OK heres one to ponder - pipTalk Forums

How to Join	Member's Area	Private Library	Search	Sanctuary		Login
Main Forums	Discussion	Tech Talk	Mature Content	Archives	A home without a wall, Our haven without ends, A circle we all call Our Family of Friends!

Greeneyes

Member Rara Avis

since 2000-09-09

Posts 9903
In Your Poetic Mind

0 posted 2002-04-11 09:39 PM

How much freedom would you / should you trade for security? What would you give to have peace? (to live in a peaceful nation, world) Now I know this is somewhat non-realistic, because there were wars happening before 9-11, but since that day have you felt uneasy about freedom? about peace? have you thought more about war? the what if's / peace? tell me your thoughts....

Step through the
barrier of my mind,
enter my soul,
feel my desire,
let my eyes guide you
into the shadows of my heart

catalinamoon

Member Rara Avis

since 2000-06-03

Posts 9543
The Shores of Alone

1 posted 2002-04-11 10:52 PM

Aack..I wrote a long reply, and my computer bumped it away.
So, starting over..
I am ok with giving up certain freedoms, if it helps keep us safe, and in some way contributes to peace.
I have been worried about the prospects for world peace ever since vietnam, and yes, it is a lot worse since 9/11. And since the escalation of things in Israel, even worse. Pretty soon I will be so full of anxiety, I will be a rollicking basket case.
I think the ideas of national ID cards and fingerprint or eye print IDs at checkpoints and such, are ok. But if they start trying to strip search me, there is a problem!
All in all, its a very hopeless feeling, to me. But in the immortal words of John Lennon
All we are saying
is give peace a chance.

NapalmsConstantlyConfused

Senior Member

since 2001-05-15

Posts 529

2 posted 2002-04-11 11:59 PM

i think we have already gone too far on this.
we could long ago have prevented the current terrorism, by choking off their sources of supply and money.
we could strangle the terrorist organizations of the world overnight by closing off their supplies and money.
but we don't.
why?
because government, and law enforcement, are big business in the worst way. like doctors with illness, this is a problem that they have a vested interest in - if they CURE it, their reason for existence goes away, while as long as it continues without actually killing the patient, they can continue to charge more and more, and use greater and greater resources to "combat" it.
meanwhile, they can use (as machiavelli so aptly put it) a never-ending series of imaginary hobgoblins to terrify the populace into relinquishing more and more of our freedoms and rights to them.
the truly sad thing is not that no-one sees it - it's mentioned on the news nearly every day - but that no-one seems to care.
but....
FACT: on 9/11, the government's spokespeople stated "we have no clue who did this."
FACT: on 9/12, the government's spokespeople had a list of OVER 50 suspects to show us.
FACT: under no circumstances, and in no conditions, does any apparatus of any government in human history do anything that fast.
this implies to the watchful eye that somewhere, at some level, those people were being watched, and were already listed as terrorists.
which begs the question: why weren't they stopped? if we knew they were here, we knew they were terrorists, we knew their intention was to attack the US, why didn't we go get them?
because if we had, and 9/11 hadn't happened, billions of dollars of defense contracts wouldn't have gotten handed out. there would be no "homeland security," there would be no reason to federalize airport security, there would be no perpetuation of the apparatus of control.
i am not willing to give up ANY freedom to "security," because i used to be one of those who provided that security - and i know for a fact, from first-hand experience, that our national intelligence apparatus is second to none.
which means that 100% of this is all smoke and mirrors, and we are being herded to someone else's tune.
but it does make a nice story on the evening news.
-Dave

edited to correctly quote machiavelli, whose "the prince" should be required reading for anyone who wonders what our government is really up to.

[This message has been edited by NapalmsConstantlyConfused (04-12-2002 12:02 AM).]

Jeffrey E. Osborne
Member

since 2001-11-01

Posts 160
out there

3 posted 2002-04-12 12:38 PM

The dreamer in me is still singing Sandra's John Lennon song (actually the song "Imagine" comes to mind here) but unfortunately the realist in me knows that Dave hit the nail right on the head. We who think we know what's going on are being ruled by those who don't want us to know.

catalinamoon

Member Rara Avis

since 2000-06-03

Posts 9543
The Shores of Alone

4 posted 2002-04-12 10:11 AM

Wow,this is interesting, and Dave brought up some points that are almost more scary than the terrorists themselves.
What the hell do we do, anyway???
Interesting subject.
And Imagine is another of my favorite songs.

