US turning into a police state/nation

[TetsuoShima]

If you guys on the other side of the Atlantic aren't carefull, you're going to be under near constant surveillance pretty soon (meaning, it won't be very hard to get some nationwide surveilance actions going where even common people can be 'tracked').

 

It doesn't mean that they are going to use these powers, but that isn't the point, the point is that they can. I can understand that a person who actually owns for example a store wants to know everything that is going on in his store. But the US intelligence agencies/government doesn't own its citizens, it's rather the other way around (in a manner of speaking)....

 

Example: say you hire a security agent for your store and he does the checking for you, but then he also starts checking your personal activities... Wouldn't you say the agent is out of line...

 

Well, not so, if these last proposals are voted through....

 

 

Senate Judiciary Committee approves Big Brother bills

 

 

If you keep this up, mr representatives/senators, soon the land of freedom, will have no freedom or privacy left...

I don't live there, but if I did, I'd be worried... :stare:

 

(imo protecting freedom by taking it away is no protection at all)

[S0V13T]

[vyper]

I think any western nation can consider itself a police state, or close to one, these days. The truly sad thing is we're not doing a damned thing about it.

[MrDad]

I think any western nation can consider itself a police state' date=' or close to one, these days. The truly sad thing is we're not doing a damned thing about it.[/quote']

I hope you are not criticizing your government. In a police state, one is arrested for doing so.

[Antipodean]

Well, already in the US, free speech has been massively curtailed. The FBI has the ability to confine protest and disagreement with the administration to policed and defined "Free speech zones".

 

What a load of semi-fascist crap. Yeah, sure you can have free speech BUT only where we say so, and ONLY once we've made sure that nobody's going to have the chance to hear you.

 

Bah! That's not bloody democracy. No way is that democracy.

[MrDad]

Well, already in the US, free speech has been massively curtailed. The FBI has the ability to confine protest and disagreement with the administration to policed and defined "Free speech zones".

 

What a load of semi-fascist crap. Yeah, sure you can have free speech BUT only where we say so, and ONLY once we've made sure that nobody's going to have the chance to hear you.

 

Bah! That's not bloody democracy. No way is that democracy.

Actually, the FBI has no such power. The rules governing public protests to which you refer are state or local laws and are primarily the result of court decisions on abortion protests. As an Australian, you should be far more concerned about your civil rights. They are far weaker than mine ever will be.

[Antipodean]

My mistake - it's actually the US Secret Service, not the FBI that has such powers.

 

Quote: "When Bush travels around the United States, the Secret Service visits the location ahead of time and orders local police to set up “free speech zones†or “protest zones†where people opposed to Bush policies (and sometimes sign-carrying supporters) are quarantined."

 

(quote taken from "The American Conservative" Online.)

 

MrDad: Mate - You might winge about my liberties as an Aussie, but at least I can protest my Prime Minister, without being "quarantined". :)

[GorunNova]

It's all a matter of definition, I guess. A state that monitors the communications of it's citizens without warrants or actual, existing evidence of them being connected to a specific crime = lowest range of police state, imho.

 

Edit: There have been actual cases of paper-checking in the US just for the sake of compliance testing... they don't really look at the passes, don't stop you if you say you forgot 'em, but if you choose to deliberately not show yours... you're screwed. Not to mention 'secret laws and regulations' protected by the NSA, and you've got a bad recipe. If you don't believe they're there, remember that the 'listening in thing' that's been blowing up in the administration's faces was one of those 'secret laws and regulations' until it was uncovered.

 

Also, if the Patriot Act 'summary arrest on suspicion of terrorism' clause is still active, that means that the government CAN arrest people without evidence, is not required to give them time in court or even notify family that they haven't just 'disappeared'. Hell, they can blatantly lie about where they are or hide their location / situation as a matter of 'national security'...

 

Sounds more and more like a police state to me every day.

 

Edit 2: Antipodean... yeah, quarantine of people exercising their right to free speech is NOT a good sign, either. -_-'

 

Edit 3: Corrected 'summary'... One shouldn't type and talk to someone at the same time, it seems. Thanks, Antipodean. ^^'

[MrDad]

My mistake - it's actually the US Secret Service, not the FBI that has such powers.

 

Quote: "When Bush travels around the United States, the Secret Service visits the location ahead of time and orders local police to set up “free speech zones†or “protest zones†where people opposed to Bush policies (and sometimes sign-carrying supporters) are quarantined."

 

(quote taken from "The American Conservative" Online.)

 

MrDad: Mate - You might winge about my liberties as an Aussie, but at least I can protest my Prime Minister, without being "quarantined". :)

Actually, the Secret Service has no such powers, either. They depend upon the cooperation of local authorities, which is rarely refused. I believe you have confused protest with a personal audience.

[Antipodean]

Mr Dad: Rarely refused? I can't find one single example of such refusal. Regardless of your finagling over the legal details, you can't deny that the authority of the Presidents office is being used to suppress dissent. In practice, "free speech zones" are a now a part of the normal modus opperandi of your executive, meaning that one of the arms of your government is actually and actively engaged in the task of suppressing free political expression. Think about it. You can't tell me that such conduct is healthy for a democracy.

