Big Brother in reality?

[FireGod]

Infragard

InfraGard - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Long Island Infragard Members Alliance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What is InfraGard? Is InfraGard Effective? What are the controversies surrounding InfraGard?

InfraGard - Public Private Partnership -Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)

 

[groupthink]

prevent hostile acts against the United States.[

you dont support hostile attacks against the united states do you?

security trumps liberty EVERY TIME!..

its all part of the new freedom.

 

[xsited1]

Infragard

InfraGard - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Long Island Infragard Members Alliance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What is InfraGard? Is InfraGard Effective? What are the controversies surrounding InfraGard?

InfraGard - Public Private Partnership -Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)

Looks familiar:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-f...sage-board-posts-post1851923.html#post1851923

Nobody's gonna say anything, except for the occasional "baahhhhh."

 

[FireGod]

Infragard

InfraGard - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Long Island Infragard Members Alliance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What is InfraGard? Is InfraGard Effective? What are the controversies surrounding InfraGard?

InfraGard - Public Private Partnership -Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)

Looks familiar:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-f...sage-board-posts-post1851923.html#post1851923

Nobody's gonna say anything, except for the occasional "baahhhhh."

Thanks for heads up.

Freedom for security humm not a fair trade in my book.

 

[groupthink]

ok look bub..check this out.....

question the government and you belong in a mental institution..plain and simple.

got it?

 

[FireGod]

ok look bub..check this out.....

question the government and you belong in a mental institution..plain and simple.

got it?

Funny that is not what all the reps think now and the Dems thought 8 years ago

Seriously though I wonder how many people have actually read 1984 or remember the lessons of the past. Quite sad actually hence we are doomed to repeat ... again.

 

[groupthink]

ok look bub..check this out.....

question the government and you belong in a mental institution..plain and simple.

got it?

Funny that is not what all the reps think now and the Dems thought 8 years ago

Seriously though I wonder how many people have actually read 1984 or remember the lessons of the past. Quite sad actually hence we are doomed to repeat ... again.

as long as our gods at the fed dont stop the presses we will live on for thousands of years like the romans. "our nation"

seriously... keep questioning the government and you will be targeted and set up for a botched terrorist attack.....

now shut up and stop talking about our government.. this is how the new freedom works.... get use to it.

 

[FireGod]

ok look bub..check this out.....

question the government and you belong in a mental institution..plain and simple.

got it?

Funny that is not what all the reps think now and the Dems thought 8 years ago

Seriously though I wonder how many people have actually read 1984 or remember the lessons of the past. Quite sad actually hence we are doomed to repeat ... again.

as long as our gods at the fed dont stop the presses we will live on for thousands of years like the romans. "our nation"

seriously... keep questioning the government and you will be targeted and set up for a botched terrorist attack.....

now shut up and stop talking about our government.. this is how the new freedom works.... get use to it.

Sorry I refuse to get used to it.

 

[jjreview]

prevent hostile acts against the United States.[

you dont support hostile attacks against the united states do you?

security trumps liberty EVERY TIME!..

its all part of the new freedom.

HAHA, yeah, freedom is your ability to choose between McD and BK, or pepsi and coke. Americans give up their freedom when they let the media terrify them. Powdered-donut-anthrax-fearing yellow bellied yellers.

 

[ItHappens]

It seems to me that some people mistake Anarchy for Freedom.

 

[uscitizen]

prevent hostile acts against the United States.[

you dont support hostile attacks against the united states do you?

security trumps liberty EVERY TIME!..

its all part of the new freedom.

HAHA, yeah, freedom is your ability to choose between McD and BK, or pepsi and coke. Americans give up their freedom when they let the media terrify them. Powdered-donut-anthrax-fearing yellow bellied yellers.

It is how we have been programmed as a nation.

 

[Liability]

We can petition the government for the redress of grievances and we can do so individually or collectively.

But when the government asks a group of us (i.e., businesses, etc.) to join with them in helping to preserve and secure our basic infrastructure, that is somehow a harbinger of the coming of the Fourth Reich.

Is THAT pretty much the gist of the complaint here?

Here's what THEY say about it:

InfraGard is an association of businesses, academic institutions, state and local law enforcement agencies, and other participants dedicated to sharing information and intelligence to prevent hostile acts against the United States.

InfraGard - Public Private Partnership -Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)

Is that claim about itself wrong? Is it misleading somehow?

They have internal links. One leads you HERE: InfraGard - Public Private Partnership -Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) | About InfraGard

What exactly is so damn nefarious?

Oh wait. I know. By even asking these questions, I must just be a sheep. And some fucking idiot like Bfgrn will insist that my willing naivete makes me a "statist." Yes. That must baaaaa-aaa be it.

 

[FireGod]

Here is the thing, I get twitchy when I have neighbors that are officially sanctioned to spy on me.

I get twitchy when government decides to elevate volunteers to status of watcher.

I get twitchy when government actively recruits civilians to be snitches.

