Explosive decompression Cargo door failure
American Airlines Flight 96 Douglas DC-10-10 Accident Rapid decompression[9] Cargo door failure
Turkish Airlines Flight 981 Douglas DC-10-10 Accident Explosive decompression[10] Cargo door failure
1999 South Dakota Learjet crash Learjet 35 Accident Gradual or rapid decompression (Undetermined)
British Airways Flight 5390 BAC One-Eleven Incident Rapid decompression[11] Windscreen failure
Helios Airways Flight 522 Boeing 737-31S Accident Gradual decompression Automatic pressurization system disabled (suspected)
Qantas Flight 30 Boeing 747-438 Accident Rapid decompression[12] Oxygen cylinder explosion (suspected)
Furthermore, the temperatures and lack of oxygen at those levels can be fatal. I know there are back ups with the drop down mask for oxygen, but I am just not willing to risk that. Are you packing your bags yet?
So I ask you again, what freedoms have you been forced to give up. Don’t site me some executive order. Don’t quote some policy that may be implemented in the event of war on our soil. Site for me an example of a freedom that you have had to give up. As far as I can tell, you can still email whomever you want, talk to whomever you want, fly wherever you want, and even question whatever you want. You are even free to carry on this conversation on the internet. I am looking for one thing that you have been forced to give up.
Also, did you find a better country to live in yet? If you want, I’ll help you pack? After all, I do believe that we still live in the greatest nation on earth, even with our problems.
You’ve done a good job throwing out a bunch of executive orders and policies, but you still have yet to site how any of these policies have made you give up any freedom.
Wow, you really do see what you want to see, don’t you?
Let me share something with you: if you put a fence around an animal, he’s not “free” even if he thinks he is. I’m sure you can extrapolate the meaning of that on your own but I’ll assist anyway: just because you have the illusion of unfettered movement doesn’t mean your keepers haven’t tightened the borders of your fence. It simply means that you have less room to move until you DO notice it.
So, SG...how much tighter will your fence have to be before you acknowledge it? Have some conversations with people who have spent time in totalitarian regimes and you’ll find that they see a lot of familiarities between things like I just posted...and things that went on in Germany.
Secondly, at 40,000 feet (note the test you sited was done on the ground),
Uh, yes but the issue was explosive decompression. It’s irrelevant whether a plane if flying or not.
Let’s be clear: You suggested that there was such a thing as a “liquid explosive” that was volatile enough to bring down a 747 even though it’s only present in a quantity that would fit into a Coke bottle....and that a person would be able to get it onto the plane through normal handling.
Were you being serious? Or were you just imagining a hypothetical scenario? Were any of the flight crashes you cited caused by such a small, liquid explosive? Or are you just hypothesizing?
So I ask you again, what freedoms have you been forced to give up. Don’t site me some executive order. Don’t quote some policy that may be implemented in the event of war on our soil. Site for me an example of a freedom that you have had to give up. As far as I can tell, you can still email whomever you want, talk to whomever you want, fly wherever you want, and even question whatever you want. You are even free to carry on this conversation on the internet. I am looking for one thing that you have been forced to give up.
I’m trying to being precise in my language: the title of this thread refers to “shrinking freedoms”. I’m not asserting that the government has stopped me from doing things. I’m flatly saying that our government has induced a level of social control and underlying legal mechanisms that give them the power to eradicate our freedoms anytime they choose. Do you not see the distinction?
I’ll wait for your answer on the “fence” question above. It wasn’t a rhetorical question.
Also, did you find a better country to live in yet? If you want, I’ll help you pack? After all, I do believe that we still live in the greatest nation on earth, even with our problems.
LOL—based on what definition?
Seriously. Stop before you respond. Ask yourself WHY you believe that our country is the “greatest on earth”. Do you believe that because you’ve actually done a study of various democracies and freedoms and arrived at that decision on your own? Are you quoting what someone told you in public school 20+ years ago when it might have been more true?
Again, that’s not a rhetorical question. Do you think that America is the only place with religious freedom? That we pay lower taxes than every other country? That we have the best health-care? That we have the best political system?
Heck, do you acknowledge even acknowledge the POSSIBILITY that there is an area of day-to-day living in America that might be not be the best on the planet? Or are you really so tunnel-visioned that you think that no one else in the world has done anything better than America?
How many stamps in your passport, SG? I’m not being presumptuous or insulting but when I see people who cannot see America in its proper perspective, I’m usually looking at someone who’s never spent any significant amount of time outside the country. Or whose knowledge is based entirely on America’s version of history and whatever gets spewed on CNN, MSNBC and FoxNews.
Do you want to help me pack my bags? I’m not leaving anytime soon. But if America’s government continues to put up the kinds of fences that Bush has erected in the last 7 years,....well, my obligation is to my family before anything else.
I love America. But I love what she’s FOUNDED on...and we get farther and farther away from that every day. Especially when the President continues to overstep his powers.
By the way, other than the Prohibition, did you ever find an example of a time when the government gave itself excessive powers temporarily and then later revoked them? I can’t think of any.
