Slashdot Mirror

It was The Progressive, in 1979, and it was thermonuclear bombs, not atomic. (there is no secret to be kept, quoted in 1945. Everyone already know how to build a Uranium bomb, so much so that it wasn't worth testing.) And it wasn't a complete guide, but more of a "these are the mountainous engineering challenges you need to solve". Since communist spies had already lifted far better materials, I don't think the magazine actually helped anyone except curious American nerds.

Full issue in PDF available here. And it is fascinating, if you are into that sort of thing.

Isn't game theory, it's manipulation by fascists
see http://www.progressive.org/new...
The Koch bros are Birchers, and the John Birch society was a organization founded to spread paranoid racist lies, and attempt to do it in secret.

And their money funded the tea party.

Not Did you read the link? US Supreme Court uphold free speech principles in this case. as not free speech per se. he was at a private mall, the security guards didnt like his shirt and told him to leave. he refused, so police hauled him off. constitution stops at the door - it only applies to govt. also, I couldn't find the resolution of the case, whether it was dropped etc. exceptional abusive action by the Bush campaign, overturned by the courts and the guy won $80k in court. pres was a dick, but free speech wins at the end. again, did you read the article? as you overzealous principal, supreme court directly contradicts and supports free speech. I couldnt find how the case resolved itself but it seems cut and dry. may private company, constitution stops at the front door. think dont know how this turned out. protests are usually fine within boundaries. cities usually issue permits, etc. Sure, it's not surprising that a low-level gov't peon steps over the bounds, but in every case the supreme court or other courts support free speech rights.

Yes, exactly right. It is ok for people to burn the flag and chant dept to America. It's also ok for people to make crappy YouTube videos. That's what makes America exceptionally great.

Not
as
exceptional
as you
may
think

And yet you can blithely say that, posting logged in to your account, with full knowledge that your IP address and user agent string are being logged, and yet still have no fear that the US government will ever come hunting you down for your disparaging remarks.

Spoken like someone who's never tried confronting an American politician or candidate with an opinion they don't care for, in person.

Why not? The FBI infiltrates US peace groups:

http://www.progressive.org/mc011411.html
http://www.progressive.org/mc052609.html

Why not? The FBI infiltrates US peace groups:

http://www.progressive.org/mc011411.html
http://www.progressive.org/mc052609.html

I'll give you that Bush was more tolerant than Mugabe, for whatever that is worth. But if you think there were "no consequences" and nobody got arrested you're mistaken.

http://www.mountainx.com/news/2007/activist_arrested_after_displaying_impeach_bush_cheney_sign_on_overpass

http://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=9167

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2927369

http://www.progressive.org/mag_wx081607

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=6702

http://warisacrime.org/node/30068

Yeah, things like bomb making and child porn get you in trouble.

Bomb making gets you into trouble but there's no law in the United States against sharing the knowledge to do so. Hell, you can even publish the designs for a fusion bomb in the United States. I wonder if the same is true in China?

"1. We do not live in a world of abundance, fusion and self replicating machines do not exist."

Corn, dogs, and trees are self-replicating machines. Taken as a whole, most cities are self-replicating machines. So, we have long had that technology, even as better technology might make things easier. We do have fusion energy, it's called the sun. :-)

Well, unless you believe in the alternative plausible theory that the Sun is essentially a lump of iron (or neutronium) and the energy is produced by gravitational forces an other things: :-)
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/iron-02b.html

In any case, objectively, the Earth receives 10,000 times as much solar energy each day as our civilization uses, and we have more geothermal resources, and there is lots more energy and matter in space.

"2. The solution you propose (neo-Marxism) idealizes man, it ignores the fact that man is selfish, greedy, and competitive."

First, why do you call it neo-Marxism? Is anything involving cooperation Marxist?

Second, while it is true that some people are sometimes selfish, greedy, and competitive, that is not the sum total of all human behavior. One big change with advancing technology is it is ever easier for a very few altruistic people to take care of the rest of the people who are lazy unless they get direct material rewards. So, for example, it only takes 1% of the US workforce to grow all the food the US needs. It really only takes a few percent of the workforce right not to produce most of the goods people really need (granted some people want more). And most services are optional or probably not needed as they are just related to guarding. So, we already live in a world of abundance where maybe an altruistic 5% could produce everything everyone needed. But our economy is not organized that way overall, even if you may see it in spots here and there like Wikipedia or Debian GNU/Linux.

