Which would you choose? Big Brother security and safety, or freedom from cameras, background checks, drones overhead, etc., but increased potential dangers? Or is it all like the airport scanners — security theater — since the billions already spent didn’t stop the bombers, school shooters, etc. Or does that imply we need more?

Americans hate Big Brother — until moments like this.

Police state paranoia has long stoked angst and outrage, until an incident like the Boston Marathon bombings takes place and the nation heaves a sigh of relief that security cameras gazed unblinkingly upon Beantown’s streets and sidewalks. Eyes in the sky — cameras that keep tabs on possible red-light runners, peer out at ATM users and stand sentry for commercial businesses — provided investigators key intelligence that led to identifying suspects in the attack. A department store camera held the much-viewed footage released by the FBI.

The developments have once again pitted personal rights against public safety. Politicians at every level — from the sheriff in Tampa to members of Congress — are urging the deployment of more surveillance and law enforcement access to captured material. Civil libertarians and privacy advocates, just as predictably, are preaching restraint.

“There is going to be more of a push to have more cameras on the streets, and it will be difficult to resist that push,” said Neil Richards, a privacy advocate and law professor at Washington University in St. Louis. He authored a Harvard Law Review paper last month titled “The Dangers of Surveillance,” where he wrote that the amount of observation these days “should give us pause.”

“The difficult balance is to have them [cameras] there for extraordinary efforts such as what we’ve seen this week but not for us to live in an emergency situation all the time,” he said.



  1. patrioticveteran says:

    Cops or crooks, when your looking down the barrel of his gun, whats the difference? I will keep mine.

  2. rabid monkey says:

    There is good and evil afoot with any technology. Technology can be used for good or it may be used for evil. We live in a unique time in history. Technology in this day and age is both powerful and liberating. It is sacrosanct in it’s ability to be both liberating and oppressive. The succinct among us may observe that the word ‘technology’ may be replaced with the word ‘knowledge’. Both are resources. Both may be utilized freely in that they are terms innately dissociated from subjective confluences of disparate thought amalgamations. In other words: “be Zen.” Thank you.

    • rabid monkey says:

      I repeal my ending statement of “Thank you.” It was an inappropriate maneuver in my ultimate goal of getting my point across. My point being of course was that one should strive to utilize critical-thinking skills in every moment of one’s own life.

      • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

        I for one imagine I understand the various meanings of and motives behind signing off “Thank You” and I have used the same flare a few times. It is as you recognize mostly BS.

        I’ve read the following several times though and cannot even make up a way for it to make sense:

        “…they are terms innately dissociated from subjective confluences of disparate thought amalgamations…”

        Word for Today: Author

        • rabid monkey says:

          I am drunk…and was when I wrote that…nuff said. I expected people to not understand it because I was being silly. Now… the crux of my argument was actually what I had said in the latter. You might have missed it on-account of your penchant for self-importance, but here it is again: “My point being of course was that one should strive to utilize critical-thinking skills in every moment of one’s own life.”

          • rabid monkey says:

            I sincerely apologize for having stressed the ability of your brain to parse complex facets of perceptual reality into a simple, recognizable microcosm that fits neatly within your own construct of reality. Perhaps expanding your own sense of ‘self’ would be an exercise worthy of an infomercial.

          • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

            I am drunk… //// So what? /// Who Isn’t //// And that justifies… what? ///

            Drunk or Sober—it should be sobering that with each of us, no one else can tell. Except you remain uncommunicating with a Santorum of Hostility.

            but I dither.

            Word for the Day: Santorum.

          • rabid monkey says:

            I am drunk… //// So what? /// Who Isn’t //// And that justifies… what? ///

            Drunk or Sober—it should be sobering that with each of us, no one else can tell. Except you remain uncommunicating with a Santorum of Hostility.

            but I dither.

            Word for the Day: Santorum.

