Abenja,
Again you say they're being developed. I ask where's the evidence?
I posted several links about the Combat Zones that See technology... look back a couple of posts.
Sure they have a lot of classified stuff. They are allowed to.
So because something can be done, means it always should?
Thank you
Essentially you are against progress.
Depends on what kind of progress. Not all progress is good, if a nation was develop a means to create bio-weapons that could selectively kill certain groups of people, would you be for it; against it; neutral if it was considered progress?
For someone that claims to be "for the constituions" you would actually impeded a scientists right to go forward?
To develop the hypothetical bio-weapon I described? Uh yeah, the guy would be developing something that would only be used for purposes that could only be described as diabolical
And don't genetic BS. I've heard that 1000 times before, I asked the person to provide the evidence, they called me a shill and they never came back.
It was a hypothetical, but it makes a valid point -- not all technological advances are good ones.
I wasn't being facetious. I was meant as a compliment. Many CTers don't know history. They make it up.
I'm sorry about that, I honestly thought you were being sarcastic.
Again, I have asked to see this evidence for this magic supercomputer that's going to store all this data. You haven't provided it from a (reliable) source, I'm not going to take your word for it.
google "Combat Zones That See". There's a wikipedia article on that, several links which include the ones I mentioned.
Hold on a sec. In a previous post you said this "in the UK they, to the best of my knowledge, have proposed linking up all those cameras to a centralized computer which would monitor everything automatically, report suspicious behavior, and even catalogue information on people." Now you are saying "The British to my knowledge have never proposed doing this." Can't you keep your story straight?
I made an error, I meant to say that the british did not, to the best of my knowledge, ever develop this.
I did state though that the UK government did plan to aggregate all internet and telephone communications for up to a year. I can't find the link currently, but I'm looking.
And that blimp was used only once during a Republican convention a few years ago. Guess what? It hasn't been used since.
What kind of blimp? Is it the same one I'm talking about?
Also, just because Ray Kelly says he wants it doesn't mean it's going to happen.
It's still very disturbing because he's a powerful individual who wants to employ this kind of technology to place an entire city under 24/7 surveillance.
While a lot are politically motivated (with the exception of the ACLU), they are serving their purpose.
Actually, the ACLU is the predominant civil-liberties group which I'm citing which listed the UK as being an endemic surveillance society
Well since you seem to be against other nations when they reduce civil rights, I didn't see you post anywhere on JREF about how what Iran was doing during the election protests was abusive.
I don't know if I posted anything regarding Iran, though I think what happened there was appalling
How about posts on China?
I think the Chinese government is repulsive.
None. All I see you say is "AMERICA IS EVIL MAN!"
I care a lot about America because I live here, and I see it showing a progressive disregard for the rights of it's people. I suppose it may be selfish that I care about my own country more than that of others, though this does not mean I do not care about any other country at all.
Nope. It was hip with the young college crowd kids (at least where I was) to be Constitution huggers when Bush was in office.
I rarely felt popular criticizing Bush; I generally felt a constant assault by crazy right-wing authoritarians who supported everything Bush did and felt that the only way America could be safe was for us to give up all our freedoms, let the government do whatever it wanted, wage war on whoever we wanted, and torture whoever we please.
A lot more people have jumped on the bandwagon now, particullarly the right and those who don't like Obama.
I personally don't like either Bush or Obama.
All movements start out with a genuine purpose. The people/groups that first started protesting Nam were against the war, draft, or both.
True
Some fled to another country as a way of protest
Correct, and it was a smart move. If I was alive back then I would have probably taken that route.
You would be naive to think that everyone that protested cared.
I agree, but I personally think that you think a lot less people that protested cared, in comparison to those than really did.
"You idiot." I touched a nerve with you. It's probably because I have you figured out like the back of my own hand.
No, I said it out of exasperation. Many of them attached onto the Constitutional arguments because they happened to be good arguments. Did some attach onto it disingenuously? Of course, but I don't think all of them did, or necessarily even the majority of them did.
You jumped on the Constitution bandwagon because it's cool. Is your life so empty that you have to follow a bunch of people who don't know squat about the Constitution.
No, that's not really my reason at all. I am honestly scared that our country is going seriously downhill, and the government cares less and less and less about the Constitution, which I value because it is created to impose limits on what governments can and cannot do, separates and divides powers, and is basically created to reasonably prevent abuse of power. I do worry that America will end up eventually becoming like countries like China, the former Soviet Union, and so on. I personally believe that with current trends that this will become more common worldwide.
Are you that arrogant seriously? You're putting yourself on the same level as a constituional scholar because "most constitutional scholars would probably say the same things I said?" Don't kid yourself.
Dude, I'm not saying I'm a Constitutional scholar -- I'm simply saying that I've heard Constitutional scholars espouse some arguments similar to the ones I've made.
I think that's a load of crap. I have the right to be concerned about things without being an authority on it. If I have physiological symptoms that are consistent with a certain disease, you can be your ass I'm going to the doctor to get it checked out, and I'm not going to enroll in pre-med, go to med-school as I get sicker and sicker.
And that country was an example of one that has no civil rights. So think twice before you jump on the evil American bandwagon.
My point though is that if America becomes a nation that has no regards for the rights of it's people, we would effectively become more and more like these nations.
Oh don't give me that. You're looking for an out. The Patriot Act was proposed in a month.
I'm not looking for an out, some things are implemented rapidly, some are not.
INRM
