The question you have to ask then is... WTF is a terrorist? What simply blows my mind with this STUPID war on terrorism is that no one has actually defined what a terrorist is! The worst law EVER passed by Congress, the PATRIOT ACT, actually strips a terrorist of all his civil rights and yet all the while the president can decide almost on a whim whether or not a person actually qualifies as a terrorist. The hundreds of detainees in Guantanamo that were released without charge after being there for several years without trial, makes it clear that a person doesn't even have to commit a crime to be categorized as a terrorist.

So... Carte Blanche for the government!

We Americans don't seem to care much though. We seem to be willing to accept severe treatment of "other" people so long as it's not us. But what many of us don't understand is what separates us from "them", more than anything else, is economic viability. As long as the bulk of Americans are economically viable they present value to big business and everything is cool. With the help of the progressive system of government, this stability is further insured by subsidizing the economic viability of non-productive people or isolating them in prisons.

But the prevailing expectation, given a host of indicators from the concentration of wealth to the rising population in this country, is that more and more Americans will loose their economic viability and when the numbers reach critical mass, there will be a human inclination to rebel.

The emperors of this nation already know this and they've established the "War Against Terrorism" as the perfect excuse to develop all the laws and methods to control us including the NSA and it's extensive surveillance systems.

So... good luck to all of you.

LOL... hardley. Where do you even see that? You must using those special glasses with the words "blame Bush" written on them so you see it in everything a free-thinker ever writes. Sure, I mentioned the USA PATRIOT Act... well dugh, we ARE talking about spying on Americans etc... and sure, Bush was the president who signed it into law but he didn't write it... he probably didn't even read it - he was just following directions, hence my reference to the "The emperors of this nation" which certainly isn't a reference to wee little Bush Jr. But I guess it's a little difficult for someone with such poor reading comprehension to catch... Sorry. Just write it off as more babbling from the overeducated left - that should make you comfortable in your ignorance.

The keyword that you aren't picking up on is "binding". I've also used the term "official" to describe the same thing although binding is more specific. Dictionaries don't provide definitions that laws are bound to. Call me a moron if you want but *I* think that if we are going to subject ourselves to a law containing 700 pages of how to strip liberty from a terrorist there should be a "binding" definition of what a terrorist is... IN THE LAW ITSELF.

comprende?