            –words well spoken. Indeed I should not hide behind words to speak my mind. However, being an “author” (as-it-were) I beg of you in your rebuttal to replace the word “uncommunicating” with non-communicative. It flows a bit better. I am an author after all, by his regency himself, the great “Bobbo” himself, no less.

          • rabid monkey says:

            I cut-out a redundant word in my following soliloquy–> words well spoken. Indeed I should not hide behind words to speak my mind. However, being an “author” (as-it-were) I beg of you in your rebuttal to replace the word “uncommunicating” with non-communicative. It flows a bit better. I am an author after all, by his regency, the great “Bobbo” himself, no less.

          • rabid monkey says:

            even better worded–> words well spoken. Indeed I shall not hide behind words to speak my mind. However, being an “author” (as-it-were) I beg of you in your rebuttal to replace the word “uncommunicating” with non-communicative. It flows a bit better. I am an author after all, by virtue of his regency himself, the great “Bobbo”. Expect nothing less. ..and you call me an author. Why, I couldn’t even write my own science-fiction novel to explain how I managed to wrangle my own spleen out of a paper-bag. I was able to reconstitute said-spleen back into my body however. The task required much trial-and-tribulation. In case you haven’t noticed, I am still drunk, but even in my delusional state of mind, I still request a duel of ‘wordsmanship’ between men. I fancy myself a worthy adversary. I thus present myself as your duly, humble opponent. Your move.

          • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

            Tommorrow may reveal more color in the shadows but I think non-communicative slightly more emphasizes not talking/writing at all whereas uncommunicative has a secondary less standard usage for talking but making no sense.

            I noted the word choice could be more clear but didn’t want to restrict my juices. That causes puddles.

            Word for Today: Discernment.

          • rabid monkey says:

            I shall reply only to these specific words: “I think non-communicative slightly more emphasizes not talking/writing at all whereas uncommunicative has a secondary less standard usage for talking but making no sense.”
            I beg to differ in your definition. Uncommunicative requires the point of view of the beholder at the behest of the beholden. Whom is the decision-maker as to the efficacy of the communication? The word uncommunicative could (for all intents and purposes) mean that you yourself are the one whom fails to manifest the reciprocal of mutual understanding as it pertains to the ‘hooman’ condition.

          • rabid monkey says:

            I have noticed that you tend to dither, when a mere dather might have sufficed instead.

      • msbpodcast says:

        What was wrong with ending with a civil salutation?

        NOTHING!

        You can exercise your faculties without being a rude asshole about it.

        • rabid monkey says:

          We are making sport of it. ‘Tis merely a game. I myself am utilizing the opportunity to hone my debating skills. Do not worry. It is all in good fun. We are all adults in this forum after all. I welcome such fine adversaries. They keep me on my toes. Peace-out! Love to all.

  3. pedro says:

    They should be able to capture this kind of imbeciles with or without that much surveillance. Otherwise, “cameras are not enough” will be the excuse to put even more limitations to freedom

  4. bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

    pedro disassociating as usual says:
    4/22/2013 at 2:08 am

    They should be able to capture this kind of imbeciles with or without that much surveillance. /// In the context of the Universe being your oyster—how, for instance?

    Otherwise, “cameras are not enough” will be the excuse to put even more limitations to freedom. //// Cameras of course are not enough. Security is best served by “all of the above” rather than imposing imbecilic limitations on achieving the best outcome possible.

    Word for Today: Balance.

    • pedro says:

      I pity the fool eager to let his freedom slip away for the illusion of security

      • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

        Pedro–twist as you will/fail as you do: how was security an illusion in this case?

        Add them up. Do the Math. Get off your donkey and think for a change.

        Word for the Day: Statistics.

        • rabid monkey says:

          sigh: “They should be able to capture this kind of imbeciles with or without that much surveillance.”

          corrected: “They should be able to capture these kinds of imbeciles with, or without much surveillance.”
          Kudos though for possessing a spelling ability beyond an eighth-grade level.