"3. Marxism has had 150 years to prove itself and has failed at each and every implementation."

I don't know; Cuba weathered it's Peak Oil crisis pretty well, all things considered.
"Can the West cultivate ideas from Cuba's 'Special Period'?"
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/03/29/eco.cubaagriculture/index.html

It depends what you consider a failure. I consider being rated as second from bottom of industrialized countries for child well-being a massive failure, and that's where the USA is. I consider massive brainwashing by compulsory education dumbing people down as Gatto suggests due to an attempt to realize a 19th century vision of a captalistic factory-based utopia a massive failure, but that's what the USA has. By what right do you call that a success? Likewise, even if we have not blow ourselves up with nuclear weapons, or killed ourselves off with weaponized plagues, the fact that the USA has chosen to run that risk shows a failure of the imagination. Now the USA is building lots of military robots to enforce a social order built around forcing people to work, instead of building robots to do the work. How is that a success? The USSR may have lost the Cold War, but IMHO so did the USA.

So, what countries would you hold up as a success for individual success? Until about a year ago, Iceland was touted as the success model of meritocracy and independent initiative. Now the entire country is bankrupt (or whatever is the right term for that). Conservatives aren't so busy touting Icelandic model anymore.

This is more what I see:
"A Just Cause A Just War"
http://www.progressive.org/zinnjuly09.html
"In Search of Morale: Are Americans Too Broken for the Truth to Set Us Free?"

You too can become a James Bond of IT with rights to"shoot to kill".

More details.

Uh.. I think he was suggesting that the government investigates things that aren't even suspected crimes. If you relax the word "investigate" and just say "fuck with" then there are already real life examples.

Secondly, the press did cover Biden's "gaffes".

They did cover gaffes — socially awkward or tactless acts. But not the "gaffes" — stupidities and outright lunacies smoothed-over as mere gaffes. For example, if it were anyone from the opposing ticket, claiming:

When we kicked -- along with France, we kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon, I said and Barack said, "Move NATO forces in there. Fill the vacuum, because if you don't know -- if you don't, Hezbollah will control it."

MSNBC would've had a "Lebanon History Special" at prime time to show the entire nation, just how pathetically wrong that statement was — and on how many levels!

But it was Biden and up until very recently even a well-meaning slashdotter (not some Joe Carpenter) didn't realize, just how far from this Universe the man, chosen by Obama for his "foreign policy credentials," really lives.

McCain chose Palin. That was part of his strategy to energize the Religious Right AND an attempt to get the female vote.

And Obama chose Biden. That was part of his strategy to alleviate the concerns of his own foreign policy inexperience and reduce the impact of racial prejudices. That one strategy worked and the other didn't is works of the press and their now-documented bias towards Obama. The media — dishonestly — claimed, that Palin's inexperience trumps Obama's (as if they ran for the same post!), while looking the other way as Joe Biden mounted one lunacy over another.

Now that Obama has won, we might see more penance from the reporters and editors. We may even get some buyer's remorse from the voters. But they'll be justified, claiming, the papers misled them. This will be studied in journalism courses as a great example, of how not to write...

Dude, I talking 4th amendment, unreasonable search and seizure, not ex-post-facto law. FISA trashes the 4th Amendment.

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

--------

"...Unfortunately, even with such a safeguard, the proposed legislation would still grant both retroactive and future legal immunity to telecom companies that help government conduct its surveillance activities. Not only does H.R. 6304 grant immunity from civil action to telecoms that participated in the presidentâ(TM)s surveillance program during the period beginning on September 11, 2001 and ending on January 17, 2007.

