New "Official" Declaration of Independence

[nacktman]

The shrub and company released the new approved and official version of the Declaration of Independence today July fourth.

It reads:

We hold these truths to be self evident, that all White, Heterosexual, Christian, Wealthy, American Men are created equal, that they are endowed by the Christian God with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life and Liberty and the pursuit of Security through military might.
--
That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Supreme Courts deriving their just powers from the President and Vice President.
--
That whenever any form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to try and alter or abolish it, and to try to initiate new Government, not that it would work, but they can try all they want.

**************

The thing is this is no joke. It is the mentality of the cabal.

[Naturist Mark]

Time for a new Declaration (http://www.buffaloreadings.com/article.php?story=decofind):


http://www.history.com/minisites/declaration/images/declaration_400x300_image.jpg

<UL TYPE=SQUARE>A Renewed Declaration of Independence
July 4, 2007.
By the People of United States of America:

When in the Course of American History, it becomes clear that the powers of the few have once again become out of balance with the checks meant to right them, it is the duty of the citizens of The United States of America to remind those in power of their equal station with the people, and that it is the founding principle of this Nation, that we all must consent to the practice of the powers handed down to them by her people, or that power shall be taken away. It is with this then that we remind the current administration of its long list of abuses, and demand that it turns over its power immediately to the people.


We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all 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 Us, 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 shown, that humankind 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 this Nation, and yes to the extent that it is true, the whole world; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the current Administration of the United States 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.

-- It was appointed to office amidst strong foul stank of election fraud
-- It has repeatedly, and without remorse appointed unqualified cronies to offices of sensitive National Security
-- It has conspired to deny the American People their Rights which have been defended by Blood and Bills since the inception of this Constitutional Democracy
-- It has prized the excesses and wealth of its friends over the decent and moral possible course of action
-- It has engaged in unprovoked and illegal military actions under the guise of security, the true object of which being greed and profit
-- It has rejected science and reason, and substituted with doubt and fear
-- It has neglected the future, and instead focused on short sighted political and personal gain
-- It has undermined the morality of our democratic society with torture, secret overseas prisons, and criminalized opposing political protest
-- It has desecrated the separation of church and state for political and personal gains
-- It has demonstrated its willing ineptitude during events of massive National Crisis
-- It has corrupted, to the extent it is able, the Free Press of this Nation
-- It has demonstrated its willingness to mislead the national debate, and operate in duplicitous secrecy, and impede the discovery of the truth
-- It has subverted the checks and balances upon its offices
-- It has perverted the concept of non-dynastic leadership
-- It has defrauded its power by selling it to corporate and otherwise anti-democratic interests
-- It has misused the treasure and children of this Nation as tools for the gain of themselves and constituency
-- It has irreparably damaged the psyche of this Nation, and has created many new enemies and haters of Our Country, worldwide
-- It has failed to protect the weak
-- It has failed to provide for the sick and dying
-- It has consolidated its power in ways that go against the principles of Our Constitution

Throughout these outrages, we have watched as time and again the congress, the courts, and the press lie down and pass their responsibility off, hoping some mythical next level would stand up for what is right, each fearing the repercussions of what may happen if they did their civil duty. This is the mark of a system that has failed. What they have failed to recall was the repercussions of what would happen if they did not execute their civil duty. The first of which being Tyranny, plundering our democracy, sedating our intelligence, and leading to chaos in the face of Global Climate and Civil disasters. Such a governance shall not be allowed amongst free people.

We, therefore, the People and Representatives of the United States of America, in Peaceful Assembly, 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 this land, solemnly publish and declare, That these United States are, and of Right ought to be Free from the Tyrannical and generally Inept Leadership of the Current Administration. And that immediately and without further harm on this Nation, George W. Bush, Richard Cheney, and all of their appointees and officers are hereby ordered to vacate their offices, and relinquish any claims to power or authority of those offices.

Sincerely the Undersigned (http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/RenewedDeclaration) [/list]

Mark

[MoonShadow]

Great read, Mark! My signature is there!

If only.......... http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/disappointed.gif

[usmc1]

Sign me up, I'll be heading back to the cabin for my arms and to tell the woman and kids so long.

[closetnudist]

Wow this is the funniest thing I've read in a long time. For a minute I thought I was on CNN,NBC,CBS,MSNBC, and the New York Times web site at the same time.

[Naturist Mark]

I think we found us a Tory!

