What is Digg?167 Comments
- gronne, on 10/12/2007, -5/+227What's the point of preventing terrorists from destroying freedom and democracy if our own leaders are working to dismantle it?
- matrox212, on 10/12/2007, -3/+105Agreed. I don't know how you can even have real democracy without freedom of speech. What good are choices you make without the full facts?
- Drahkar, on 10/12/2007, -2/+90To quote something a person I knew in New York said shortly after 9/11. 'I'd be willing to give up my freedoms if it meant I felt safe again.' Unfortunately this is the sentiment from a lot of people in the US. The mindless sheep out there. I flat out told her that if her grandfather who died in Pearl Harbor was standing there when she said that, he'd likely have slapped her senseless for saying such an atrocity.
- ScornForSega, on 10/12/2007, -3/+79@gronne
The sad part is that they're so damn short-sighted that they don't see the irony in their own actions. - MaximusIGN, on 10/12/2007, -5/+67This has nothing to do with stopping terrorists. It's about control over the people. Using fear, aggression and suppression of the populous gives them absolute control and power, which is the true end game.
- MattL920, on 10/12/2007, -8/+69If the terrorists hate us for our freedoms, this will make them hate us less.
- ajb2015, on 10/12/2007, -4/+59are you ***** kidding me?
so who really hates our freedoms? the terrorists or the neo-cons? - hoppdawg, on 10/12/2007, -6/+47Maybe we should just stop pissing of these fringe religious fanatics by changing our foreign policy to one that doesn't ***** up their countries.
Might have a long term benefit or two. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+41Wait a minute! Who gave Gingrich the right to say this out loud? To the Gitmo with him!
- InsomniaSlim, on 10/12/2007, -3/+39FTA:
"Gingrich, speaking at a Manchester awards banquet, said a "different set of rules" may be needed to reduce terrorists' ability to use the Internet and free speech to recruit and get out their message."
...then...
"Gingrich sharply criticized campaign finance laws he charged were reducing free speech and doing little to fight attack advertising."
WTF?!? Did anyone else do a double-take there? So his "new rules" don't apply to his re-election?
*sheesh* - gr4v3d1gg3r, on 10/12/2007, -2/+33All I know is if they blow up a city I still won't give up my freedom of speech,unless i'm in the city.
- ToxicBomber, on 10/12/2007, -13/+41Agreed. This is gonna sound mean...but oh well.
Gingrich, die plz. - Drahkar, on 10/12/2007, -11/+37@hoppdawg - Those were basically my thoughts. Our current problems stem from our Foreign policies that have been put into effect by the Neo-Cons. Hell, even our Allies are starting to balk at the attitude coming from Washington DC. If there is a fear of losing one of our Cities. Then I think we really need to reconsider where things are going.
And, as a finisher. I think everyone should take a moment and read the following. Because we seem to forget about it a lot these days. And most importantly I suggest people read Paragraph two.
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor. - arkmtech, on 10/12/2007, -2/+25"Sell not virtue to purchase wealth, nor Liberty to purchase power." - B. Franklin
How terrible. :( Sometimes it feels as though the U.S. is slowly slipping below the reign of martial law. - d00ley, on 10/12/2007, -2/+25It's interesting that Osama's stated goal in using terrorism within the U.S. was to cause our government to react by reducing our civil liberties which would result in the stagnation and then fall of our civilization...and, absurdly enough, it's working.
It's also interesting to note that bin Laden's "foreign" policy is to bleed us into bankruptcy, of which they are also succeeding. Here is a bin Laden quote from a three year old article cited below, '"All that we have to do is to send two mujahedeen to the furthest point east to raise a piece of cloth on which is written al Qaeda, in order to make generals race there to cause America to suffer human, economic and political losses without their achieving anything of note other than some benefits for their private corporations," bin Laden said.'
I can't believe we have been this easily damaged and possibly destroyed. We had the wrong leaders at the wrong time :-(
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/11/01/binladen.tape/ - FzArEkTaH, on 10/12/2007, -5/+26may I be the first to say that Newt Gingrich can suck my balls
- TheWedge, on 10/12/2007, -4/+24You wouldn't be the first...
- fitchmicah, on 10/12/2007, -3/+21Wow, people voted for him!?