As citizens of the US we should be ever vigilant for our homes, families and neighbors. That is the basis of being a good citizen. Vigilance of the population also displaces the mind numbing fear that seems to run rampant in the US.

There is no need for a program as this as they have a huge tendency to be basis for abuse and have been every time in history.

Yes I do have serious questions on many levels on this as should you. I can not force you to question this nor have I called you a sheep. It is your choice.

 

[Liability]

Here is the thing, I get twitchy when I have neighbors that are officially sanctioned to spy on me.

I get twitchy when government decides to elevate volunteers to status of watcher.

I get twitchy when government actively recruits civilians to be snitches.

As citizens of the US we should be ever vigilant for our homes, families and neighbors. That is the basis of being a good citizen. Vigilance of the population also displaces the mind numbing fear that seems to run rampant in the US.

There is no need for a program as this as they have a huge tendency to be basis for abuse and have been every time in history.

Yes I do have serious questions on many levels on this as should you. I can not force you to question this nor have I called you a sheep. It is your choice.

If you behaved in a way that made a moderately observant neighbor wonder if you were a possible terrorist (or just a skell cooking meth in a basement lab in your house), you could get twitchy because your neighbors are already allowed to report their suspicions.

Your twitchiness over the "sanctioning " of such observant neighbors is rather silly, since they could be doing it with or without an official okey-dokey. Besides, the program is actually directed at businesses primarily and is designed to defend our infrastructure against an enemy attack. I wonder if someone in the InfraGuard program happens to have noticed the activites that recently led to the capture of the would-be NYC subway bombers? That's protection of infrastructre for you.

There is no actual support for your claim: "There is no need for a program as this as they have a huge tendency to be basis for abuse and have been every time in history." You are stating a fear as though it was a fact. It isn't. But, you may educate me. Back it up.

And no. There is NO actual reason why I "should" have the silly question YOU have over this innocuous program. I don't care that YOU are a bit paranoid on this one. But that's no basis to assume that anybody else needs to share that paranoia with you.

Vigilance? Sure. There's nothing wrong in OUR society in keeping a wary eye on any and all government activities. But given the nature and purpose of THIS program, I see NO valid reason to paranoid about it.

But let's not misunderstand our respective positions. It's ok if you do wish to call me a "sheep." You seem to be a bit on the Chicken Little side on this one.

 

[FireGod]

But let's not misunderstand our respective positions. It's ok if you do wish to call me a "sheep." You seem to be a bit on the Chicken Little side on this one.

OK first and formost I have yet to call anyone a sheep, it ain't gonna happen.

How do you know it is a innocuous organization? I sure as hell do not know that it is or it is not. What I do know from reading history books is that there is a warning triggered in my mind on the way this is being done. I have purposely steered clear of the rumors of misuse on this particular issue.

My point was to question the validity and possible repercussions of this particular program.

I happen to see a possible grave threat in it, if you do not then that is entirely your right. It is not my job to convince you either way.

 

[Liability]

But let's not misunderstand our respective positions. It's ok if you do wish to call me a "sheep." You seem to be a bit on the Chicken Little side on this one.

OK first and formost I have yet to call anyone a sheep, it ain't gonna happen.

How do you know it is a innocuous organization?

I'm not the one bragging about getting "twitchy" without any evidence that it's anything BUT innocuous.

I sure as hell do not know that it is or it is not. What I do know from reading history books is that there is a warning triggered in my mind on the way this is being done. I have purposely steered clear of the rumors of misuse on this particular issue.

I'm not trying to mess with you, but let's get serious. Your entire thesis is that the organization is inherently dangerous. You make vague (very vague) allusions to some unknown "history," but then deny that you are actually making a claim. If you had some kind of actual evidence, you'd absolutely make a claim. But you have no evidence, so instead you walk up to the line and come THAT close to making an allegation. It amounts to a smear lacking the support of any substance.

My point was to question the validity and possible repercussions of this particular program.

If that's all you are doing, I have no issue iwth anything you're saying. But it seems that you are going quite a bit further than just sounding a general warning to the effect that such governmentally-sponsored groups could be subject to abuse.

I happen to see a possible grave threat in it, if you do not then that is entirely your right. It is not my job to convince you either way.

And now the potential threat isn't merely a potential threat, now it's a potentially "grave" threat? [Jack Nicholson, in the movie, A Few Good Men, "is there any other kind?"] A fucking application by a prosecutor to a magistrate could pose a grave threat, too. Sound the alarms.

 

[FireGod]

But let's not misunderstand our respective positions. It's ok if you do wish to call me a "sheep." You seem to be a bit on the Chicken Little side on this one.

OK first and formost I have yet to call anyone a sheep, it ain't gonna happen.

How do you know it is a innocuous organization?

I'm not the one bragging about getting "twitchy" without any evidence that it's anything BUT innocuous.

It was not a brag, just a statement of fact.