S

Ron

Administrator

Member Rara Avis

since 1999-05-19

Posts 8669
Michigan, US

5 posted 2002-04-12 02:02 PM

Dave indeed brings up a lot of scary things, all unfounded and all based on illogical conjecture.

Sorry, Dave, but you offer only two real facts and then label a personal conclusion as your third fact, building a network of conspiracy that makes no logical sense. You decry government and law enforcement as big business, forgetting it was policemen and fire fighters who died trying to rescue and protect those put in danger. You cite imaginary hobgoblins, forgetting that the terrorists were anything but imaginary and the death was all too real. You espouse one opinion on top of another opinion, as if saying them will make them true.

There is no such thing as government. There is no such thing as law enforcement. There are only people, individuals in places of responsibility. If you have names, then name them. If you have real facts, then pronounce them and support them with evidence. I'll listen. (But please start another thread.)

The only thing you said that I agree with (and for obviously very different reasons) is that security and freedom are not negotiable instruments to be casually bartered at the corner store. Would you give up love for a happy home? Would you forsake intelligence to prevent worry and strife in your life? Would you cut off your right hand so you could learn to draw with your left? Some things, I think, can never become merchandise, can never be bargaining chips on the table. Some things are ours by right of existence.

Here's another way to ask the same question. At what point does freedom become something which is no longer worth fighting to preserve?

Our history was built by men and women who gave their lives for the freedoms too many now want to trade for their own security. Were their lives worth so much less than ours? I sincerely believe that those who are unwilling to die for freedom will never be free. And ironically, they will also never be secure.

Christopher

Moderator

Member Rara Avis

since 1999-08-02

Posts 8296
Purgatorial Incarceration

6 posted 2002-04-12 02:21 PM

Thank you Ron - almost exactly the thoughts going through my head when i read Dave's reply. I only want to add that we should remember that the government is not a separate entity - it is comprised of you and I, on every level, in every facet. Without the individual, the is no government, nor really a need for one.

Which, looking back, is part of what you said... just in a different way.

[This message has been edited by Christopher (04-12-2002 03:07 PM).]

Kielo
Senior Member

since 2002-02-11

Posts 1109

7 posted 2002-04-12 05:13 PM

Meh... Honestly, I would rather die free than live in "security".
First, it is unlikely that terrorists will use airplanes again.
Second, who anticipated the airplane attack? Anyone? No. No one. So no one will anticipate the next way terrorists attack next time, if there is a next time, which is a possibility. Terrorists are not successful because they are stupid. In fact they are quite smart. They will find a way to inspire terror if they look hard enough, and we can't stop them no matter how much freedom we give up for "security". Its just the cold hard truth. The disadvantage to giving up freedom for "security" is that it shows that we are afraid. Isn't that the whole point of terrorism? Whether they will make another attack is uncertain to everyone except them, and I am in no way saying that there will be another attack, nor am I saying there will not be. We just cannot know.

Be that as it may, I would rather have my freedom and live life to the fullest, and enjoy it. Granted, if I am ever a victim of a terrorist attack, I promise you I will not enjoy it, but since there is little or nothing we can do to prevent it, I will not worry about it unless it happens.

Basically, I'm not willing to relinquish any freedom. None at all. Whether I have the power to influence the seizure of my freedom is a different matter, but I don't have to like it!

I guess I'm just saying that in this area of life, what happens will happen, no matter what we do, worrying won't help, neither will "security" so why bother? Take each day as it comes, and if the world doesn't collapse on us today, then we don't need to worry about it. If it collapses tomorrow, then we can worry about it then, but "security" will do us no good.

This is just my opinion, so feel free to tear it to pieces if you like!

Kielo

[This message has been edited by Kielo (04-12-2002 05:47 PM).]

	⇧ top of page ⇧
All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format.