[MJ_KC]

Originally posted by closetnudist:
Wow this is the funniest thing I've read in a long time. For a minute I thought I was on CNN,NBC,CBS,MSNBC, and the New York Times web site at the same time.
I saw conservatives writing even worse things about Bill Clinton and wanting him out of office. Now we see the flip side.

[texasjoe]

Where can I put my "John Hancock?"

[Naturist Mark]

Originally posted by texasjoe:
Where can I put my "John Hancock?"
You can sign the online petition HERE (http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/RenewedDeclaration) or add to the comments here. (http://bluehorde.blogspot.com/2007/07/renewed-declaration-of-independence.html)

[Journeyman]

Very clever. Thanks for posting it, Mark. To give credit where it's due, the "new" declaration was written by 'kingotho' (aka Otho Thundercleese) on
http://www.buffaloreadings.com on May 28, 2007.

Is that your nom de plume, or was it written by someone who looks a bit like you?

[Naturist Mark]

Very clever. Thanks for posting it, Mark. To give credit where it's due, the "new" declaration was written by 'kingotho' (aka Otho Thundercleese) on
http://www.buffaloreadings.com
on May 28. 2007. That is correct, you'll note that I link to his original post at the very beginning of my post: Time for a new Declaration (http://www.buffaloreadings.com/article.php?story=decofind) And he is given author credit on the Petition page (http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/RenewedDeclaration) - as is Thomas Jefferson.

-Mark

[usmc1]

Originally posted by Naturist Mark:
I think we found us a Tory!

Hold on, I'll get the tar & feathers and rail.

[closetnudist]

This is the problem with you libs. You want to call me a tory well fine. You want to tar and feather me fine. I understand, truth be told you couldn't debate me for 5 minutes in the arena of ideas. I don't attack you on your posts but someone with different views comes on and you all jump on him. If you want to go line by line on your little declaration, bring it!!!!

[Boreas]

Originally posted by closetnudist:
This is the problem with you libs. You want to call me a tory well fine. You want to tar and feather me fine. I understand, truth be told you couldn't debate me for 5 minutes in the arena of ideas. I don't attack you on your posts but someone with different views comes on and you all jump on him. If you want to go line by line on your little declaration, bring it!!!!

At the risk of starting something, may I ask how you can still support Bush and his beliefs?

[Boreas]

This is a brilliant new declaration. I hope that things start to shift to a more reasonable, democracy for you guys. I think the whole recent events with Libby speaks volumes about ideology in Washington. It is time for a change. I'd also like to see the tendency to drop the name calling of lib vs conservative etc. It serves no useful purpose other than to build walls and polarize.

[Bobx23456]

Originally posted by Still_Boreas:

At the risk of starting something, may I ask how you can still support Bush and his beliefs?


At the risk of starting something, may I ask how you can still support Clinton, Kennedy, Pelosi, Kerry, Edwayds, B. Hussein Obama, or any of the rest of their ilk?

Blessings

Bob

[Boreas]

Actually, as a Canadian I cannot comment on American leaders, so you make a huge assumption about who I follow. I would like to see a move away from policies that support only the capitalists such as Cheney and Halliburton. The almighty dollar is not the only measurement of a successful society. I believe in the ability for the "little guy" to have the opportunity to succeed rather than be squashed by policies created to support big business only.

[Bobx23456]

Originally posted by Still_Boreas:
I think the whole recent events with Libby speaks volumes about ideology in Washington.


Indeed, a politically motivated crimial prosecution clearly demonstrates that total lack of integrety of the Democratic party.

And, of course Bush has his head so far up his bung hole that he can't hear any of the people.

Democrats, Republicans, same sh**, different shovel!

They are all a bunch of lying scumbags.

Blessings

Bob

[Boreas]

Democrats, Republicans, same sh**, different shovel!

They are all a bunch of lying scumbags.

Well, we can certainly agree on that point! http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/beam.gif

[MoonShadow]

Yes, Bobx, that is something we can agree on..... "Democrats, Republicans, same sh**, different shovel!"

[Pete Knight]

How can you tell when a politician is lying?



His lips move!!!

Pete Knight

[MoonShadow]

lol....lol.......that is a good one, Pete! http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/laugh.gif

[Naturist Mark]

Originally posted by closetnudist:
This is the problem with you libs. You want to call me a tory well fine. You want to tar and feather me fine. I'm sorry you didn't get the joke. We were making fun of ourselves - not you. The conceit is that this declaration would result in a new American Revolution like the one 230 years ago ... and that we would be divided between patriots and torys ... never explain a joke ...I understand, truth be told you couldn't debate me for 5 minutes in the arena of ideas. I don't attack you on your posts but someone with different views comes on and you all jump on him. again, my apologies that you felt attacked, it was meant as self deprecating levity. If you want to go line by line on your little declaration, bring it!!!! OK, I'm up for it.

