It's funny, you speak of "no meaning" as if you have a scientific basis for this. Unless you do, your opinion is no more valid than the guy strapping a bomb on himself to get 72 virgins, and no less dogmatic. Not everyone defines "meaning" is as narrow a manner as you.

For starters, deism isn't a religion, which makes the rest of the comment not worth bothering with.

I've been deistic for decades. It discounts the idea that god is an old man on the mountain, but maintains the idea that there is purpose and meaning to everything, not just man.

As you point out, not all birds of a feather stick together. I'm not a Tea Party guy. I'm just not closed minded enough to judge a friend by their politics. If you only have friends that agree with your politics, you are probably narrow minded or take politics too seriously.

Has the United States of America become a member of The Totalitarian Club ?

Yes. Each President has been moving in this direction more and more, but Obama has managed to overreach even more than those before him. Take the IRS, for instance. I personally know of people who have been getting involved with Tea Party politics and now are getting audited. Like their politics or not (it doesn't matter), that is totalitarianism, which means the next time a GOP'er gets in, he can do the same thing. It isn't a good time to be an American.

However, it takes a really fast car to stay on the other side of the planet.

I'm sure Blackberry used to say the same about the various upstarts that tried to dethrown them... and we know how well that worked out.

You know, the really pathetic thing about what you just said is that I've never illegally downloaded music or movies, and never cheated on my partner.

Care to cite where I accused you of any such thing?

And you're seriously saying that will get flagged as a lie and make me untrustworthy?

Depends on what else they know... either based on their own info or that which is said about you by others and the credibility of those statements.

Let me tell you this right now ... the people screening based on those things are morons unless they actually have proof to the contrary.

Oh? And you've been on the receiving end of such Q's and know their mental processes? I haven't... so I can't say either way.

Because unless you have evidence, assuming everyone who answers no to those questions is lying is completely idiotic. Because, not everybody has done those things, and if you have no evidence suggesting otherwise is just being an asshole.

No where did I say answering no would get you flagged as a liar... I said that depending on the circumstances they it will raising a flag that they may not be the most trustworthy. Key word in that sentence *may*. Further investigation may be required. Maybe they've honestly never used Napster back in the day and instead has a rather lengthy iTunes purchase history?

A broader thing is you seem to thinks such a background check has the same level of evidence & burden of proof as a court does in a criminal trial. It does not.

I increasingly believe the people who do security screenings don't give an actual damn about the truth, just their own interpretations of reality.

Very true at the airport, when it comes to security clearances... it depends on who is doing the vetting and to what degree they are doing it (based on the degree of clearance being sought).

It's not about answering yes or no. It's about disclosure.

Exactly, but let me add... these background checks aren't so much about checking as to if you've lead a boring and uncompromised life... but more about gauging your integrity with regards to honesty and ability to be blackmailed.

Example: An old college of mine is now a feeder to a couple of government agencies which give out a few scholarships each year... which in turn require a background check. One of the questions that screws up most kids is "Have you ever illegally downloaded any music or movies from the internet?" (or something to that effect).

Most kids put "no"... not wanting to admit wrong doing... but by doing so end up raising a flag that they may not be the most trustworthy as it's rather unlikely given their age and background (those applying for these scholarships).

Ditto for Q's regarding fidelity. If you've been unfaithful and your spouse doesn't know, it can be used against you (ie "Give me a copy of the blueprints or... I'll tell your wife and the rest of your family that you cheated on them... with another man."

Correct, Lavabit tried just that ( http://nakedsecurity.sophos.co... ) and was held in contempt for it ( http://www.theguardian.com/tec... ).

You can't deliberate engage in activities to make it more expensive or complex for law enforcement to search subpoenaed records.

That's not quite accurate.

If the intent is to make it more difficult... then you best not have any evidence that it was done deliberately then you will be in for a world of pain.

If however it is part of your normal business processes and as a side effect it makes law enforcement's job harder... that is still perfectly legal.

Slingshots (ie: wrist rockets) are better for squirrel, faster projectile. You need perfectly round projectiles, like marbles, so they don't wobble in flight. And yes, I've eaten squirrel, usually "Squirrel and dumplings". Not bad if the squirrels aren't too gamey, it just takes a lot of squirrels to make a pot. We ate normal food most of the time, but my parents made sure all 7 of us tasted squirrel, turtle, rabbit and lots of deer, dove, quail, duck, lake fish, wild turkey and other game. Most parents don't teach self-sufficiency and basic survival skills, except those that the majority snidely call "rednecks".

And the "wrist rocket" IS technology: the taking of an old concept, and updating it with the most modern materials. You can do some serious damage with one of those.

No they've been very clear... just like Al-Qaeda was in the 90's.

Hopefully this time around it doesn't take a few buildings getting knocked down down for us to respond properly.

True, but don't forget that Germany did declare war on the US first and that the US was more or less obligated to respond in some way... which we did with our own declaration later on the same day.