'Homeland Insecurity: Americans fear government more than terror'

[eyer]

The Washington Post asked a sampling of 588 adults 2 and 3 days after the Boston bombing:

Which worries you more, that the government will not go far enough to investigate terrorism because of concerns about constitutional rights, or that it will go too far in compromising constitutional rights in order to investigate terrorism?

- 48% worries that the government will go too far
- 41% worries government won’t go far enough

Fox News asked a random sampling of 619 registered voters the day after the Boston bombing:

Would you be willing to give up some of your personal freedom in order to reduce the threat of terrorism?

- 45% answered no
- 43% answered yes

In May 2001, before 9/11, the balance was similar, with 40 percent answering no to 33 percent answering yes.

But following the terrorist attacks of 9/11, the numbers flipped dramatically, to 71 percent agreeing to sacrifice personal freedom to reduce the threat of terrorism.

Subsequent polls asking the same question in 2002, 2005 and 2006 found Americans consistently willing to give up freedom in exchange for security. Yet the numbers were declining from 71 percent following 9/11 to only 54 percent by May 2006.

And similar to the Fox News poll, the Post found the worry to be a fresh development, as only 44 percent worried the government would go too far in January 2006 and only 27 percent worried the government would go too far in January 2010.

The Fox News poll was unique in that it further broke the responses down by political affiliation:

- Bucking the trend, 51 percent of Democrats responded they would give up personal freedom to reduce the threat of terror, compared to 36 percent opposed.

- Forty-seven percent of Republicans, on the other hand, opposed giving up freedoms, compared to only 43 percent in favor.

- Yet independents were the most resistant, with only 29 percent willing to sacrifice freedom, while 58 percent stood opposed.

http://www.wnd.com/2013/04/americans-fear-government-more-than-terror/

 

[Mike_Yates]

Yes, the war on terrorism has shifted from fighting Islamic fundamentalists overseas and onto various domestic political groups. Conservatives, libertarians, gun owners, and returning veterans are the prime groups that the government wants to purge.

Also, conspiracy theorists, political activists, protesters, outspoken critics of government policy, anyone who questions authority, etc..

If you are any of these, the government may brand you a terrorist or enemy of the state.

And whats to say that all of these mass shootings and terrorist bombings aren't actually being staged by shadowy criminal black-op elements inside the US government, military, and intelligence community in order to advance political agendas and broaden the fraudulent national security theater?

 

[eyer]

Yes, the war on terrorism has shifted from fighting Islamic fundamentalists overseas and onto various domestic political groups. Conservatives, libertarians, gun owners, and returning veterans are the prime groups that the government wants to purge.

Also, conspiracy theorists, political activists, protesters, outspoken critics of government policy, anyone who questions authority, etc..

If you are any of these, the government may brand you a terrorist or enemy of the state.

I've already branded myself, tyvm...

...and have lived in exile under occupation by the USSA for 5 years next Wednesday.

BTW:

I am unarmed and totally intend to stay that way, for I have no malicious, offensive intent toward any other individual(s), all of whom inherently merit liberty just as naturally as I; but I do have some defensive Benjamin Martin wound-up tight within me...

...so there is that.

 

[Mike_Yates]

It's not hard to conclude that the war on terrorism is being over-hyped and exploited by a myriad of special interests for political and financial purposes.

There are many people whom stand to gain financially from this. The defense/armaments industry, the security industrial complex, the military industrial complex, the petroleum industry, defense contractors, arms manufacturers, etc...

 

[SmilingGuy_]

It's not hard to conclude that the war on terrorism is being over-hyped and exploited by a myriad of special interests for political and financial purposes.

There are many people whom stand to gain financially from this. The defense/armaments industry, the security industrial complex, the military industrial complex, the petroleum industry, defense contractors, arms manufacturers, etc...

It wasn't hard to conclude that was going to happen before the war of terror ever started.

 

[Mike_Yates]

It wasn't hard to conclude that was going to happen before the war of terror ever started.

When the cold war ended in 1991, the armaments industry had lost almost half of their market share. There needed to be an event to start an endless state of war to ensure continued profits.

 

[eyer]

I discern a real danger to be too much of a fixation with what you're harping about (some of which is elementary sound)...

...while too less attention is paid to foreign enemies at the same time.

If I were a Communist like Putin or Jinping, I'd be licking my lips anticipating possible control of the oil reserves and natural resources America has...

...the potential control of which is much more feasible if America wars against itself.

I truly see global chaos ensuing at some near point in time - if it isn't started by war(s), then food and water shortages will do it...

...but that's alright, because if one understands that chaos is the rule of the universe and thus is ready and able to just as naturally adapt to it, all will turn out as it should - after all, literal progress evolves that way.

My dear worries are for all the microwaved lemmings who can't help but fully believe that chaos is to be avoided at all costs...

...even at the cost of ceding any individual liberty they have left for any security they can futilely grasp onto.

I'm human enough to wish peace and justice and equality and fairness were the rule...

...but I'm also realist enough to fully understand that those exceptions can only be gained by disenfranchising those who seek to assault individual liberty itself.

It seems to me the universe of chaos is clamoring quite loudly for another healthy dose of collective human freedom...

...which can only be obtained by the steadfast defense of individual liberty for all.

Hallelujah...

...and pass the potatoes, please.

 

[Laurel]

important data

https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/5436270592/h5BA32BC1/

 

[Laurel]

More precisely

http://www.shorpy.com/files/images/imbeciles-morons-idiots-chart.jpg

 

[eyer]

There's really no need to be so callous toward yourself...

 

[Laurel]

Oh, burn!

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51SeMXZ0seL._SL500_AA300_.jpg

 

[eyer]

http://blackhairdeals.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Aloe-Vera-Plant.jpg

 

[Laurel]

*rubs aloe on the burn*

 

[neci]

will you rub my bum?

 

[sigh]

Anyone whose response to those questions changed since DHS was created ten years ago is a short sighted fool. The time to stop it was then. It's way too late to put that horse back in the barn.

Note that we of the GB were properly insightful at the time:

http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=77281

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

About a century ago G.K. Chesterton wrote a literary criticism of Charles Dickens, and in the book he digressed about Dickens' day and modern times (1910s). He noted that in Dickens' time folks jumped into the fray when they observed trouble, whereas in modern times (1910s) people cry for official investigations, and nothing much happens except for the growth of government investigations. In our time you cant get an investigation, even.

 

[Byron In Exile]

http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n307/byroninexile/tia2.jpg

 

[mercury14]

Thread title doesn't match the survey.

 

[CandiCame]

Folk sure love their surveys, don't they?