Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Big Dog's Boom Boom Room -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: S Shaw who wrote (26842)	11/4/2003 2:52:10 AM
From: Dale Baker	Respond to of 206085

Well said, Scott. (eom)

To: S Shaw who wrote (26842)	11/4/2003 4:20:57 AM
From: chowder	Respond to of 206085

Scott, My response to the question about flag or constitution started with; >>> I don't know that we should be separating the two but, in the narrow context of your question, and based on the fact that you want to make it an either or ....... <<< I don't think you can separate the two. It's like asking which ingredient is more important in a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. The question was asked in the context of arguing over a couple of beers. It was asked in the narrowest of contexts. The response it revokes, in my mind, is determined by whether one is focusing on world wide events or domestic ones. In a wider context, there are more people willing to put their lives at risk fighting for the flag. Most people who wrap themselves in the Constitution would rather fight a war of words. Both the flag and the Constitution are important of course but, over a couple of beers, and I've only had one, my measuring stick in the very narrow context of the way the question was presented, is that I will measure importance by whether one is willing to die for it. For those who will be enjoying bacon and eggs for breakfast, the chicken made a contribution, the hog a commitment. I was willing to be the hog. Fortunately I wasn't called upon for that sacrifice. My sacrifice, if it came, would have been for the flag. That was my thought process in responding. Funny thing though, I wouldn't be willing to sacrifice my life for one of your innocent victims that the government was going execute. However, if a Taliban killed one of your victims, I would. I can't figure that out. Maybe I need another beer. dabum

To: S Shaw who wrote (26842)	11/4/2003 3:39:18 PM
From: Mark Adams	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 206085

I am not a Scholar of the Law or the Constitution, so perhaps my Unease has no solid Foundation in Reality. There appears a Pattern of Changes taking place, which erode Individual Protections and Freedoms in the name of Security. Civil Forfeiture without Due Process started with the War on Drugs, a cause the majority related to. There was the occasional story of abuse; a bit of drugs planted in the trunk with the auto then confiscated. But by and by, there didn't appear to be a pattern of abuse which would cause the majority to rally. The Patriot Act appears to extend this forfeiture to financial assets & personal freedom, on the back of defusing the threat of terrorism, again a cause the majority relate to. We seem to be moving a step at a time, to a world where no one can do business without a number, and with a click of the mouse, a person may be stripped of assets and literally 'disappered'. I realize as a society, we Rely on Trust & the Integrity of our mates. I think this is why the potential abuse of the added powers placed in the hands of civil authorities hasn't generated an outcry. I imagine most people are basically ethical and will make the right choices in most circumstances. However, I think the ongoing news stream out of the post bubble WallStreet world illustrates the potential Corrosive Influence Power may inflict, as the Mores of one's closet peers adjust to changing circumstances. I think Americans need to send a strong message, both through the polls and the upcoming Vote, to our leaders. That protection of what America stands for & the Constitution should come first.