-Mark

[Naturist Mark]

Actually, as a Canadian I cannot comment on American leaders, so you make a huge assumption about who I follow. I would like to see a move away from policies that support only the capitalists such as Cheney and Halliburton.
Let's see, do the actions of American leaders have an impact on Canadians? If so, you have leave to make your opinions known if you wish.

Personally I like capitalism. But Cheney and Haliburton aren't capitalists, they believe in an ideology that combines the power of the state with that of very large corporations. Political scientists have a name for that combination. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism)

-Mark

[Naturist Mark]

Originally posted by Bobx23456:
Indeed, a politically motivated crimial prosecution clearly demonstrates that total lack of integrety of the Democratic party.

A Republican prosecutor appointed by a Republican Attorney General to investigate and prosecute crimes pursuant to a complaint by the CIA, that resulted in an obstruction of justice trial before a Republican Judge appointed by the current Republican President somehow demonstrates that total lack of integrety of the Democratic party?

Please explain.

[nacktman]

Originally posted by Naturist Mark:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bobx23456:
Indeed, a politically motivated crimial prosecution clearly demonstrates that total lack of integrety of the Democratic party.

A Republican prosecutor appointed by a Republican Attorney General to investigate and prosecute crimes pursuant to a complaint by the CIA, that resulted in an obstruction of justice trial before a Republican Judge appointed by the current Republican President somehow demonstrates that total lack of integrety of the Democratic party?

Please explain. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, please do explain!

You jus' gotta love the consistency of the, shall we say less than viable, when they mouth the same tired lines when their puppet-masters wiggle their fingers on the hand up their backsides working the strings like a ventriloquist's dummy on a stage.

[MJ_KC]

Originally posted by nacktman:
Yes, please do explain!
What I would like to know is why he would think that it would be wrong if Democrats had requested this. This was clearly illegal conduct, so why would Bobx think that it was improper for anyone to want to check into this?

The fact that he pointed the finger at Democrats, in error, should make for an interesting response.

[closetnudist]

Hey Mark and USMC1 after thinking about what you guys typed in responce to my post it was pretty funny. I missed the cleverness of the joke. Been awhile since tory was used in a joke. I just want you to know I meant no offence in my post and mean none in future posts. I think it will be fun to get eachother going, as what happens with people who are interested in such things.

I will agree with most of you that most if not all politicians are professional liars. If they didn't most wouldn't get elected. Us mind numb robots have alot of problems with the current administration and Congress too. We all want the best for the greatest country in history, we just don't agree on what that is. So I look forward to a good debate with you.

[Naturist Mark]

I will agree with most of you that most if not all politicians are professional liars. If they didn't most wouldn't get elected.
Even worse, they are by necessity charlatans and hucksters - they have to be in order to constantly raise the ridiculous sums of money it requires to run a campaign in our system of legalized corruption. It isn't surprising that a few overstep the bounds and don't quite dot the i's and cross the t's to wash their bribes legal. The real scandal isn't the lawbreaking, it is what is legal. For instance, "K Street" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K_Street_Project) is an out and out criminal enterprise, yet perfectly legal - less an Abramoff or two.

Our political system is so debased that the ability of a handful of Billionaires like Mitt Romney and Mike Bloomberg to self finance national campaigns is seen as an ethically superior choice. In today's America only an obscenely rich politician is to be trusted.

Meanwhile our Supreme Court has ruled that money is speech, and that corporations are legal persons whose freedom of speech (money) cannot be regulated, at the same time they have made other rulings that ordinary 'meat' people may have the manner, time, place, and content of their speech regulated by government.

Do you remember the Bizarro World stories in the old Superman comics?

It's here.

-Mark

[nacktman]

Originally posted by Naturist Mark:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by closetnudist:
This is the problem with you libs. You want to call me a tory well fine. You want to tar and feather me fine.
I'm sorry you didn't get the joke. We were making fun of ourselves - not you. The conceit is that this declaration would result in a new American Revolution like the one 230 years ago ... and that we would be divided between patriots and torys ... never explain a joke ...