          • rabid monkey says:

            okay, after much scrutiny, it actually looks correct either way. The way you said it, and the supposed “correct” way I replied. The idea was understood anyway. I apologize for being a total arse. I am stupid.

          • pedro says:

            No problem. The incoherence of my statement lies in the huge jetlag I currently have for being 12 timezone away. I commented 5 minutes after checking into my hotel.

            Yes Bobbo, that small is my oyster.

          • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

            Pedro—always had the DU Monkey on your back, now its rabid too? I am hoping after your shower that you compliment RM for the advise he has given you?

            Traveling? God I used to HATE IT. Always so close to the local attractions…never time to imbibe. So–I actually spent a few years traveling “on vacation” to all the places my businesses had taken me.

            Second trip worth all the effort—paid for by the first trip.

            Keep your eyes on your balls.

            Word for the Day: Travel Wallet.

        • pedro says:

          Statistics schmatistics.

          Where were the cameras & the intelligence before the pressure cookers exploded? Would more of those help in avoid future kitchen accidents?

          The answer is no. They knew the older brother was up to no something yet they did squat. Same excuse as dumbya for 9/11; they knew but nobody heard nor did shite.

          The increase in security & intelligence did nothing to prevent this, as will do nothing to make the US the envy of the nanny state of UK to avoid any future events.

          Keep rationalizing it all you want but all you’ll get is what you have now: illusion of security in lew of your freedom.

          • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

            Jesus on Room Service Pedro—you sure are bone breakingly stupid:

            “Where were the cameras & the intelligence before the pressure cookers exploded? Would more of those help in avoid future kitchen accidents?” /// Yes, the main story from Boston is just how fast/community supported the apprehension of the Bomber Brothers were==initiated by the surveillance.

            In the chase, multiple bombs/grenades were set lose in public ((didn’t catch if they exploded or were just ditched)). Those were “future explosions” avoided.

            …… you aren’t stupid “exactly” Pedro. Its not jet lag either. I’m thinking a bad pork taco from Juarez?

            Word for the Day: Trichinosis. You can’t taste it, but it makes for a bad meal.

      • msbpodcast says:

        Freedom is illusory at best and delusional at worst.

        You have the right to cower in your bomb shelt… uh, retain your privacy, in your owned* domicile.

        Apart from that, you are on common ground and there is no possibility of privacy on common ground**.

        There will be cameras recording everything (broadcasting over the wireless internet in color and HD) absolutely everywhere.

        This will be done by anyone (person or corporation) who owns anything and it will require everyone (persons or corporations) to adjust their expectations of privacy.

        Privacy is a dying concept that is being killed off by technology.

        We are witnessing the end of criminality.

        It will go down hardest in those sectors of society which have long thought themselves immune from intrusion, that includes state capitals. (Eventually, the only place where criminals can ply their perfidy will be out in nature, aka the wilderness, and Best Korea.)

        *) I wrote owned because if you don’t own it, it behooves the owner of the property where you are to ensure that nothing illegal is happening on that property or be legally liable for any damages.

        Renting your apartment? Tough shit when you find LED lit cameras in the corridors. It will make hanging out, aka lurking, in the shadows a lot tougher though when there’s no shadows left.

        **) Crime dramas are going to be concerned with finding way to evade surveillance more than any actual criminality.

        • bobbo, putting the extacy in Existential says:

          Well said MPod. Not to harp, but “in fact” most of your references above to “privacy” are actually addressing the concept of anonymity.

          …. and in a very real sense, that is just the way it should be.

          “We were never more free than during the German Occupation.”

          FREEEEEEEEEEEEEDOM includes not being fettered by the BS crap foisted by so many LIEberTARDIANS for the various false reasons they do.

          But now I am dithering.

        • pedro says:

          So freedom is illusory but safety is not. Care to spin that one again?

          • msbpodcast says:

            Freedom from what exactly?

            Freedom to what exactly?

