Difference between revisions of "Civil liberties"
(Add about the Singapore model) |
(Destubbed.) |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{concept | {{concept | ||
|wikipedia=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_liberties | |wikipedia=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_liberties | ||
| + | |historycommons=http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=civilliberties | ||
|image=War-on-Terror.jpg | |image=War-on-Terror.jpg | ||
|image_size=370px | |image_size=370px | ||
| + | |sourcewatch=http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Civil_liberties | ||
}} | }} | ||
| + | '''Civil liberties''' are rights and freedoms enjoyed by citizens. They have been dramatically reduced since [[2001]], under the dogma of the "[[war on terror]]". | ||
| + | |||
| + | They have been undermined by the [[Great Reset]]. | ||
==Official narrative== | ==Official narrative== | ||
These have admittedly been rolled back since [[9-11]],<ref>[[File:ICJ report 16-2-09.pdf]]</ref> but will be restored when the perpetual "[[War on Terror]]" is safely concluded. Honest. | These have admittedly been rolled back since [[9-11]],<ref>[[File:ICJ report 16-2-09.pdf]]</ref> but will be restored when the perpetual "[[War on Terror]]" is safely concluded. Honest. | ||
| Line 12: | Line 17: | ||
=="War on Terror"== | =="War on Terror"== | ||
{{FA|War on Terror}} | {{FA|War on Terror}} | ||
| − | The main doctrine pretext under which governments are rolling back civil liberties is the so-called "[[War on Terror]]". They claim that this is a justified and even needed response to the increased threat of global "terrorism". However, prior to [[1979]], no such response was considered. Moreover, this policy has failed to reduce terrorism, but according to [[US state department]], have seen the number of terrorist attacks has increased by around 6500%.<ref>https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/how-to-change-the-world-in-three-easy-steps-92d7ca576fc1#.yp92llqgn</ref> At the same time, various corporations have reaped huge profits from the policy. | + | The main doctrine pretext under which governments are rolling back civil liberties is the so-called "[[War on Terror]]". They claim that this is a justified and even needed response to the increased threat of global "terrorism". However, prior to [[1979]], no such response was considered. Moreover, this policy has failed to reduce "terrorism", but according to [[US state department]], have seen the number of terrorist attacks has increased by around 6500%.<ref>https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/how-to-change-the-world-in-three-easy-steps-92d7ca576fc1#.yp92llqgn</ref> At the same time, various corporations have reaped huge profits from the policy. |
==Singapore Model== | ==Singapore Model== | ||
| − | The tiny [[nation state]] of [[Singapore]] is instructive in the case of civil liberties. This boasts one of the largest per capita GDPs in the world, and has been consistently rated the easiest place in the world to do business, in part because of its near total{{clarify}} lack of civil liberties. [[Naomi | + | The tiny [[nation state]] of [[Singapore]] is instructive in the case of civil liberties. This boasts one of the largest per capita GDPs in the world, and has been consistently rated the easiest place in the world to do business, in part because of its near total{{clarify}} lack of civil liberties. [[Naomi Wolf]] has suggested that the Singapore model may be illustrative of the goal of the drive to reduce or eliminate civil liberties. |
{{SMWDocs}} | {{SMWDocs}} | ||
| + | |||
==References== | ==References== | ||
{{reflist}} | {{reflist}} | ||
| − | |||
Latest revision as of 06:20, 8 July 2021
 Civil liberties     | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Interest of | • ACLU • Big Brother Watch • Silkie Carlo • MLK • National Council for Civil Liberties • NewsBud • Rutherford Institute • State Research • Statewatch |
Civil liberties are rights and freedoms enjoyed by citizens. They have been dramatically reduced since 2001, under the dogma of the "war on terror".
They have been undermined by the Great Reset.
Contents
Official narrative
These have admittedly been rolled back since 9-11,[1] but will be restored when the perpetual "War on Terror" is safely concluded. Honest.
Incipient totalitarianism
The roll back in civil liberties is part of a globally coordinated lurch toward totalitarian government. These are habituating populations to increased mass surveillance and stripping them of even the nominal rights to be free from arbitrary search, kidnapping, detention and even torture and assassination.
"War on Terror"
- Full article:
“War on Terror”
- Full article:
The main doctrine pretext under which governments are rolling back civil liberties is the so-called "War on Terror". They claim that this is a justified and even needed response to the increased threat of global "terrorism". However, prior to 1979, no such response was considered. Moreover, this policy has failed to reduce "terrorism", but according to US state department, have seen the number of terrorist attacks has increased by around 6500%.[2] At the same time, various corporations have reaped huge profits from the policy.
Singapore Model
The tiny nation state of Singapore is instructive in the case of civil liberties. This boasts one of the largest per capita GDPs in the world, and has been consistently rated the easiest place in the world to do business, in part because of its near total[clarification needed] lack of civil liberties. Naomi Wolf has suggested that the Singapore model may be illustrative of the goal of the drive to reduce or eliminate civil liberties.
Related Quotations
| Page | Quote | Author | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| ACLU | “Far from compromising them, vaccine mandates actually further civil liberties. They protect the most vulnerable, people with disabilities and fragile immune systems, children too young to be vaccinated, and communities of color hit hard by the disease.” | 2021 | |
| Bob Wieckowski | “The police power of the state...has absolute authority to force that person (even adults) to get the vaccination...We undervalue our power–the state police power. If we believe that children are being harmed, we go into this domain of family rights, which are not absolute, and my question is: maybe we are not going far enough?” | Bob Wieckowski Bob Wieckowski (California State Senator) | 2015 |