I'm not trying to mess with you, but let's get serious. Your entire thesis is that the organization is inherently dangerous. You make vague (very vague) allusions to some unknown "history," but then deny that you are actually making a claim. If you had some kind of actual evidence, you'd absolutely make a claim. But you have no evidence, so instead you walk up to the line and come THAT close to making an allegation. It amounts to a smear lacking the support of any substance.

My point was to question the validity and possible repercussions of this particular program.

The possible repercussions that I have read about. I no longer have the books for reference. No I do not have concrete (sourced) evidence at this time. The history I speak of is from books written by Germans before and after WWII. Also books on post WWII Russia. Again I can not be specific so I am very limited in my ability to make an out and out credible accusation. On a side note it has been 30 years since I have done the reading on this.

If that's all you are doing, I have no issue iwth anything you're saying. But it seems that you are going quite a bit further than just sounding a general warning to the effect that such governmentally-sponsored groups could be subject to abuse.

I happen to see a possible grave threat in it, if you do not then that is entirely your right. It is not my job to convince you either way.

And now the potential threat isn't merely a potential threat, now it's a potentially "grave" threat? [Jack Nicholson, in the movie, A Few Good Men, "is there any other kind?"] A fucking application by a prosecutor to a magistrate could pose a grave threat, too. Sound the alarms.

Where the question comes in on my side is why does the fed find it necessary to do this? Yes a threat is a threat we are agreed. Now if you see no problem with this great we will have to agree to disagree. I am not so sure that I would have as big a problem if it was strictly a non government organization.

All I have is an interest in history and some reading on history. The parallels between what has happened in the past and what is happening now are not hard to see from my POV. What I did learn is that for a determined "government" this type of organization is a great tool for control of the masses. And no I am not saying that is our current path nor do I think that we will be anytime soon as long as the citizenry of the country does remain vigilant for both internal and external threats.

If you are not able to see them that is OK. I could be totally wrong ... then again I could be right.

 

[Liability]

OK first and formost I have yet to call anyone a sheep, it ain't gonna happen.

How do you know it is a innocuous organization?

I'm not the one bragging about getting "twitchy" without any evidence that it's anything BUT innocuous.

It was not a brag, just a statement of fact.


The possible repercussions that I have read about. I no longer have the books for reference. No I do not have concrete (sourced) evidence at this time. The history I speak of is from books written by Germans before and after WWII. Also books on post WWII Russia. Again I can not be specific so I am very limited in my ability to make an out and out credible accusation. On a side note it has been 30 years since I have done the reading on this.

If that's all you are doing, I have no issue iwth anything you're saying. But it seems that you are going quite a bit further than just sounding a general warning to the effect that such governmentally-sponsored groups could be subject to abuse.

I happen to see a possible grave threat in it, if you do not then that is entirely your right. It is not my job to convince you either way.

And now the potential threat isn't merely a potential threat, now it's a potentially "grave" threat? [Jack Nicholson, in the movie, A Few Good Men, "is there any other kind?"] A fucking application by a prosecutor to a magistrate could pose a grave threat, too. Sound the alarms.

Where the question comes in on my side is why does the fed find it necessary to do this? Yes a threat is a threat we are agreed. Now if you see no problem with this great we will have to agree to disagree. I am not so sure that I would have as big a problem if it was strictly a non government organization.

All I have is an interest in history and some reading on history. The parallels between what has happened in the past and what is happening now are not hard to see from my POV. What I did learn is that for a determined "government" this type of organization is a great tool for control of the masses. And no I am not saying that is our current path nor do I think that we will be anytime soon as long as the citizenry of the country does remain vigilant for both internal and external threats.

If you are not able to see them that is OK. I could be totally wrong ... then again I could be right.

You still miss the point. ANY power we grant to the Government can be the subject of abuse.

We have judicial oversight on the actions of a prosecutor who wishes to invade a suspect's expectation of privacy, right? The prosecutor is obliged to go to a judge to get a warrant and has to demonstrate probable cause to get the judicial approval. Does that make all search warrants or interception warrants safe? Can't a prosecutor still find a way to violate a person's rights? The answer is "of course he could." And the judge would not have to be "in on it."

But the InfraGuard Program is voluntary. And just like you and I may have a natural mistrust of government (a very American notion), it is also a safe bet that some of the Federal Law Enforcement guys have some basic mistrust of the citizenry, too. Just because you join InfraGuard doesn't mean you aren't out to become a huge whistle-blower. So what makes anybody think these guys are going to have some unknown quantity, like a businessman, engage with them on something nefarious?

We don't outlaw search warrants just because they could be abused. Instead, we try to make sure we keep our eyes open to guard against misuse or abuse.

Similarly, we would be silly to reject an effort like InfraGuard just because there may be SOME risks involved. There always will be some risks. The answer is still to keep your guard up. The ancient question (from Roman Empire times) hasn't changed much: "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" "Who will guard the guards, themselves?"

The answer to that age old question hasn't changed much. The answer, for us, has long been: WE will.