            Its usually the freedom to go about your day doing whatever the Hell you want to whomever the Hell you want for any reason the Hell you deem valid (like: “I didn’t like the way he looked, so I shot him. [In the '80s, a South African cop shot and killed their country's best Olympic medal hopeful just because he was running. "He must have been running away from something so I shot him." {He was never charged with the murder of an innocent man strictly because that running man was black.}])

            Well, now you can still do whatever the Hell you want, but know that there’ll be consequences.

            Surveillance is not prevention.

          • pedro says:

            “Surveillance is not prevention”

            Tell that to the ninnies in Washington

  5. ECA says:

    I find it strange..
    CRIME is CRIME..
    but if you look back in Short and long history FEW of the rich/powerful/corrupt end up in jails.

    a person that robs($100+) a 7/11-market ends up in jail for Many years. The person who Robs from the payroll or retirement fund ($1000000+) ends up in Haiti..or some other nice country..or at the most a min security prison.

    Can I mention all the people that DIED, during our wars(yes WARS) in the middle east (MOSTLY bystanders)..compared to the ones killed in the USA.. is 100/1 good trade off?

    there were OTHER deaths in this country.
    There are OTHER problems happening.

  6. Andy K says:

    Here in the UK, CCTV by the state is the norm. We probably have the same amount of privately owned CCTV as in many US states but we’ve found it’s just not enough. Last i heard the figure was something like, in London on an average day you will be seen 2000 times by CCTV cameras. For us it’s normal and not intrusive because you are in public – it’s the same premise as everything you do online is being watched, whether it’s your ISP, Facebook or otherwise you are being watched.

    Anyway my point is, if you’ve nothing to hide don’t be scared of these CCTV cameras saving your Liberty somewhat

    • rabid monkey says:

      saving freedom one minute, microcosm at-a-time. The more your slice it, the more it is diced. Apologies for requiring freedom does not freedom make my friend. The “you’ve nothing to hide” argument is both childish and ignorant. You have already broken 13 tax laws merely by responding to this forum. If they want to get you, they can, and they will. The CIA is a rogue operation. Anyways, mind your P’s and Q’s and you’ll ‘git-along ‘jest fine. HAAR!

      • rabid monkey says:

        okay, the way I said all the prior stuff bequeaths the drunken-state I am in. AUUGH. I seem dumber that a pile of rocks right now. SIGH! I hate lava. It makes me sneeze. HAR!

      • msbpodcast says:

        broken 13 tax laws

        And these are?

        The problem for the pi…, uh, authorities, is that when they behave badly, its also being caught on camera.

        The truth of a camera is that it can exonerate as well as condemn.

        • pedro says:

          Sure, they are so honest they will not make that footage (already in their hands) disappear, just like they confiscate videos from whomever is taping them.

          Liberuls that give all their life to the state. Idiots!

    • pedro says:

      So there is no such thing as being stalked. I bet you love having someone following you around.

  7. bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

    The more your slice it, the more it is diced. /// Thats not true. You have to rotate the subject 90 Degrees to dice.

    You make a common error—thinking everyone is as rotated as you are.

    Silly Hooman.

    The Word for Today is: Taste Synesthesia

  8. rabid monkey says:

    Word for the day: “Bobbo” – a meandering neanderthal who pretends to be non-human for the sole purpose of understanding what it really means to be sic [hooman].

    • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

      Word for the Day: Nutshell.

      • rabid monkey says:

        word for the day: “discombobulation.” –for no other reason than it is simply fun to say. :-)

  9. bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

    rabid monkey demonstrating how to use a brain as a doorstop, or as we in the trade call it: “A Pedro:” says:
    4/22/2013 at 5:35 am

    I shall reply only to these specific words: “I think non-communicative slightly more emphasizes not talking/writing at all whereas uncommunicative has a secondary less standard usage for talking but making no sense.”
    I beg to differ in your definition. /// Its not “my” definition but those immediately found by the simplest of google searches. Dictionaries–simple cheap tools helping us all to “get out of ourselves.” Liberating, you should try it.

