[quote=CA renter]
Playing devil’s advocate here…what proof do you have that the govt wasn’t involved in 9/11? Do you believe that the U.S. government is altruistic, and that they are “defending liberty and freedom” when declaring wars on other people or when they claim the right to spy on U.S. citizens and/or detain them indefinitely (here or overseas) without a trial? Do you think the U.S. government has never killed American citizens who might have posed a threat to certain powerful people (both within and outside of the govt)? [/quote]
Proof that they weren’t involved? The same proof that there are no aliens controlling your mind. Are there aliens controlling your mind? No? What proof do you have?
[quote=CA renter]
Do you really think that all of the people who believe there was something strange about that whole incident are crazy “conspiracy theorists”?
How about these people?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architects_%26_Engineers_for_9/11_Truth%5B/quote%5D
Yes, I believe they’re conspiracy theorists and can’t be taken seriously. Just because you’re an engineer or an architect doesn’t mean you’re not susceptible to paranoia.
[quote=CA renter]
Do you believe that the 30,000 drones scheduled to fly over U.S. airspace within the next decade are there “for our own good”?
[quote=CA renter]
Do you believe that this data center — capable of storing every bit of multiple years’ worth of electronic communications — is being built “for our own good”?
Do you think the TSA’s screening of all manner of Americans — elderly women and children, included — is being done “for out own good,” or might they be getting us accustomed to being regularly physically violated and “screened” by government officials?
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/tsa-335352-agent-rights.html%5B/quote%5D
Getting us “used to being …violated and screened?” I think it’s highly unlikely that anyone in that field is thinking that far ahead. And I think it’s paranoid to see the TSA screen people in a way that you don’t like and think that they’re “preparing” us for worse.
[quote=CA renter]
Anyone who thinks that our government isn’t willing or capable of violating our rights or doing any harm to us is frighteningly naive. [/quote]
Sure, a person thinks our government isn’t willing or capable of violating our rights at all or doing any harm is naïve. Sure, the government is capable of violating our rights and doing harm. But I’d say it’s usually in small and isolated cases. I think anyone who thinks that there are vast conspiracies perpetrated by the U.S. government against the U.S. people is paranoid.
[quote=CA renter]
And while it’s difficult to fight a well-armed force with hand weapons, it’s not impossible. Look to Iraq or Afghanistan to see how much trouble a poorly-armed, but fairly large, population is able to cause a major fighting force when they feel they are fighting for a just cause.[/quote]
If fighting against government tyranny is really why we’re allowing people to have guns, the whole debate changes. It’s a completely different thing from “we should be allowed to have guns so we can hunt and shoot target practice and defend our homes against intruders.” Gun advocates use a scattershot method and attack on all fronts. But, really, defending against government tyranny and those other uses are completely different subjects. If we’re defending against government tyranny, do we need a .38 under our pillow? No. We need organized, secure, large collections of automatic weapons and assault rifles. If you think that sort of thing would work. Which I don’t, but which is at least debatable. Key word there is secure.