- shinynew, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20Terrorism is simply the vehicle they use to, ironically, drive fear into the population. They then use their fear to get what changes they want. This of course isn't want everyone is doing, a select few are consciously doing this. A few, I think, are unconsciously doing this. And one big guy is being told to do with without knowing it, or much of anything.
- r©ain, on 10/12/2007, -10/+27You liberals are all so short sighted.
Don't you see that the terrorists HATE us for our FREEDOMS!?!?!?
By getting rid of our freedoms, we'll all be made safer because the terrorists wont hate us anymore. - Artifez, on 10/12/2007, -3/+19Dead people are still free to say anything they want, they just don't take advantage of that right.
- jaydj, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14At least some dead people vote.
- steinbeckgirl, on 10/12/2007, -3/+16He hasn't decided yet if he will run for president yet? What!? He's joking right!?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14"Will no one seriously consider changes to free speech in this country before one of cities glows in the dark?"
I sure as hell won't. That whole city glowing in the dark ***** is exactly the kind of crap they spew to get you to cower at your own shadow. I'm so goddamned sick of the word terrorist it makes me want to puke. The real terrorists are in DC. - cmearns, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14So, suddenly the question becomes - who is better at promoting fear, aggression, and suppression?
Makes me think of "V for Vendetta". Its all about control through fear. The government is just trying to stay in control. - Easty, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Ben Franklin. Apocryphally. - Artifez, on 10/12/2007, -5/+15That guy is a professional ***** who should be kept far away from the workings of our government. Changing the constitution, or at least the interperatation of it, will do nothing to stop terrorism. It would make silencing all dissent easier, that's likely why it's so attractive to the theocons.
- ephemerae, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13Disgusting.
- WhiteTeeRash, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12If you liked "W", you'll love Gingrich.
(The terrorists are going to kill us. Vote for me.) - pabster, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9It's called treason.
- Aldrenean, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10I would hope that no one would ever consider limiting free speech. If one of our cities should be destroyed, it won't be because of free speech, it will be the terrorist actions of the U.S. Government provoking the rapidly growing ranks of our enemies.
- deadbaby, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12Everytime Newt opens his ugly little mouth it's like a present to the Liberal movement in this country. Keep talking Newt, please. I love it.
- JonForTheWin, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12@ajb2015
The terrorists _or_ the neo-cons??
They're the same people. - xchino, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8@Karyyk
He's not an elected official - Mulo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9The unfortunate truth is that we have had our collective asses kicked in a seriously profound manner because of 911. The result being that we as a nation are willing to exchange our freedoms for some sense or pretense of national security. The reality is the that the moment we passed the Patriot act the terrorists won, hands down, no discussion. The real target for 911 was not the World Trade center or the Pentagon, but the values and ideals that we Americans hold sacred. And we are such pussies for letting it happen. Do we want to grow our balls back and be a strong nation? Then lets face the threat of terrorism with our constitution intact. End of rant (step down from soapbox).
- coreman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Funny, the threat of global thermonuclear war didn't undo the Constitution, but many of the same Republican blowhards liked to hold it up as "this is why we're better than the USSR". So now a bunch of seriously disgruntled zealots might blow up one city. OK, cry me a river. In the game of tit-for-tat, Iran and Syria have a lot more to lose than the US does in that one.
Nashville, TN for Tehran, Iran. Pagosa Springs, (it's a suburb of Denver, after all!) CO, for Damascus, Syria. And if France, Germany or Luxemborg don't like it, we'll start on them, too.
As much as the Islamic wackjobs are letting their own propaganda drive them towards idiotic martyrdom, we in the Western world are also letting our collective fears be amplified by our own governments so it can justify its means and ends just like the Islamic governments do to their peoples. It helps keep all of our eyes off of the real problems we should be taking care of by making silly strawman arguments and smoke-and-mirrors threats seem far more real and dangerous than they really are.
As long as the Islamic communities in such places as the Chicago suburbs, Detroit, NYC and Portland, OR don't have a reason to really get their underwear all wrapped up aroudn their left hands, then the US is relatively safe from an inside job, even from them, because despite the rhetoric and chest-beating, people here are still way too comfortable and complacent to put their own selves in the line of fire for their (or others...) beliefs.
