1. Please take 30 seconds to register your free account to remove most ads, post topics, make friends, earn reward points at our store, and more!  

The police state is alive and well in the U.S.

Discussion in 'Off Topic [BG]' started by seventhson, May 29, 2011.


Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. DerHoggz

    DerHoggz I like cats :| Banned

    Feb 13, 2009
    Western Pennsylvania
    I was asking you to clarify the too much of a good thing statement.

    You still haven't.
     
  2. Quickie

    Quickie

    May 6, 2011
    On the previous page.
     
  3. Quickie

    Quickie

    May 6, 2011
    I believe there was an incident , probably more, that happened some years ago, where a film crew had the ability to warn some of our soldiers of an enemy presence. The press chose not. They filmed the conflict and when questioned about it later on stated something like, "they were there to report on the war"...something like that. It was their right "freedom of the press" but at what cost? Can you understand where I am coming from at all?

    I would of warned our soldiers. If you choose to say that's taking away the right of free press, then I can't help you on that.
     
  4. seventhson

    seventhson Supporting Member

    Aug 12, 2005
    Seattle, WA
    citation?
     
  5. seventhson

    seventhson Supporting Member

    Aug 12, 2005
    Seattle, WA
    what rights do you imagine this crowd of obese persons believe are being abused? do you have an example of such an expression of outrage?
     
  6. Quickie

    Quickie

    May 6, 2011
    I have been searching for it...can't find the event. And that's exactly why I posted it "I believe". I will research it. I also, well, I believe that another similar episode happened as when our soldiers were coming on shore at a beach, the press were there with full lights. It was to be a secret beach assault.

    These episodes happen. Now I would say don't put our soldiers lives in danger by exposing them. Others would say..."that's censorship" how dare you.

    Can you understand the difference I am trying to clarify for you?
     
  7. Quickie

    Quickie

    May 6, 2011
    Well, yes...this crowd would include you. You are very upset at me for even suggesting ANY kind of possible amendment that may, could, would protect us from future attacks. The crowd is just a reference word.
     
  8. Quickie

    Quickie

    May 6, 2011
    Second, and more importantly, the federal government shouldn’t be in the business of telling Americans what and what not to eat and drink. Our democracy is founded on the idea that individuals have basic freedoms. Among these, certainly, is the right to choose what we put on our plates and in our goblets. But the anti-food extremists like CSPI would gladly take away that freedom and mandate our diet in order to save us from ourselves. It is time for these zealous anti-food advocates to understand that it is not the federal government’s job to save us from ourselves by making our choices for us.

    Obesity is a major health concern for all Americans, but should federal government respond?


    OK. Hopefully I have made my wishes and opinion more clear. I would rather we just help each other and look out for one another willingly, but many of us just don't any longer.

    There's a saying, you don't know whats good for you.


    This is becoming more and more true today. Not everyone, but so many.
     
  9. seventhson

    seventhson Supporting Member

    Aug 12, 2005
    Seattle, WA
    I can make up all sorts of poopiee as well to support my position.
    If such an incident DID happen, I wouldn't call it an example of "censorship" or "freedom of the press". I would call it a misguided interpretation of the press' general policy of not trying to be part of the story. But there are many, many examples of the press being part of the story to save or preserve lives.
    Not really lol...
     
  10. Quickie

    Quickie

    May 6, 2011
    I'm sure you can. I don't. The beach landing was televised. I saw it. Gotta love "live war".
     
  11. seventhson

    seventhson Supporting Member

    Aug 12, 2005
    Seattle, WA
    I can't tell which side of the argument you're on. I'm not saying that your position is "left wing" or "right wing", but I'm going to refer to those positions in what I believe to be the traditional meaning...

    With regards to mandating a diet to counter rampant obesity in the U.S. Most "right wing" and minimal govt people would classify this as a BAD thing. But you seem to be arguing that it's a GOOD thing and that the obese people are out of line with regards to expressing their freedom of choice in foods.

    With regards to protecting the nation, most "right wing" (with the exception of minimal govt proponents) people would classify the Patriot act as a GOOD thing.

    So I conclude that you are neither "right wing" or "left wing" in the traditional sense. But rather, you seem to be an advocate of government sponsored policy when the end goal serves the greater societal good. Do I have that correct?
     
  12. seventhson

    seventhson Supporting Member

    Aug 12, 2005
    Seattle, WA
    Can you cite the two factions involved and the beach?
     
  13. seventhson

    seventhson Supporting Member

    Aug 12, 2005
    Seattle, WA
    "Yeah, he must work out."
     
  14. Quickie

    Quickie

    May 6, 2011

    OK. Without getting political. I was right for over 20 years. I am now left. I believe in both so I guess if you want to label me, I'm a centrist leaning toward the left.

    You asked for information on the obese. what rights do you imagine this crowd of obese persons believe are being abused? do you have an example of such an expression of outrage?I gave you the link.

    The link states the benefits of nutrition. The "nutritionally challenge" say (basically) don't tell me what to eat. That's my right. Even though, clearly eating less and exercise helps us live longer. They see the government "telling" them what is good for them.

    And in this case, the government is completely right. However, the "right" to be fat and unhealthy.....well...now can you understand?

    I will protect this nation at any cost. And if that means adapting to a stricter security at the airports or implementing some different inspection procedures at our harbors...to save lives, so be it.

    REASONABLE. That is the word and MUST be the only agenda.
     
  15. Quickie

    Quickie

    May 6, 2011
    Two? Fox broadcast it live. Die hard right winger then.
     
  16. seventhson

    seventhson Supporting Member

    Aug 12, 2005
    Seattle, WA
    No, I meant the two sides of the military conflict at the beach.
     
  17. Pacman

    Pacman Layin' Down Time Staff Member Gold Supporting Member

    Apr 1, 2000
    Omaha, Nebraska
    Endorsing Artist: Roscoe Guitars, DR Strings, Aguilar Amplification
    This has gotten political.

    For the record, the televised beach landing was during Grenada.
     

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.