It also unconditionally releases these companies from any future liability (presumably both civil and criminal). For it unqualifiedly states, "No cause of action shall lie in any court against any electronic communication service provider for providing any information, facilities, or assistance in accordance with a directive issued pursuant to paragraph (1)." So, if American citizens cannot file suit against these companies for past or future violations of their Fourth Amendment right to privacy, then it has to be questioned how this Act preserves this constitutional right..."

http://www.electiondefensealliance.org/2008/07/fisa_amendment_just_time_steal_election

"The Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence may direct, in writing, an electronic communication service provider to a) "immediately provide the Government with all information, facilities, or assistance necessary . . . b) maintain under security procedures approved by the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence any records concerning the acquisition or the aid furnished. . . ."

And hereâ(TM)s the kicker: "No cause of action shall lie in any court against any electronic communication service provider" for providing this information.

Thus we have the Congress granting to the Executive Branch and the private sector enormous new powers to violate our privacy.

In essence, the government can now conscript the private sector to do its dirty work. But donâ(TM)t pity the companies; the government will pay them for coughing up our secrets, the bill says. âoeThe government shall compensate, at the prevailing rate, an electronic communication service provider for providing information, facilities, or assistance...."

http://www.progressive.org/mag/wx071008.html

Ya' think making corporations completely immune from prosecution of any kind for any legal or illegal work it does to spy on people for the government in the past PRESENT AND FUTURE might be a just a wee bit of a violation for the 4th Amendment?

He's a self-described liberal that cheered on our Iraq warmongering, providing the Bush administration with the kind of media cover they need. His social commentary is equally misguided, and as such, he's a pundit without a real audience. He's been unapologetic on his cheerleading, wishing upon a star for a 3rd party (built on the "centrism" and "bipartisanship" of Joe Lieberman and John McCain). In short, an idiot.

don't forget the Empires Ruling Elite .. it's coming fast and sheeple still sleep ..

a couple of links ..

http://infowars.net/articles/april2008/180408impact.htm

http://www.progressive.org/mag_rothschild0308

Matt Rothschild on YouTube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDX0CuuRYDI

http://www.infragard.net/

It's just those conspiracy nuts ..

When in simple fact in order for there to be a Conspiracy .. all that is required is that there be a preconceived plan .. nothing more ..

The big media (NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, NYT, etc) basically support the powers that be. 40 or 50 years ago, when liberals ran the country, there may have been some truth to claims of "left wing media bias". But conservatives have run the country since at least Reagan (arguably since Nixon), and so the media has actually had a right wing bias for many years. See, e.g., http://www.fair.org/index.php

If you want to read real "leftist" media, try The Nation http://www.thenation.com/ or The Progressive http://www.progressive.org/

For extensively documented long list of police brutality in the U.S. circa 1999 see:

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR5114719 99?open&of=ENG-USA

Police killed almost 10,000 people in a 20 year period between 1976 and 1998:

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/0428-04.ht m

Police have tasered 167 people to death in just the last 7 years, clearly when a taser is deployed death ought not to result.

http://www.azcentral.com/specials/special43/articl es/1224taserlist24-ON.html

According to Human Rights Watch an internationally respected human rights organization these conditions obtain in American prisons:

"In recent years, U.S. prison inmates have been beaten with fists and batons, stomped on, kicked, shot, stunned with electronic devices, doused with chemical sprays, choked, and slammed face first onto concrete floors by the officers whose job it is to guard them. Inmates have ended up with broken jaws, smashed ribs, perforated eardrums, missing teeth, burn scars--not to mention psychological scars and emotional pain. Some have died.

Both men and women prisoners--but especially women--face staff rape and sexual abuse. Correctional officers will bribe, coerce, or violently force inmates into granting sexual favors, including oral sex or intercourse. Prison staff have laughed at and ignored the pleas of male prisoners seeking protection from rape by other inmates."

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2004/05/14/usdom8583.h tm

And the use of restraint chairs as torture devices in U.S. jails and prisons:

" restraint chairs have been used for punishment of nonthreatening behavior;

children have been strapped into the chairs for nonviolent behaviors;

nude inmates and detainees have been strapped into restraint chairs;

prisoners have been left in restraint chairs for as long as eight days. In some cases, the jail staff failed to manipulate the prisoners' limbs to protect against blood clots;

prisoners have been required to testify while in restraint chairs;

prisoners have been interrogated while in restraint chairs;

prisoners have been injured while in restraint chairs;

prisoners have been tortured by being hooded, pepper-gassed, beaten, or threatened with electrocution while in the chairs;

at least eleven people have died under questionable circumstances after being strapped into a restraint chair.

