So the Feds apparently have a database on all travelers

When did I say remove all tools? All I said was that the systems are only as good as the people who enter run them. I never said the tools and systems are the problem.

 

the database isn't being used to make arrests, just deciding who should be searched and checked out....nothing more. I think that's innocent enough. C'mon, cops do it all the time. They pull over certain kinds of cars....or plates from other states....isn't that profiling?

 

The database is just another tool. Think of it as a market researching tool - because that's exactly what it's based on. Just as a marketing research tool doesn't tell you who will be your customer, this tool doesn't tell you who will be a terrorist.

What it does tell you who is more likely to be one. Maybe only by 20%, which is still small.

But here's what a database does. There isn't enough resources to check everyone out equally. So we have to pick an choose. It could be random - and then you get security pulling over little old grandma and her cookies.

Or it could be focused based on the data.

I'd rather our resources go towards checking out likely criminals then your grandmother.

 

Trust your government and become a slave.

Liberty= the government the slave of the individual

Tyranny= the individual the slave of the government

I once read that there is almost nothing done in your life that is not controlled in some way by local, state or federal government.

except maybe going to the bathroom and making babies and they are now regulating septic systems and birth control.

 

But you're still missing my point. The tool is only as good as the people using it. The problem with this program isn't the tool but that bureaucracy, incompetence and corruption could lead to potential abuse and other problems from the use of such a tool. A jackhammer is a great tool but if the people using it are incompetent they will do a lot of damage. In that regard then you should carefully consider who uses a jackhammer and limit its use. The database tools aren't evil or good in and of themselves. The danger is that bureaucracy, incompetance and even outright corruption will lead to abuse of that system that will cause a lot of problems for innocent travellers. The only guarentee we have that that won't happen is trust in the government. Unfortunately its the same government that we know in many many many matters is rife with bureaucracy, incompetant and corrupt which is why I'm uneasy when a new unaccountable program is put forward.

 

Back on the meds, Mr McVie.

 

Nice insult, McVie was no lover of liberty, nor was he a patriot.
I remember men who loved liberty... like Patrick Henry-
Men like Henry, John Jay, Sam Adams, Madison, Ben Rush, Witherspoon, Washington saw liberty threatened by government and tried to give us a liberty we could hold... away from the grasp of centralized government... a trust we have lost.

A speech by Patrick Henry-
No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope that it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen, if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve.

This is no time for ceremony. The question before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty towards the majesty of heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.

Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren, till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation?

For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth -- to know the worst and to provide for it. I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided; and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years, to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House?

Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with these warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation -- the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motives for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies?

No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us; they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer on the subject? Nothing.

We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves longer.

Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament.

Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne. In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope.

If we wish to be free -- if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending -- if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained, we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of Hosts is all that is left us!

They tell us, sir, that we are weak -- unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance, by lying supinely on our backs, and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot?

Sir, we are not weak, if we make a proper use of the means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. Three millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us.

The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable -- and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come!

It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, "Peace! Peace!" -- but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!

Patrick Henry - March 23, 1775

How sweet it was to be 'patriotic' to Mother England when they so tenderly stripped liberty from the colonists.

 

Hmmm, yeeeeaaaah. Jay and Madison were federalists. It's fairly ridiculous, IMO to claim they didn't love liberty because they saw the need for a centralized government. I'll take the Constitution anyday.

 

Jay and Madison were very much on board with limited federal government- individual liberty.
And they both knew more about the Constitution and what it meant for limiting the role of the federal government than both of us put together.

True it's been years since I read the federalist papers, but memory serves me right their view of central government and our current central government are day and night.

What our government controls and regulates would have had them 'bearing arms' in resistance.

 

BTW- please don't think I live in a bomb shelter with 2 yr food supply, guns and John Birch Society pamplets littering the place.

I love history and read too much, post too much and you can be certain I don't take my self as seriously as others might take me.

I've enjoyed your posts.

I hate strong central governments.

 

OK, that's what I was starting to think, lol.

Fair enough.

 

roflcopter.