<span class="ev_code_BLUE"> Quite right ol'bean never explain a joke ... they're will always be at least one who has no humor and they lack the ability to recognize it.</span>

I understand, truth be told you couldn't debate me for 5 minutes in the arena of ideas. I don't attack you on your posts but someone with different views comes on and you all jump on him.
again, my apologies that you felt attacked, it was meant as self deprecating levity.

<span class="ev_code_BLUE">Wouldn't need more than a minute to destroy him in a debate (if we dawdled about it), so what will we do for the remaining four minutes?
And as stated above some have no sense of humor and as such humor actually causes then pain ... then again there are those that are just wacko!</span>

If you want to go line by line on your little declaration, bring it!!!!
OK, I'm up for it.

<span class="ev_code_BLUE">I am up for it as well!</span>

-Mark </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

<span class="ev_code_blue">As was said in the opening post on this thread, the mentality expressed in it was no joke but how the cabal and their sycophants think.
And the responses to the following very humorous "new" declaration of and for everyone else show the mentalities of both the cabal and its sycophants and everyone else ... one group does not recognize the humor and the other not only recognizes the humor but plays off it and spoofs the spoof ... who knows the spoof might become reality, remember all those 'cellphones' we have today were called 'communicators' on the original Star Trek television series, and today's Science Fiction is tomorrow's Science.</span>

[Boreas]

Personally I like capitalism. But Cheney and Haliburton aren't capitalists, they believe in an ideology that combines the power of the state with that of very large corporations. Political scientists have a name for that combination.

LOL. Capitalism has its place. My problem is when it is the only goal, and when policies are put in place that only serve capitalism and big business. Often (usually) these policies are at the expense of the little guy. Also, when big busiiness runs things instead of elected officials then we have problems. I believe that is a factor in all the nonsense we see in Washington and Ottawa.

[MJ_KC]

Originally posted by Naturist Mark:
In today's America only an obscenely rich politician is to be trusted.
Not as easy to bribe or corrupt someone who has so much money that they can spend hundreds of millions on a campaign and not even care. I bet that a lot of influence peddlers do not want one of these guys to get elected.

[closetnudist]

In Abramoff's case it was McCain-Feingold that led to him. That work of art just changed the way people had to donate money. Giving rise to the 527 groups. Like most bills it didn't do anything but make it look like something was being done. Sorry I don't know about Bizarro World I'll have to take a look. I am more from the Transformers generation, which by the way if you like scifi the new movie is great.

[usmc1]

Originally posted by closetnudist:
In Abramoff's case it was McCain-Feingold that led to him...

Which has now been gutted by the Ultra-Right Roberts' court. McCain-Feingold, that is!

[usmc1]

Originally posted by MJ_KC:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by nacktman:
Yes, please do explain!
What I would like to know is why he would think that it would be wrong if Democrats had requested this. This was clearly illegal conduct, so why would Bobx think that it was improper for anyone to want to check into this?

The fact that he pointed the finger at Democrats, in error, should make for an interesting response. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don't expect a cogent reply. The guy hasn't gotten anything right yet. Hell, I'm still waiting for some support from him for his wild-eyed, veins in neck popping, arms waving wildly, spittle-flying assertion that poor innocent Border Patrol agents are "in prison dying like dogs".

Nevermind his lunatic call for "dead or alive bounties" on economic emigres to the U.S..

[MJ_KC]

Originally posted by usmc1:
Nevermind his lunatic call for "dead or alive bounties" on economic emigres to the U.S..
It would be bad enough if he had simply thought this to himself. The idea that he would get on a public forum and proclaim this boggles the mind.

[usmc1]

Originally posted by closetnudist:
This is the problem with you libs. You want to call me a tory well fine. You want to tar and feather me fine. I understand, truth be told you couldn't debate me for 5 minutes in the arena of ideas. I don't attack you on your posts but someone with different views comes on and you all jump on him. If you want to go line by line on your little declaration, bring it!!!!

Well after considerable thought as to whether or not I wanted to take the time and exert the energy, I have decided that HELL YEAH! I'm willing to debate any of the points in that declaration with which you disagree.

And since, as you put it, we "libs" made the initial assertion and postings of agreement and approval, I think it is incumbent on you to offer up your refutation of that with which you disagree.

[nacktman]

I find it extremely hilarious that when their calls for "debate" are answered and their "challenges" met those of the right wing bent clam up and run away.

Curious, isn't it?!

