Bridgegate
- Thread starter myp
- Start date
-
- Tags
- bridgegate
EPA didn't do any of that. Only the congress can pass laws. EPA is still just a group of people that extort citizens.
Had you spent even a few moments reading the links...you might have noted that each of these instances involved the EPA and many of the laws congress enacted because of what they recommended...as well as enforcement of said laws by the federal agency tasked with doing so, we refer to this as the Environmental Protection Agency.
You could think of this in an analogy:
A police officer (such as yourself), is charged with catching a bad guy because he stole some money from a little old lady. She was defenseless to stop it, but fortunately the city has hired the officer at taxpayer expense (extortion), to enforce the laws enacted by this city (the EPA) and return her money to her, as well as prevent the bad guy from stealing again.
Granny gets her money back (environmental clean-up), and gets to buy her cat food next week (return to acceptable environment).
Had the city not decided to have a police force, the cat would starve and little old ladies everywhere would be targets for bad guys all over the city...eventually leading to many dead cats and fearful grannies, including yours.
I read the links. I just don't think the EPA serves a valid purpose. Much like the DEA or homeland security.
This analogy would work if it were honest.You could think of this in an analogy:
A police officer (such as yourself), is charged with catching a bad guy because he stole some money from a little old lady. She was defenseless to stop it, but fortunately the city has hired the officer at taxpayer expense (extortion), to enforce the laws enacted by this city (the EPA) and return her money to her, as well as prevent the bad guy from stealing again.
Granny gets her money back (environmental clean-up), and gets to buy her cat food next week (return to acceptable environment).
Had the city not decided to have a police force, the cat would starve and little old ladies everywhere would be targets for bad guys all over the city...eventually leading to many dead cats and fearful grannies, including yours.
The reality is it is more like organized crime. A business opens up in a neighborhood. In this case a business is a business and the neighborhood is the united states. In order to do business in this neighborhood you have to pay protection to the large powerful organization or mafia (EPA). While the unsuspecting customer sees the nice beefy dude (EPA'S public image) protecting the store. In reality they are just collecting money for their own purposes..
If the EPA can make up laws that brings them more money and validate their existence, that becomes their motive. I am not interested in drinking that particular koolaide.
If the mafia in your analogy served no public purpose, or if this mafia extorted from the business and spent the money to maintain the neighborhood greenery and water supply....you might have a point.
It seems however, that your perception of public safety does not encompass the entire public....but instead just your own family.
Likely, you will continue to see no purpose in the EPA, DEA, and Homeland security until someone spills their Meth lab into your well, poisons your kid and blows up your house.
I have seen the hells angles "give back to the community". Not a bad tactic to improve public image.
Hyperbole and pigeonholeing? I never said anything to provoke this partisan attack.
I would see purpose in the DEA if they did do something about meth hoses. They don't. I have seen state police do things about it, local police, hell I have seen Mexican police do things about it. Only federal agency I ever saw involved with a meth lab was the ATFE.
Home bombings didn't occur with any more frequency prior to homeland security existing. I don't buy into the paranoia. Giving up liberty for safety is asinine.
If the EPA did anything besides bully business and levy fines I would support them.
http://therogersinstitute.blogspot.com/2009/01/epa-cow-tax-could-charge-175-per-dairy.html?m=1
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Govern...ead-Bullets-Thanks-To-EPA-State-Regs-Military
http://bunkerville.wordpress.com/2013/12/22/epa-to-ban-lead-bullets-will-end-sportsman-shooting/
EPA is nothing more than a progressive weapon to force through policy nobody wants.
Who would have ever thought that a government nanny that thinks it knows best would be used this way?
Last edited:
I believe you are confusing liberty with privacy. Now which liberty do you feel has been "given up"???
Americans have been assassinated and thrown into concentration camps, journalists have had to self-censor to avoid being labeled as traitors, there are secret courts, you have the TSA bullying people (and offering a paid 'service' to bypass it all) plus all the privacy issues.
I believe you are confusing liberty with privacy. Now which liberty do you feel has been "given up"???
Privacy is a liberty. If I had it once and now it was taken away that means I am less liberated.
Yes you can. No government agent can just walk up and search me without reasonable suspicion.
No not a horse of a different color. You can't see my identification, income, bank accounts, really anything whatsoever. You can see my haircut but that was never really private.
I seem to have a lot of privacy in public.
I said giving up liberty forSAFETY, not privacy, is asinine.
You are confused between safety, and privacy.
I agree 100%!!! Along with a great majority of the general public. That is why it will never happen!
Yet it has numerous times.
I agree 100%!!! Along with a great majority of the general public. That is why it will never happen!
We have a concentration camp in Cuba and that's just the 1 we know of. The Patriot Act. Assassination of US citizens, often times for no other 'crime' than associating with overly vocal dissidents (that have a surprising tendency to be Muslim despite the broadness of the sometimes militant dissident population). I could go on but I've made my point.
I agree 100%!!! Along with a great majority of the general public. That is why it will never happen!
This was just in Barak Obama's and George Bush's presidency.
The doctrine of global supremacy and the advocacy of preemptive war, outlawed by the United Nations charter.
• Refusal to recognize international law or the applicability of the Geneva Accords.
• Roundup of immigrants after 9/ll, thousands of persons held without charges.
• The Patriot Act, authorizing massive government spying, now renewed by Obama and the Democratic-controlled Congress.
• Domestic deployment of the military as law enforcement in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878.
• Secret deportation hearings.
• Seizure of citizens as “enemy combatants.”
• Massive secret wiretaps in violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), later made legal by Obama and Congress.
• Issuance of secret administrative warrants for all kinds of records under the Patriot Act.
• Suppression of Muslim charities.
• Secret “sneak and peek” searches under the Patriot Act.
• Classification of most government records. A reversal of the idea that government should be transparent, but people’s lives private.
• Legitimization of torture. (Obama said he made torture illegal — it already was, even when Bush authorized it. Those who authorized and carried it out must be indicted and tried. Obama doesn’t want to touch that possibility.)
• Special rendition (outsourcing torture, which Obama still upholds).
• Establishment of private military contractors like the mercenaries of Blackwater.
• Assertion of Executive supremacy through “signing statements.”
• Doctrine of “Unitary Executive,” elevating the Executive Branch above Congress and the Judiciary.
• The 2007 John Warner National Defense Act, which allows the President to deploy the National Guard of one state into another state without the permission of either governor.
• The contracting for $385 million with Kellog, Brown, and Root, a subsidiary of Halliburton, *for the construction of a detention camp meant not just for immigrants.
• The introduction of military commissions to try criminal cases.
• The assertion of the state secrets privilege to protect the government from lawsuits by victims of torture and government abuse.
Similar threads