Collectively, we in the US are just too comfortable and complacent to really get all hot and bothered to do something violent over a long, sustained period. Not that we don't have fits (Fright Night in Detroit, the Rodney King riots in LA, life in Cincinnati, OH, etc), but so far it all tends to just burn itself out eventually. Even the ALF/ELF wackjobs come to justice eventually.
Wasn't one of the big sources of money for the Irish Republican Army during the Troubles actually $$$ sent over to them from people in cities like Boston with lots of Irish expatriates and sympathisers?
The Police State won't make us safer, it'll make us fear not only the "evil doers", but our own governments as well. - GutterBumber, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10I wonder if he would welcome the same re-examination of the 2nd amendment... Somehow, I doubt it.
- cranium, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10Wow, the conservatives are finally getting around to treating the first amendment the same way that liberals have been treating the second amendment for decades.
Remember what liberals have been saying all along, that the constitution is a "living document" and that it is "open to the interpretation of the times"???
Guess what? Liberals were wrong then, and Gingrich is wrong now. - Artifez, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10Our appesement options seem to be dwindling. Converting to Islam doesn't seem to work because they are killing eachother in Iraq due to some absurd disagreement. This could be the only viable alternative.
P.S. if you can't handle sarcasm please hit yourself with your keyboard until you stop being a moron. - ruprecht, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I for one welcome Gingrich's short-sighted, astonishingly stupid comments. May he have the freedom to spout his nonsense for the rest of his days.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." -- Voltaire - JupiterLander, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10"It's funny to see all you self-proclaimed "critical thinkers" treat the Constitution as if it were the pot smokers Holy Bible, beyond discussion or review. It's a tool. It's too holy to even discuss looking at it? Where's the ***** freedom in that?"
well the fact that an article was written about it and people in power are trying to persuade and succeeding in changing the meaning of the constitution AND it is being discussed here makes your point moot. - pyrolyte, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7"I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing,
and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical.
Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed, generally establish the
encroachments on the rights of the people which have produced them.
An observation of this truth should render honest republican
governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions as not to
discourage them too much. It is a medicine necessary for the
sound health of the government."
Thomas Jefferson
Source:Letter to James Madison, Jan 30, 1787 - AxeSwinger, on 10/12/2007, -6/+11@spoony
Actually, the fanatics want us out of the middle east not to convert us or at least that was the statements of Al Queda. I'm not saying we should leave I'm just pointing out its not about conversion. - fyngyrz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6"I have yet to read where the Patriot Act has been used against a single American Citizen."
1) http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/nevada/2003/nov/04/110410819.html
2) http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/june2004/061904patriotact.htm
3) http://www.nysun.com/article/28232
4) http://www.bespacific.com/mt/archives/009035.html
5) http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/07/15/200905.php
6) http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1112778310144
7) http://www.clairewolfe.com/wolfesblog/00000143.html
...that took me no more than a few seconds to find. I typed "patriot act used" into google, and cherry picked a few stories. There are many more.
Wake up. The Patriot Act is not about terrorism. It never was. Most legislators never read it; they just voted it up because that is what they were told to do. - steinbeckgirl, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Unfortunetly I have heard that before (about him running). I thought it was a joke the first time too. Let's hope it is.
- JonAce, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Don't come crying to me when you've lost the right to say something like that.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10Seriously, it's time We the People start getting organized and prepared. If you think this country will go back to being run as a Constitutional Republic just by voting in the 'right' people, you must be smokin' some of that really good *****.
The demons in Washington DC view us as cattle because we act like cattle.
One man can change the world...if he has enough ammunition. - geekee, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9FTA
"Gingrich, speaking at a Manchester awards banquet, said a "different set of rules" may be needed to reduce terrorists' ability to use the Internet and free speech to recruit and get out their message."
Recruiting for a terrorist organization already goes beyond simple free speech and into the realm of conspiracy to commit murder. As for getting out their message, it's bankrupt and should be addressed openly by rational people, instead of being suppressed.
FTA
"Gingrich sharply criticized campaign finance laws he charged were reducing free speech and doing little to fight attack advertising."
It's amusing that he's pointed out that our free speech has already been limited in an important area, and the ACLU and other liberal organizations aren't even challenging it. - smoothmedia, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9Newt Gingrich, "destroying the republican party since 2001"
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8"Oh yeah and remember, the 2nd Amendment is there to enforce the 1st."
You got that right brother! -
Show 51 - 100 of 164 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is