Use of the restraint chair is widespread: Jails, state and federal prisons, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the U.S. Marshals Service, state mental hospitals, juvenile detention centers, and foreign governments are all equipped with the chair.

Amnesty International has called for a federal investigation into use of the restraint chair. The device "is an issue of great concern to us," says Angela Wright, a researcher at Amnesty's headquarters in London. "It appears to be used in some jurisdictions as a front-line or even routine form of control, including as a punishment for disruptive or annoying behavior."

http://www.progressive.org/mag_cusacchair

And swat teams are being militarized and given ex-military hardware:

"It's unlikely that the officer who shot Culosi did so intentionally. But it's also unlikely that the investigation into this shooting will address why police sent a military-style unit to arrest an optometrist under investigation for a nonviolent crime and why the officers had their guns drawn when approaching a man with no history of violence.

I'd probably be arrested.

To all the free speech advocates who cannot believe how this could happen in England and who are so self-assured about free speech in the US, a guy named Steve Howards got thrown in jail accused of assaulting the vice-president for saying the following to him:

Your policies in Iraq are reprehensible.

http://www.progressive.org/mag_mc100406

If you think this sucks, do something about it here at home and support Steve Howard's lawsuit in support of his right to free speech.

And this.

While one cannot be certain what exactly will happen, history has shown us that people usually react fairly strongly to anything that gets in the way of their freedom. And Americans have certainly proven this point.

When exactly in the last years?

There is a difference between rumours of elections being rigged versus actual evidence.

I'd say the evidence is there just nobody seems interested in picking it up. Might be because some KGB^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Federal institutions are actively persecuting people who have differing opinions?

Remember: Elections are not a sign of democracy. Hitler was democratically elected (besides, he won most of his wars and took personal responsibility after obviously loosing the last one). They are necessary, but they are not enough.

I more fear that it will be like 1984. Cameras everywhere, mass surveillance, no criticism of the rulers allowed.

Aren't we pretty near the 1984 society already? This would no longer be news today.

Section 215 of the act allows FBI agents to obtain a warrant from a secret federal court for library or bookstore records of anyone connected to an investigation of international terrorism or spying.

Unlike conventional search warrants, there is no need for agents to show that the target is suspected of a crime or possesses evidence of a crime.

Do you remember in the wake of 9/11 how one person asked a Post Office clerk if there were any stamps without American flags on them and got detained and questioned?

Nope, but if you have a URL I would love to see it.

Want to be more disturbed? Read about the new 385m$ internment camps under construction in the US.

The case against Frank Van Den Bosch was dismissed on May 27.

On June 8, Van Den Bosch's attorney, Andrea Baker, filed a civil complaint against Platteville Police Chief Earl Hernandez, five other police officers, and one fire fighter.

http://www.studentsfororwell.org/

of course, the secret service actually comes to the door of many kids...

here are 3 diff examples:
http://www.progressive.org/mag_mc100405
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/170992_prosser 28.html
http://www.warblogging.com/archives/000379.php
http://shockandblog.com/blog/modules.php?name=News &file=article&sid=16
http://shockandblog.com/blog/modules.php?name=News &file=article&sid=18

Let me guess. Everything bad that is happening is made up. All of it. They are all partisan attacks to make George Bush look bad. We are actually living in the freest paradise on the planet and nothing bad happens here. ...

http://www.studentsfororwell.org/

of course, the secret service actually comes to the door of many kids...

here are 3 diff examples:
http://www.progressive.org/mag_mc100405
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/170992_prosser 28.html
http://www.warblogging.com/archives/000379.php
http://shockandblog.com/blog/modules.php?name=News &file=article&sid=16
http://shockandblog.com/blog/modules.php?name=News &file=article&sid=18

Let me guess. Everything bad that is happening is made up. All of it. They are all partisan attacks to make George Bush look bad. We are actually living in the freest paradise on the planet and nothing bad happens here.

http://progressive.org/mag_mc122605

The UMass Dartmouth student who alleged that Homeland Security had questioned him over his library request for Mao's "Little Red Book" has now come clean. "The student confessed that he had made it up after being confronted by the professor who had repeated the story to a Standard-Times reporter," Jonathan Saltzman of the Boston Globe reported. Professor Brian Glyn Williams told the Globe that when he questioned the student about inconsistencies in his story, the student replied: "I made it up. I'm sorry. . . . I'm so relieved that it's over."

