Meanwhile, in North Dakota ...

[Devils Advocate]

(08-27-2015, 03:27 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No.  In order for something to be awry you need to see something going awry.  There is absolutely no evidence of anyone wanting to "occupy this country".  The Patriot Act has been around for over a decade and we have not had any government takeovers.  We have zero citizens held as political prisoners, and there has been no extortion, ar seizing of property.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with using drones as long as a warrant is required.  The level of paranoia in a country with very few limits on freedom and no political prisoners is ridiculous.

And finally I find it even more ridiculousn that the same people who claim every citizen should be able to own every type of weapon wants to restrict what the police can use.  it makes no sense.

Don't be so naive, Fred. 'Somebody' definitely hopes to occupy us. We're surrounded by evidence, exhibit 1 being the militarization of law enforcement. But let's look at further evidence, shall we?

The Church Comittee clearly outlines abuses committed by the several alphabet agencies as well as branches of the military.

COINTELPPRO offers nice segway into those U.S. Political prisoners you deny. Of course first, we must define the term.

Here Encyclopedia Brittanica define Political Prisoner as;

Quote:political prisoner, a person who is imprisoned because that person’s actions or beliefs are contrary to those of his or her government. This is the most general sense of a term that can be difficult to define. In practice, political prisoners often cannot be distinguished from other types of prisoners.

Amnesty International defines them as;

Quote:Amnesty International campaigns for the release of prisoners of conscience – people who have been jailed because of their political, religious or other conscientiously-held beliefs, ethnic origin, sex, color, language, national or social origin, economic status, birth, sexual orientation or other status, provided that they have neither used nor advocated violence.

Hmmm, I wonder if we can find anyone that fits into these descriptions?

Martin Luther King Jr ring a bell?

I've read several times that

Quote:"international law defines political prisoners as those who struggle against racist or oppressive regimes, including through force"

Under that definition many activists from the 60's and 70's fit the bill, according to former Mayor, Congressman and U.S. Ambassador the the United Nations Andrew Young, who said;

Quote:"We still have hundreds of people that I would categorize as political prisoners in our prisons,"

Just ask former NY attorney Lynne Stewart what the Patriot Act is all about.

Onto limited freedoms. If...

Arbitrary Justice

Assassination of U.S. citizens

Indefinite Detention

Warrantless Searches

Secret Evidence

Secret Courts

... aren't indicative of limited freedoms, then I'll have what you're having. The use of drones is one thing, using weapons mounted drones is brings it to another level.

And finally, a level playing field is only fair. The right bear arms isn't to kill Bambi. It's to guard against tyranny, which brings this reply full circle.