    Uncommunicative requires the point of view of the beholder at the behest of the beholden. /// Link to any definition that teases that idea out? While it might even be a good idea in a vacuum, absent a source, you are just making this BS up–hoping others will be as lazy as you to rope them in.

    Whom is the decision-maker as to the efficacy of the communication? /// That would be “Who” but I dather.

    The word uncommunicative could (for all intents and purposes) mean that you yourself are the one whom fails to manifest the reciprocal of mutual understanding as it pertains to the ‘hooman’ condition. /// Not when I say that it is YOU who is being uncommunicative. See how some words modify other words? And how I refused to rotate 90 Degrees to your myopia?

    Sadly rabid, I will assume a first name casualness, you as too many otherwise intelligent people do use your intellect to isolate yourself rather than EXPAND your appreciation of life. Just one of the many reasons you are silly. Getting drunk and referring to it is another. But I dather once again.

    un·com·mu·ni·ca·tive
    /??nk?’myo?on?k?tiv/
    Adjective

    1. Unwilling to talk or impart information.
    2. (of something such as writing or art) Not conveying much or any meaning or sense.

    https://google.com/search?q=uncommunicative&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

    Word for the Day: Fantacist.

    • rabid monkey says:

      My appreciation of life is innate. I may express it differently than others might appreciate or acknowledge, but it is genuine nonetheless. Zen equals zEN.

      • rabid monkey says:

        The mirror shines brightest when one’s self is out of the way. Thank you for showing me what an absolute “ass” I am capable of being. Zen-mind, Zen-thought, Zen action.

        • rabid monkey says:

          I thus shall be silent for the rest of my life. I must deeply consider your viewpoint. In-time it may not matter a single iota to me at all. The sun rises, the birds chirp. A single thought passing matters no more than a crisp, welcoming, refreshing wind upon one’s face. It is nice while it there, but then it is gone like a faint whisper. Have a wonderful day. I am glad to have exchanged thoughts with you.

  10. MikeN says:

    This website long ago chose the path of security and Big Brother when it didn’t object to the naked RapeaScan machines in the testing phase, instead just saying ‘prudes can choose a same-sex screener’, and before that celebrating when someone was found via satellite surveillance.

  11. bobbo, putting the extacy in Existential says:

    pedro says:
    4/22/2013 at 6:56 am

    So freedom is illusory but safety is not. Care to spin that one again? /// Read my first post….. yeah, on page one: I posit that what is illusory and DAMAGING TO THE PSYCHE of America is that freedom and safety stand in opposition to one another.

    Silly sheeple. You’ve still got grass on your chin.

    FREEEEEEEEEEEEEEDOM–REMOVING the shackles of false equivalents. I can’t even image the size of the bowl movement you would have if you knocked this kind of shit out of your thinking.

    Silly Hoomans.

    • pedro says:

      That reply was not for you. I know reality and freedom seem as difficult as understanding how the commenting system works but give it a serious try; I believe you can, someday, see reality and understand the commenting system.

      Silly hooman indeed.

  12. Uncle Patso says:

    I like that some of the best video of “the suspects” was from a department store camera, rather than one owned by government or police.

    This offers a good balance between security and privacy — let private institutions have all the cameras they want, but require law enforcement to get a court order to look at the recordings.

    • bobbo, putting the extacy in Existential says:

      Silly dichotomy you propose.

      What is it you are trying to protect and in what context?

      Cartoon images and ideas for four color print process.

      Explorer the Rainbow!!!!!

      PS–no body gives a shit what you do in public. You just aren’t that interesting.

      • bobbo, putting the extacy in Existential says:

        …. and by you I do mean all of us. ♫ As you are me, and I am you, and we are all together.

        I assume YOU know that….. but too ambiguous none the less.

  13. Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

    The blog argues a false dilemma, cameras a totalitarian state doesn’t make. If the state is good, cameras will help it accomplish good, if it is evil, then cameras will be turned to evil.