A much more detailed account is here:
http://www.southcoasttoday.com/daily/12-05/12-24-0 5/a01lo719.htm

In the bigger picture, we live in a world frought with privacy invasions that we have learned to accept...but stick "web-enabled" in front of it and people get all crazy. The photos you drop off at Wal-Mart can be turned over to the Secret Service, no telling what happens with your pay-per-view video data, and your boss can watch your at-work search patterns by analyzing your firewall logs, yet we continue to use these services. I'm not trying to say these things are good, just that we can't go all Chicken Little over every new product offering that comes out. You can always choose not to play (in some cases).

Someone should point out that the U.S. hardly seems like a country and culture that champions free speech.

Protesters are placed in "free speech zones" (nice euphemism!) where they will not be seen on TV
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/08/04/hilden.freespeec h/
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/ch ronicle/archive/2004/01/04/INGPQ40MB81.DTL

A high-school student who made a political poster got a visit from the secret service (they confiscated the poster)
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/170992_prosser 28.html

Police, FBI, and Homeland security frequently target and harrass protesters
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/ACLU_sues_Homeland_S ecurity_for_arresting_spying_on_vegans_who_protest ed_0922.html
http://www.progressive.org/mcwatch04/mc1021a04.htm l

The FBI defines peace groups as "terrorists"
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/ACLU_reveals_FBI_lab eled_peace_affirmative_action_group_terrori_0829.h tml

An Ohio paper did not print some story for fear of being jailed.
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/artic le_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000976374

The government has misrepresented and altered the conclusions of scientific panels on global warming and other issues.
http://www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,1286,62339,00. html

Officials how have an unpopular (but true) message are fired (numerous), their wives are targeted (Plame), etc.

The BBC says the "embedded journalist" restrictions on the Iraq calls into question the credibility of Americas media
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/ 20030425/media_nm/iraq_media_bbc_dc_4

People were excluded from church for being of the wrong party.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/church_politics

Airline passengers who ask questions are targeted
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=512&u=/ ap/20040317/ap_on_go_coairline_passenger_screening _3&printer=1

The US has a history of killing non-US journalists in Iraq...so many times that it's getting hard to believe it's not intentional.

People wearing anti-Bush T-shirts arrested
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/South/08/21/heckler.fir ed.ap/index.html

Teachers Evicted From Bush Event for Wearing 'Protect Our Civil Liberties' T-Shirts.
http://www.progressive.org/mcwatch04/mc101604.htm

Someone wearing an anti-Bush T-shirt was kicked off a Southwest plane.

and so on...

Certainly, America is not as bad off as Saudi Arabia, but that's not saying much.
This is not a country we can trust to safeguard free speech on the internet.

I think Americans only u

Someone should point out that the U.S. hardly seems like a country and culture that champions free speech.

Protesters are placed in "free speech zones" (nice euphemism!) where they will not be seen on TV
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/08/04/hilden.freespeec h/
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/ch ronicle/archive/2004/01/04/INGPQ40MB81.DTL

A high-school student who made a political poster got a visit from the secret service (they confiscated the poster)
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/170992_prosser 28.html

Police, FBI, and Homeland security frequently target and harrass protesters
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/ACLU_sues_Homeland_S ecurity_for_arresting_spying_on_vegans_who_protest ed_0922.html
http://www.progressive.org/mcwatch04/mc1021a04.htm l

The FBI defines peace groups as "terrorists"
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/ACLU_reveals_FBI_lab eled_peace_affirmative_action_group_terrori_0829.h tml

An Ohio paper did not print some story for fear of being jailed.
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/artic le_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000976374

The government has misrepresented and altered the conclusions of scientific panels on global warming and other issues.
http://www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,1286,62339,00. html

Officials how have an unpopular (but true) message are fired (numerous), their wives are targeted (Plame), etc.