[closetnudist]

The whole point of my posting was to make a point. If the declaration is about the current administration, not against our whole government it is pointless. Perhaps only to express some fustration. Why tear down a system because some people don't like who controls it at a specific time. The original Declaration was to set us free of a government rule we did't like. If you wanted to make a statment like that it should of been a call for impeachment. But, you will get your chance to make a declaration in November. It is called voting. So if you want to continue fine. As for me, that's the way I see it.

[Naturist Mark]

If you wanted to make a statment like that it should of been a call for impeachment
We called for them to resign, but impeachment is acceptable too. But, you will get your chance to make a declaration in November. It is called voting. So if you want to continue fine. As for me, that's the way I see it. Not next November, the one after that. Still time enough for a couple of unnecessary wars. Assuming there is no emergency twixt then and now that allows Bush to invoke his new emergency powers.

-Mark

[usmc1]

Originally posted by closetnudist:
The whole point of my posting was to make a point. If the declaration is about the current administration, not against our whole government it is pointless. Perhaps only to express some fustration. Why tear down a system because some people don't like who controls it at a specific time.
<span class="ev_code_blue">When in the course of human events...</span> That's why!

The original Declaration was to set us free of a government rule we did't like.
Precisely!

If you wanted to make a statment like that it should of been a call for impeachment.

No, at this point that is only a start -- desperate times, call for desperate measures!

But, you will get your chance to make a declaration in November. It is called voting. So if you want to continue fine. As for me, that's the way I see it.

Which would be fine if all those qualified to vote and who wanted to vote had easy, simple and timely access to the process, used a voting process that insured that all votes were properly registered, gathered and tabulated, and were not turned away at the polls for some specious reasons.

Now, you're probably a great guy, but you, in your posts, as do several others, assume this posture of smug superiority toward those of us in the center and left of center who recognize and decry just how virulent and rapacious are this administration and its fellow travelers.

The forces behind these excesses are not new. A lot is made of Bush's shredding of the Constitution in his quest for total control of government. It is not new. Others have attempted it before. His henchmen did not have to do a lot of work, all they needed do was dust off a copy of the Internal Security Act and update it! That perfidious b*st**d Nixon had his enemies list and a ramped up COINTELPRO.

We saw what passivity brought us in 2000 and again in 2004. You wanna be passive, fine. Some of us aren't.

As to the document under question, obviously it is figurative and used to make a point of how far we've drifted from the original and how to today parallels those conditions which helped bring on our original revolution.

There was some ironic and self-deprecating humor following its post which I think you missed.

Yes! we have sufficient documentary foundation by which we could run our country. A starting point would be to heed those documents and to become outraged when they're disregarded and/or abused.

Inertia, passivity, maintaining the status quo and waiting for the process to work is not sufficient.

[Pete Knight]

Whatever happened to freedom of speech, if you can't put your opinion forward without being attacked, then what are we fighting for in Iraq, WWII and WWI to name but a few arena's where civil liberties were at stake.

My opinion may be different to yours, but its not wrong, its MY opinion and I believe in it, it can be swayed with persuasion, but I resent being told its wrong.

Now, if you'll all agree to disagree then we can continue to post our viewpoint as we see it.

Thank you for being a patient and caring audience.

Pete Knight

[Boreas]

Whatever happened to freedom of speech, if you can't put your opinion forward without being attacked, then what are we fighting for in Iraq, WWII and WWI to name but a few arena's where civil liberties were at stake.

You have just pinpointed the scariest thing for me about the Bush admin. It seems that there is less room for discussion and more of the "if you are not for us, you are against us" mentality. It seems to be most prevalent in the US, the country that values freedom above all. Very ironic. Also, very sad and scary.

[MoonShadow]

Still_Boreus...doesn't that make your head spin in a country that proclaims it values freedom?

[Boreas]

Originally posted by MoonShadow:
Still_Boreus...doesn't that make your head spin in a country that proclaims it values freedom?

Definitely. I am also looking at it as an outsider. It is particularly curious from this side of the border!

[hm0504]

As Canadians, we may be outside the geographical borders of the U.S. but those borders are next to irrelevant when it comes to how the loss of freedom and democracy in the U.S. would affect Canada and the rest of the world. Let us pray that the U.S. can return to being the strong force for good (generally) that it was in the 1990s.

[Caipora]

One particularly disturbing aspect of the growing repression is that it affects even this forum.

How did Gonzales react when pressed on firing district attorneys, etc.? Why, he announced new measure to crack down on a really grave problem ... child pornography!

