jump to last post 1-4 of 4 discussions (7 posts)

Is signing the StopWatchingUs petition to Congress counterintuitive?

  1. ptosis profile image73
    ptosisposted 4 years ago

    Is signing the  StopWatchingUs petition to Congress counterintuitive?

    If I'm putting my real name and address to Congress in the petition - aren't I just given up my privacy and could be considered a 'terrorist' under FBI's  profiling?  The following may get ANYBODY labeled as a “suspected terrorist” today: valuing online privacy, being Christian, reverent of individual liberty, a belief that one’s personal and/or national “way of life” is under attack, Oppose GMO's .....


  2. d.william profile image62
    d.williamposted 4 years ago

    Yes, and no.  Of course by signing any petition that opposes anything that congress is doing, trying to do, or already has done puts you on that proverbial black list and you are scrutinized more closely than those who kiss up to them, or say nothing at all.
    But if we do not speak out against the things we find repugnant, then we are in essence condoning and agreeing with those attacks perpetrated on us by the government and their allies (big business, wall street, the wealthy, etc.., and companies like Monsanto that is altering all of our foods without any restrictions, or concern for public health and safety both by them and the government). 
    According to congress we as individuals do not deserve to know what is in our foods if it might take a few dollars in profit away from their benefactors.
    the more people who speak out, the louder our voices become and the more apt congress will at least consider our voices before they stab us in the back.

    1. ptosis profile image73
      ptosisposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Thank you

  3. maxoxam41 profile image73
    maxoxam41posted 4 years ago

    If I am profiled a terrorist because I believe in one of the cornerstone of our constitution then so be it but I will NEVER give up my freedom of speech. I will sign it.

    1. ptosis profile image73
      ptosisposted 4 years agoin reply to this


  4. Gareth Pritchard profile image86
    Gareth Pritchardposted 4 years ago


    Timeless lyrics, as relevant today as they where when he first wrote them. 

    Now after this question being up for 2 days there is only two answers on such a serious issue. It just shows to me how people really are worried about being on some government list. What these people don't know is two things really. One is that if they use the internet then they are already on that government list because the government have been spying on people for a very long time, almost as long as there has been a government.

    The second thing is that because people are worried about the potential outcomes of criticizing government spying it shows that that alone is spreading fear into the so called democratic populations of the world, manipulating them into keeping their mouths shut in the face of adversity. The real question is who are the terrorists then? I think it would be safe to say that it is those spreading fear and that's not being done by me or you for sure. 

    Does anybody think that this is good market research on the governments part for seeing how much they can get away with and how much the public will ignore what's going on for fear of their own so called governments?

    If the truth is a problem then they better come and get me now because I am not changing it for the greedy hands of politics and the death of institutional Philosophy or the truncation of truth.

    Just say NO!

    1. ptosis profile image73
      ptosisposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Doublespeak is language that deliberately disguises, distorts, or reverses the meaning of words. The original meaning is state terrorism  conducted  against its own people has been turned around to include freedom of assembly & speech.