The BBC says the "embedded journalist" restrictions on the Iraq calls into question the credibility of Americas media
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/ 20030425/media_nm/iraq_media_bbc_dc_4

People were excluded from church for being of the wrong party.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/church_politics

Airline passengers who ask questions are targeted
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=512&u=/ ap/20040317/ap_on_go_coairline_passenger_screening _3&printer=1

The US has a history of killing non-US journalists in Iraq...so many times that it's getting hard to believe it's not intentional.

People wearing anti-Bush T-shirts arrested
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/South/08/21/heckler.fir ed.ap/index.html

Teachers Evicted From Bush Event for Wearing 'Protect Our Civil Liberties' T-Shirts.
http://www.progressive.org/mcwatch04/mc101604.htm

Someone wearing an anti-Bush T-shirt was kicked off a Southwest plane.

and so on...

Certainly, America is not as bad off as Saudi Arabia, but that's not saying much.
This is not a country we can trust to safeguard free speech on the internet.

I think Americans only u

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/computing/perso naltech/20050530-9999-mz1b30snap.html

http://progressive.org/mag_mc100405

Big deal, my high school physics textbook had all this information as well.

Actually, your high school physics book probably has *more* information. This "in-depth article" is nothing more than a few graphs and a description.

That being said, nuclear fission technology is stupidly simple in it theoretical foundations. Once one is able to build an atomic pile (demonstrating sufficient purity of U235), it's only a short period of time until a gun-type A-Bomb can be made. All you need is two sub-critical masses of U235 that add up to a critical mass. Mount one mass in a stationary (and strong!) holder. Take the other piece and mount in some sort of gun. The more force the gun can impart on the second piece, the better. Fire the first piece at the second, and viola! You're dead!

Ermm... I mean... you can see a pretty light show from the U235 compressing into a super-critical bundle.

Nuclear reactors and Implosion bombs are a bit more difficult, but not beyond any country with sufficient industrial capability. This article from the magazine "The Progressive" tells you how to build a hydrogen bomb. Good luck on that, though. Implosion bombs aren't too bad with computer modelling, but H-Bombs are REALLY, REALLY tricky.

Of course, if a Slashdotter with no formal training in nuclear science can desribe how bombs are built, is there any question as to why nuclear materials are carefully controlled?

You couldn't be more wrong. Enron was one of Bush's biggest contributors.

http://www.progressive.org/pc0900.htm

http://www.knowthecandidates.org/ktc/BushAnalysis. htm

You, sir, really need to get your facts straight. A simple google search reveals the links between Bush and Enron. It takes all of five minutes. Try it sometime, you might learn something.

It should be noted that most of the fallout from current thermonuclear warheads is produced entirely by choice. As reported, for example, in the famous Progressive Magazine article of 1979, over half of the energy released and most of the fallout produced by such a warhead comes from fission that occurs after the fusion explosion. Effectively, the fusion explosion serves to produce a much larger and more complete burning of fissile material than could be produced with conventional explosives.

leftist bias in the "mainstream" media (CBS, ABS, NBC, NYT, LAT, etc.).

Only NYT in your list even comes close to publishing liberal perspectives (not exclusivly). If you want good liberal perspectives visit: salon.com or The Nation or The Progressive necessary if you want a counterpoint to the right-wing perspectives that dominate.

Good arguments all around - just a little different philosophy I think.
The "Just War" doctrine is in my mind oxymoronic. Morality, in my opinion, is at odds with warfare, and therefore a war can never be just.
Remember the old adage "The pen is mightier than the sword"? The failure to exhaust the options of diplomacy, strike that, the complete rejection of attempting diplomatic solutions to the conflict we now find ourselves in is a reprehensible condition that many minds reject.

