You know, for the most part I am used to being more/less "on my own" during most of the more important topics where "Opinion" is the primary deciding factor when determining the sides the members chose to be on but I had hoped that there would be someone here now who thinks like me considering the massive member count we now have.

Anyway, onward....

OK, discounting the blue text because all humor/sarcasm aside, nothing was said in it to entice a response since I felt it was out of place in a conversation of import. ( I am not saying blue text is unimportant, just that I saw nothing to comment upon)

@ Fragman- As I tried to say, I disagree with the big brother concept but feel that because people are basically stupid that its a necessary evil. I feel that there is no right way to do a wrong thing because no matter HOW it is employed, it will always hurt someone needlessly. The truly evil thing is, so many people make the concept a necessity. To answer your statement, I say "Yes" there are plenty of examples of doing a right thing in a wrong way. I am not sure if this topic should deviate enough to discuss them before we establish how you are viewing ME in this but yes I feel there are wrong ways of doing right things.

Also, as I said, there are some/many cases where the end justifies the means. I did not insinuate that "all" ends do so.

I would also like to point out that in almost every example, you all are determined to enlist the "exception" to the rule. Try to use the non-exception for a change and see if you can make as compelling a case for your side of the discussion. Are their examples where you can imagine a big brother action being beneficial or are you totally dead set against the idea period?

@ Obie- I do not predicate anything sir. I know that anything can be nonperfect by design. The law being chief among them. What I am trying to say is that the system might be necessary simply because so many people have their own system when determining "right from wrong"

If we could somehow have a set parameter for these things then there would be no need to anyone to watch OVER anyone else. Sadly, this will never be the case. We have a major drought around here. There are several hundred signs pointing this out and yet people are still tossing their cigs out the window lit. We have people who think nothing is wrong with this. Now how do we handle these people. Remembering that fires are a much smaller issue than terrorism. How do we enforce a burn ban?

People seldom realize that small wrongs add up eventually. People are under the false assumption that if enough people do a wrong thing long enough it somehow becomes less wrong. I even hear people say "get a life" or "you worry to much about small things" Try telling that to the people who's houses are gone now because of the cigarette. try telling that to the people who now have no pasture to feed their livestock.

Anyway, if we cannot enforce the little things how the hell will we ever convince people to enforce the bigger ones?

/rant

cass, for a pup, yer still a favorite hero of mine...

as i understand it, yahoo, and aol turned over said requested info pronto....and the reason google didnt is because of the nature of the personal info they collect whilst being used, and the nature of their search protocols, ie, the guts of it that makes it tick....now, i understand the need for competitive secrecy as far as that goes, and i understand the need for client confidentiality....but, plain and simply, if the government wants the info bad enough, they'll find a way to get it....and theyll act on it, no matter what they tell you, whether its correct or not.....if they want to fight with me because ill spot the occasional tits and ass page, so be it....your government dollars at work....

makes me wonder just how deep google can get into my "life"....

....heres the kicker.....once they have theyre finger in the pie, they will use it in every way BUT what was originally intended, under the guise of "national security".... the thought of that really frosts my ass, and yet.....

Doc B....

hell would have broken completely loose in that case fishman.....but i think pakistan was intimately involved in that scene, simply because the intel would be virtually impossible to get otherwise......white folks in the poshtoon region (sp?) stick out like a sore thumb.. " SRC="images/smiles/heee.gif">.....why do you think we are kissing pakistans ass? musharef......hes the "in"....

Doc B...

The neatest thing is, I see nothing wrong with you doing so either. I am actually quite glad as a matter of fact.

I wish all my differences were so easy to distinguish around here.

My thoughts...Exactly.

? quoting Dr Brasso

.... intel would be virtually impossible to get otherwise......white folks in the poshtoon region (sp?) stick out like a sore thumb.. .....why do you think we are kissing pakistans ass? musharef......hes the "in"....

it's a bit of a thin arguement to say the intel came from the pakistani government because a w.a.s.p. would be noticed over there. don't ethnics get into the cia/millitary? don't the cia/millitary pay locals for info, good or bad?

Herein lies the crux of the discussion methinks. At what point does wrong become wrong enough to warrant scrutiny?

Don't fool yourselves fellas, we are truly discussing scrutiny here not right and wrong. People tend to shy away from close scrutiny on most, if not all matters. This tendency lends to the idea that in doing so we are being accused of something even if there is nothing erroneous at all going on.

If I read Obie's post correctly he in effect is against any action that can cause harm to innocents. I postulate that inaction can do at least as much harm, albeit in a different way or method, but harm none the less. Inaction has caused at least as much grief as acting rashly, or prematurely throughout out histories.

Bottomline, scrutiny seems to be what balks the mind of everyone who dislikes the "big brother" activity.

Does that about sum it up?

Ouch guys, just to defend myself for a second. I was an art student in a bad mood when I wrote that.

To be honest, Cass, I've never read 1984... and I stand by the "the US is an oligarchy" thing.

Back on topic,

In my humble opinion the government of my time seems to be untrustworthy. If I didn't have the thought in the back of my mind that some big wig is looking through my history folder, not because I do "wrong" or am a criminal, but because I don?t trust "them".

I nice man who worked for my dad found his stock accounts frozen after joining a gay rights group and getting a slot on the patriot act's black list.

I can also bring up the WMD stuff.

Hidden amendments snuck into bills in congress.

From what I see through the filter of network news scares me a little bit.

So... while we aren?t going to all be in matching shirts and shoes with chains around our ankles, we seem to be on a road to something worse than where we are now.