    If Obama has his heart’s desire, then he will install his own cameras…where they are presently lacking…so whether any serve good now, as in aiding the identification of the Boston bombers…is irrelevant to what the coming Dictator will do with them. If none are installed now, you can be sure he will embark on a major install then.

  14. Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

    Lest the intellectually escape realizing how absurd the premise of this blog is, does anyone really believe not installing cameras now will stop a Dictator from installing them under his regime?

    If so, then perhaps this blog makes sense to you…

    But to any critical thinker, its absurd cameras installed today somehow enables dictatorship tomorrow…the technology will still be available to the dictator regardless what we do today.

    But meanwhile it certainly would help public security as seen by our ability to identify the bombers quickly unlike in the past, before cameras existed.

    • noname says:

      Most cell phones have cameras and most people carry cell phones.

      As you noted, a plethora of images helped capture the bomber and more so eye witness…. so why exactly do we need more cameras?

      Do we need more stop light, speeding, jaywalking, smoking, license plate, facial recognition, IR, gun sensing cameras, microphones, gps trackers, RFID trackers, DNA databases….

      When does it end? Obviously you will never feel secure, as typical of Repuke chicken hawks!

      For a Repuke who thinks you can never have enough guns because of an imagined needed; you are again imagining an unnecessary need for more cameras!

      Get some courage and do the country good, instead of just another taker!

      • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

        The evils you cite aren’t caused by cameras, its the liberal progressives (control freaks) who make life hell.

        Being a low information voter you fail to see the parallels to the Nazi regime, you don’t know Nazi = National Socialism (leftist), and its programs of abortion and health care (which require control) lead to tyranny.

        Being a low information voter, you don’t know leftism, even when granted absolute power as under Stalin or Castro, never fails to enslave and impoverish the people.

        You just march on misdirecting, pushing the very thing you actually hate, because you think leftist ideas are good, when in fact they will enslave you.

        And if there aren’t enough cameras functioning then, they will simply put up more.

        Real freedom is enshrined in our constitution, the document you mistakenly hate because the left told you to.

        • noname says:

          Funny “Taxed Enough Already Dude” you are trying to promote the very evils you decry for yourself!

          What does that make you (left/right/evil/all the above)?

          “Taxed Enough Already Dude” writes:
          “But to any critical thinker, its absurd cameras installed today somehow enables dictatorship tomorrow…the technology will still be available to the dictator regardless what we do today.”

          • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

            That statement didn’t promote anything, read it again.

          • noname says:

            Good!

            Then you fully agree no additional cameras and no additional monies need be spending on your beloved Gestapo like national security apparatus!

            They need to just correctly do their jobs with the already immensive resources at their disposal.

            If they can’t manage what they have now, why should we give them more!

            That was easy!

          • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

            Nobrain—didn’t promote or agree to anything, read it again.

            Cameras are analogous to having more cops on the beat, which in high crime areas…is a good thing for law abiding citizens.

            With the right safeguards, nothing evil about cameras.

            When liberal demoncrats have a super majority, the statists manifest Stalinist tendencies, control freaks that they are.

            So the fix is not less cameras, its less demoncrats.

          • noname says:

            You have no interest in safeguards!

            Where are your safeguards in regards to background checks for guns! You and your Evil Repuke NRA brethren are people who don’t believe in reasonable intelligent safeguards! In fact, your ilk believe gun shot victims are just props!

            There are more than enough cameras out there. The FBI has more than enough access to cameras.

            And no, cameras are not another cop on the “beating”/a>!….

            Go to Russia, if you want more cameras and their incompetent police who don’t know how to effectively use their over abundant physical and legal (and illegal) resources!

  15. pedro says:

    The Canooks are more efficient with less intrusion, go figure.

    • noname says:

      Of course and why not; what incentive does the FBI, HLS … have to get it right? Look how much more the chicken hawk Repukes in congress appropriates to our “national security complex” every time they screw it up!

      Every security consultant and lobbyist will argue they need billions more money to get it right and the mean black Obama won’t give to them!