 

And the fact remains that at least I can protest my Prime Minister, without being "quarantined" - Umm, YOU CAN'T. And no I'm not confusing protest with a personal audience. The fact is that postesting in a vacuum is pointless, stupid and impotent. Well that's what "free speech zones" are all about; confining protest to a vacuum.

 

Now add to this the legal possibility of 'summarary arrest on suspicion of terrorism' under the Patriot Act (as mentioned by GorunNova).

 

And add to this the Big Brother style surveillance regime proposed in the laws mentioned in the Article which started this topic.

 

Now if you include the fact that the current US annual expenditure for military and defence is somewhere between $441.6 billion $669.8 Billion this year, which accounts for over 40% of the WHOLE worlds Military spending. In fact Military spending accounts for OVER 50% of the United States discretionary budget. This means that more is being spent on the military than EVERYTHING ELSE PUT TOGETHER.

 

 

Anyhow, put this all together, though I'm sure there's more besides, and the picture you get is one of a militaristic state, where an ongoing assault is taking place on peoples civil rights, with the threat looming large of a panoptic police state.

 

 

Well, that is starting to sound more and more like some of the regimes we thought we'd consigned to the dustbin of history, no?

 

 

 

Anyhow, I think these are issues most of the english speaking world is being confronted with, not just the United States... Most of the developed world even. I guess the trick is for the citizens of the worlds democracies to keep their eyes open for the threats to our democratic rights and processes. Eternal Vigilence and all that. MOST ESPECIALLY we need to be wary of the assaults on our basic liberties that our various governments try to get away with in the name of fighting terrorism.

[MrDad]

I live here. I know what is going on. I have no idea where you guys get this crap. As for the proposed laws, Bush's efforts have been stymied by a steady erosion of allies and popular support. He does not have the votes to pass them and is likely to lose many more allies come November. He has lost his court challenges on the summary arrests, detainee treatment and wiretaps. That is why he is making these desperate attempts to legalize what he wants done. Every day I see people like Al Gore, John McCain and Colin Powell protest and even actively oppose the President's decisions and actions. There have been hundreds, maybe thousands, of public marches and protests. None were "supressed". There was even that Sheehan woman camped for months outside his ranch in Texas. The US military budget has historically been quite large, but apparently only recently has become evidence of a police state. The threat of a police state is overblown; apparent only to those ignorant of the current internal political situation here.

[Antipodean]

Mr.Dad: There are MANY many American citizens concerned about the state of American democracy. Where do I get my info from? American sources. From "The American Conservative" Online (on the right) to oldamericancentury.org on the left. My arguement is a legitmate one shared by no small amount of US citizens.

 

You have the right to disagree but please don't just write off what I say just because I'm not American myself. It doesn't make me any less informed than most US citizens. In fact, it would seem that I'm even better informed than yourself on this count. I do advise you to look up the numerous incidents where "Free speech zones" have been applied. Its easily google-able.

 

As I said above, its clear that one arm of your government IS actually and actively engaged in the task of suppressing free political expression. Sure, protest is still alive in the US... But seriously mate, does it not worry you that your own executive is trying to stymy just that?

 

Anyhow, I don't know if you have it in the US too, but in Australia, we have a saying: "Play the ball, not the man". Take my thoughts on, challenge them by all means. But don't just dismiss them because I'm an Aussie. It's intellectually immature and speaks of a tribalism that doesn't belong in this globalised world of ours.

[Guest c4evap]

I live in the USA as well. Police state? Of a sort no doubt. Yes we have lost some freedoms (damn pesky terrorists). It pisses me off that I'm not allowed to cary a box cutter or a bottle of flameable liquid onto a US airline anymore ;)

 

Seriously though...finding a balance between freedom and security is no small feat. The only question is where to draw the line.

 

c4 :(

[MrDad]

"Free Speech Zones" don't stifle dissent. They are weak attempts to insulate the President from his detractors. They do nothing but hide the President from reality. You see, I am aware of them but also that their effects upon public discourse are marginal at best. I would be worried if it were effective, but it's not. Dissent is everywhere. It's in the newspapers, the TV, the movie theaters, the Capitol, the workplace, the internet and countless other places. Those Americans whom you pointed out are dissenting. The Democrats are dissenting. Even Republicans are turning against the President. The Alien and Sedition Act, McCarthyism, Cointelpro, Watergate. This isn't some new development originating with G.W. Bush. Dubya is having no better luck muzzling the American people than these others have. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights will still be around long after Bush goes back to Crawford to chop firewood.

[Guest c4evap]

SNIPPET:

 

Even Republicans are turning against the President.

Mainly because he's a lame duck. They want another of their candidates in the White House next election (LOL) and since there's an anti-Bush ground swell...well, better distance yourselves fellas! Makes perfect sense.

 

c4 B)