So, if you love all the new fences around your life that you haven’t bumped into yet....more power to you. Or if you haven’t noticed them, then continue telling yourself they don’t exist. But, you may find one day that you wake up with your nose pressed against a fence and wondering “Wow....I thought that was just some new landscaping the government had put in place....I had no idea I was being fenced in.”
I see things as they are, not through a glass clouded by suspicion and distrust. Now let’s use your analogy of the animal in the fence. Let’s say that you are a meerkat and the only thing separating you from an old lion in the next cage is a series of fences. The old lion represents terrorists and countries that seek to harm us. He is not strong like a young lion so he will not take on an elephant or anything of a challenge. What happens when that fence fails? The old lion gets a snack, and you (the meerkat) does not have a nice day. While those fences are up, you are free to live how you want. In other fences, that is not the case. Now I would argue that here in the U.S., our fences are a lot wider than most other countries. We go about our everyday lives without really noticing those fences are there. The same is not true in countries such as China, Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, and many others. Even in the countries that are similar to ours, the fences are more visible. You see, your argument works both ways. There is a point at which the fences become too restrictive and become very threatening. The lack of fences has equally bad results. I just don’t believe that we are to the point where those fences have become that restrictive.
On the issue of explosive decompression, it does matter whether you are on the ground or at 40,000 feet. The fact is, at 40,000 feet the air is thinner. The difference in the pressure from the inside of the cabin and the outside is far greater than it is on the ground, therefore a hole in the cabin will be far more explosive at 40,000 feet than it is on the ground where the pressure inside the cabin is closer to the same as the pressure outside. The same is true for submarines. The deeper they go, the more the pressure is out of balance. At 5000 feet down, the implosive nature of a hole is going to be much different than at 500 feet or 50 feet. In fact, at the surface, there will be no implosive reaction. That is what you call scientific thinking and rationale. As far as the liquid explosive idea, I don’t know what is available off hand. But I personally don’t want to test the ability of my plane to withstand any explosion happening inside the cabin.
I am very aware what the title of your thread is implying, however I don’t see how you are drawing the conclusion. You have admitted that you have not given up any freedom. You are just scared it is going to happen because of some steps the government has taken due to a new reality of terrorism that we have been forced to face. You are putting the cart before the horse in this instance. You are living out of fear and that is not healthy. If the government begins to get to restrictive, you will quickly notice it and the signs will not be so subtle. Hint, it will probably start in the area of religious freedom and the church will probably be restricted from preaching that the homosexual lifestyle is sin. It will be something along those lines and it is in these areas that we really need to be fighting.
I asked you if you knew of a better country to live in. You asked me on what definition. Yours, you are the one that has such issues with our country. I wanted to know if you could point to any country that you felt was doing a better job. America is not the only country with religious freedom, but I do believe it is the best example at this moment. Do we pay the lowest taxes, no ( at least those of us that do pay taxes don’t) and those taxes will skyrocket if we get Obama in office. I would submit that we do have the best health care system in the world, even though we do have our own problems. I also believe that our constitution is the foundation for the greatest political system in the world, although we don’t always achieve its vision completely.
I have not spent a lot of time outside the country, but I have spent quite some time studying other countries. You mention that “day-to-day living in America that might be not be the best on the planet”, yet you fail to give one example of someone that is doing it better. I ask you again, what country is doing it better? What country should be our model now that we have slipped so far?
Finally, you asked me “Are you quoting what someone told you in public school 20+ years ago when it might have been more true?” My answer is no. First of all, I am not that old, probably not quite as old as you are. But I do have a college education ( which I was free to strive for) and I am capable of doing research and studying of my own.
Now, I am going to go watch the US wins some more medals at the Olympics. Talk to ya later.
Do you resent speed limits? I prefer to drive 100 anytime I like.
What about food ratings? How dare they invade the privacy of a privately owned restaurant.
What about vehicle safety inspections? Shouldn’t I be allowed to put anything I want on the highway?
What about those poor bus companies in NY that are being forced out of business because someone sees them as unsafe? It’s my right if I want to ride on something held together with duct tape and bailing wire.
Why can’t my son carry his shotgun to school?
People with good sense have to be subject to laws because of the idiots in the world. Do you realize there are hundreds of people in the world right now that would love to kill Tony Rush. They’ll do it first chance they get at any cost. If one of your neighbors took a shot at you with a high powered rifle, I bet you’d be wondering why the police wasn’t doing more.
Those who are spending time complaining about these policies have never been threatened personally. Kennedy didn’t see the need for a bullet proof car. Lincoln didn’t see the need for secret service in the box with him. We’re all 10 feet tall and bullet proof until we feel personally threatened.
Something to think about……………………………
Has the government taken away(or shrunk) any of these freedoms (in general) for you?
Read GOD’S HOLY WORD;
Witness to the unsaved;
Go to church;
Pray;
Visit nursing homes;
Call or visit your neighbors;
Spend time with your family;
Post on this website;
Go to a gospel music concert.
That’s just to name a few. Now when these freedoms are taken away (or shrunk) here in the U.S. (esp. the first 4) then I will start worrying.