      So again what incentives do the FBI, HLS and our national security industry have for efficiently using tax payer’s monies? The more inefficient they are the more Carl Rove and ilk will give them!

      • pedro says:

        Sure nobrain, the problem is only the repukes, not the demagogues.

        Keep your head in the ground

        • noname says:

          Actually pp (pathetic pedro), people are always asking, why is the problem always you?

          You always seem tuned out; maybe, because you’re doped up or your meds not working anymore?

          • pedro says:

            Anybody that’s not a liberul like you sounds to you like tuned out.

            Thanks for following my advice of keeping your head in the ground

          • noname says:

            Forever disillusion aren’t you!

            You have no idea what my politics are, yet you claim too!

            Poor pedro, doctors can’t help you!

          • pedro says:

            You’re right. It’s difficult to know the political leaning of someone that cannot write English

          • noname says:

            Me hurt, you not I understand. Poor pathetic pedro not bright is he?

  16. Mextli says:

    Surveillance state no answer to terror
    http://tinyurl.com/bl887pv

  17. deowll says:

    Personally I’m not sure I’d feel safer being videoed while being blow up than just being blow up without the video.

    Each to their own I guess.

  18. bobbo, Jr Culture/psychiatric/ethnic/social/art critic and general bonvivant says:

    MPod coming so close to the nut of Existentialism says:

    “Well, now you can still do whatever the Hell you want, but know that there’ll be consequences.” /// And thats exactly what living under Nazi Occupation was. Consequences over life/death decisions. Go to the store for milk, or hide a Jew in the Attic==life and death. Free—as in making “real” decisions.

    I prefer a drab humdrum life without freedom so defined.

    Most of us do.

    • noname says:

      “I prefer a drab humdrum life without freedom so defined.

      Most of us do.”

      bobbo “the psychotic” you want a “drab humdrum life without freedom so defined” then go to Russia!

      Only a coward can say something like that and not a “red blooded American”!

      You obviously have never taken an oath to defend “the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic”! Do you even know what that means?

      What has a coward like you done with his “drab humdrum life without freedom”?

      • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

        Your reading and contextual skills really are deficient. Read it again for what kind of freedom I am referring to. Hint: “life and death” decisions.

        Maybe you should re-enlist?

        • noname says:

          Maybe you should know what America’s constitution is!

          And yes, maybe I should accept a commission! Obviously our constitution needs defending from idiots like you!

          • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

            nogame==you seem to be upset?

            No reason, no good reason, for that.

            Consider conversation to be like a chess match. Each round you lose, you become a better player====IF you pay attention rather than lose the opportunity in self defeating emotionalism.

            I don’t see what the Constitution has to say about that?….Hmmm…other than you are free to be as you wish?

          • noname says:

            bobbo not upset, it’s just you projecting again.

            bobbo so simplistically childish and quaint, “Consider a conversation a chess match”!

            Yes, bobbo go right ahead and play your chess conversation games; while we Adults discuss what matters at hand!

  19. Glenn E. says:

    What the politicians always fail to point out, because they want to exploit the moment too. Is that these terrorists and bombers aren’t actually killing human beings and destroying trash cans, because that’s their true target. What the terrorists are really taking aim at, and blowing up, are the citizens’ freedoms and rights. Because what they’re after is to destroy a nation’s democracy, by causing it to sting itself to death. As it keeps tightening up it’s “security weaknesses”. Weaknesses which use to be the trust granted the average citizens, to go about their lives, without having to prove they’re not criminals or terrorists.

    And as soon as these “weaknesses” are tightened up. The terrorists simply find another one, left unchecked. Yes, some day we might be terrorists and bomber free. But we won’t be free in any other sense. So we’ve got to telling out politicians not to cave into these security experts, delusions. Far more people die every year from auto accidents, than terrorist acts. So why aren’t they going nuts over arresting those drunk and distracted drivers? And keeping them off the streets?