No, we haven’t developed any kind of symbiosis with Bill Maher, trust me on this one, despite a previous post in which the man expressed opinions regarding Muslims and terrorism that tended to agree with our own take on the subject.

However, here, he does bring up a point that pretty much jibes with the subject of my last post, involving, though from a different and more “direct” perspective, our liberty.

Again, the “what if…?” idea as far as an overly oppressive, liberty smothering government coming into power (gradually, of course) is concerned.

The Boston Police pics and some of Maher’s observations are indeed worrisome, especially to a guy like me who has served our nation in a more covert role at one time and another in countries where these scenes are the norm.

Also, the fusillade of gunfire that was directed at the brother who was allegedly simply laying down in the boat was patently ridiculous, especially if the goal should, indeed, have been to take the man alive.

No, no, don’t say the police fired that kind of a barrage to ensure their own safety from the a–hole possibly returning fire. Maher brought up a good point about that, about “contagious fire” versus the fact that the police involved should have had training.

Jeez, they should have, given the kind of weapons they’re entrusted with.

Wolf, myself or any of our old team mates would have had the guy alive and with less than a fraction of the noise or the destruction that occurred in that instance.

Visiting New York at the moment, I have actually seen squads of NYPD’s finest going around in full combat gear, toting assault weapons. Passing through Grand Central Station, I saw that there’s a sidearm equipped National Guard contingent on duty there.

Why?

Placebo! Neither the cops or the ‘Guard element accomplishes a damn thing in the way of protecting the people, they’re merely there, as has been said here before, to get the public accustomed to seeing a heavily armed, uniformed presence among us.

We are, as someone once said we had a choice in the matter thereof, opting for a decrease in our liberty as a trade for our security, even though the trade we’re making gains us no more security than we’d have without it!

On Sunday, 17 August 1975 on Meet The Press, Senator Frank Church made an interesting and, in view of today’s ill-concealed attempts to infringe on our liberty by the folks on the left side of our political equation, a matter of some concern, observation…

The chairman of the Senate panel probing U.S. intelligence agencies says the government has the technological capacity to impose “total tyranny” if a dictator ever came to power.

“There would be no place to hide,” Senator Frank Church. D Idaho, chairman of the committee, said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet The Press.”

Read On…

Given that this was over 37 years ago and that our surveillance technology has advanced exponentially since then…

Now, this politician was a Democrat, and as we know, the Democrats have generally been the usual suspects when it comes to this kind of paranoia, having as they do a twenty four seven number for the ACLU on speed dial, but in the meantime, it’s actually been those same Democrats, particularly since the far left took over their party, who have been chiseling away at our liberty at every opportunity under the transparently false guise of “respecting” the Constitution.

If any kind of dictator arises in America, he will certainly come from the left side of the aisle — just look, for example, what would happen if there were no Congress standing between Barack Obama and his egotistic pretense of monarchy.

Anyway, just thought I’d share that with you.

“Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you.”