Sure, it's a serious crime. But go down to your local police station, tell them that pictures of you naked at the age of eight are circulating on the internet, and you can't sleep because of the distress caused you by men looking at your pictures and having nasty thoughts.

Yeah, right. Witch hunts are great for law enforcement because it can invent witches when and where it needs them. There's no unsolved crime (except when there's a need for budget) because no one has ever said that well, I'm a victim of this. Wait, there's Justin Berry, who was making big bucks at it, engaging in self-abuse in several senses of the term, but really it's rare.

The pictures of "underage" nudists have disappeared from here. Why? They were most definitely not illegal.

Perhaps the moderators did genuinely have a problem with Strange Men, in which case this post is off-base and I apologize.

But it's far more likely that they were somehow pressured, and that they realized that, despite the pictures being entirely within the law, they could not afford to fight the Government, that years of legal battles would leave them innocent, and with their finances and reputations destroyed.

And a government that can, and will, prosecute a charge it cannot win, simply because it knows that it can crush you, that it need not have reason or justice because it is irresistible in its arrogance and its might - that's what the Declaration of Independence was about.

It's an old tactic, fear-mongering, creating enemies that are denied the process of law and the presumption of innocence. They used to be witches, anarchists, Jews, Communists or homosexuals. Now they are "sexually violent predators" or "presidentially designated illegal combatants". The tactics are the same, though.

It is easy to defend the witches or anarchists of yesterday, who are a quaint threat. It takes no courage, and it's even fashionable, showing that you accept some newly acceptable group, like blacks or homosexuals. What takes courage is to defend the witches of today, when the danger is real that you will be hauled off as a "fellow traveler" or one of Them, whoever today's Them may be.

Who will it be tomorrow? I bet they'll work their way down to the nudists, soon enough.

- Caipora

[MJ_KC]

Originally posted by Caipora:
But it's far more likely that they were somehow pressured
Perhaps someone can add to this, but I think it was simply the preference of some of their corporate sponsors. It was a business decision.

[NudeAl]

I heartily support the idea of a new and stronger endorsement of our rights and liberties. However with increased freedom comes a increased responsibility. If you truely value freedom and liberty above all else you must be prepared to accept more responsiblilty for your own self in terms of self defense, ablility to care for you own basic needs of food and shelter, requiring little or no support from the government. If you are prepared to accept that responsibility then you should be granted all the freedom our forefathers spoke so eloquently about. If however you still feel it is the responsibility of the government to regulate things for you for your own good to protect you from something that you may do that is potentially harmful or dangerous or in the veiw of certain folks potentially litigation actionable. Well the you better stick to the watered down form of democracy you now have. Freedom isn't for the faint of heart. Remember the words of one of our wisest founding fathers, Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither. Freedom is primal, bloody, raw. The savages of ancient times knew true freedom we can only allow so much in modern society as it is too dangerous to allow true freedom.

[Naturist Mark]

Even the Reagan conservatives are beginning to see the light - read this op-ed from the Denver Post By John S. Koppel - a 26 year Justice Department professional who came to DOJ with Reagan and has witness the debasement of Justice under the current regime from the inside.

Bush justice is a national disgrace (http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_6308408)

And keep an eye on Mr. Koppel. He is a current Justice Dept. Lawyer - who believes he won't be subject to illegal reprisals?

-Mark

[Caipora]

I think it was simply the preference of some of their corporate sponsors. It was a business decision.
It's almost always a "business decision". So was complying with the Hollywood blacklist during the red scare, or the "Whites Only" signs, or the deed restrictions barring Jews.

- Caipora

[Cigol Edun]

Originally Posted by NudeAl:
If you truely value freedom and liberty above all else you must be prepared to accept more responsiblilty for your own self in terms of self defense, ablility to care for you own basic needs of food and shelter, requiring little or no support from the government.


I believe we indeed need to accept more responsibility for our liberty.

There certainly are security consequences of being free. However, I would much rather experience the challenges associated with freedom than the oppression that comes from the lack of it.

Although I concur that freedom isn't for the faint of heart, and that those who would sacrifice liberty for security probably deserve neither, I don't believe that security has to always be pitted against liberty in such a way that we have to decide to have either one or the other.

Maximizing security at the expense of freedom would increase security from outside threats, and increase internal despotic threats to our Liberty.

On the other hand, a totally anarchist society would maximize freedom at the expense of any security, with the opposite effect.

Neither of these options appeal to me. I think threats to freedom of all varieties are minimized in a well considered Libertarian society.