Perhaps the best argument I have read in this vein is that of Howard Zinn, who believes that we are confusing "Just Cause" with "Just War".
I think his prediction of a proliferation of terrorism is unfortunately eerily accurate. I'll let you draw your own conclusions.

I'm also interested in your pessimistic (no offence intended) outlook on conflict. I hold (perhaps an unhealthy) optimism for peaceful solutions to conflict.
While not a strong pacifist, I hold that nation states can indeed do a much better job of conflict resolution. Perhaps our failure recently has it's roots in our violent culture back at home.

I know I'm rambling a bit here, but just one more point. There is a system of governance that would produce a much more peaceful world should man choose to try it. That system has been called Anarchy (not to be confused with chaos) by some, Democratic Socialism by others, but I prefer to use the less charged, but equally accurate term Direct Democracy. A good place to start if you are interested is one of the many accounts of the Spanish Civil War (George Orwell's is a good one).

"There is no consistency as to what is acceptable in one region for the ATF that won't be acceptable somewhere else," said Wickman. "The ATF people seem, as a rule, to feel this whole idea of hobby rocketry being regulated by the (government is) a mistake and a waste of time. There's a disconnect between the ATF in Washington and the regional field offices."

What's worse, even though not much has changed about the regulations, they are subject to arbitrary interpretation in the field, said Bundick, of the National Association of Rocketry. "It's a never-ending treadmill to try to pacify the local inspector."

The Justice Department's Nowacki didn't respond to questions about the ATF's perceived inconsistency.

• (1st) free speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion;
  
• (4th) unreasonable searches and seizures;
  
• (5th) freedom from self-incrimination;
  
• (6th) rights to counsel and to a speedy trial
  
• (8th) freedom from cruel and unusual punishments
  
• (9th) rights retained by the people
  
• (10th ) or rights reserved by the States

if these assertions were true, then people would be put in jail for making them.

That is completely untrue.

Kerry maybe liberal, but he is in no way the most liberal person in the senate. That number one ranking was based on Kerry's vote in 25 of the 62 votes ranked by the National Journal. Kerry missed the other 37 because he was out promoting himself on the campaign.

Please, please read those articles and don't just believe what you were spoonfed.

Fine, have it your way. Text from the BofC website, links from elsewhere, unless too numerous to list, so I default to Michael Moore's page, full of links from government sources and the like.

1953: U.S. overthrows Prime Minister Mossadeq of Iran. U.S. installs Shah as dictator. Declassified CIA report, same uncensored report linked from a slashdot article.

1954: U.S. overthrows democratically-elected President Arbenz of Guatemala. 200,000 civilians killed. CIA documents from 1954 pertaining to Guatemala as well as book excerpt and newspaper article.

1963: U.S. backs assassination of South Vietnamese President Diem. President Johnson once called him "the Churchill of Asia" in 1961. Wikipedia and two books

1963-1975: American military kills 4 million civilians in Southeast Asia.

September 11, 1973: U.S. stages coup in Chile. Democratically elected president Salvador Allende assassinated. Dictator Augusto Pinochet installed. 5,000 Chileans murdered. Common knowledge, its in a ton of books (excerpt)and movies

1977: U.S. backs military rulers of El Salvador. 70,000 Salvadorans and four American nuns killed. (Chomsky) and full reports (another), and a piece by William Blum

1980's: U.S. trains Osama bin Laden and fellow terrorists to kill Soviets. CIA gives them $3 billion. --Reagan invited Afghani leaders to the white house, and said they were like the US' "founding fathers."

1981: Reagan administration trains and funds "contras". 30,000 Nicaraguans die. --Orchestrated by Oliver North from the White House

1982: U.S. provides billions in aid to Saddam Hussein for weapons to kill Iranians. Sworn affadavits by members of National Security council. Photo of Tariq Aziz at White House with Reagan. More evidence.

1983: White House secretly gives Iran weapons to help them kill Iraqis. --Part of Iran-contra

1989: CI

I would not be so worried about the government collecting such information if it were not for the knowledge that they have tried to collect it in the past and used it in less than ethical ways.

Is it any wonder people are paranoid about them doing it again in the future or the people who defend some of the governments actions?

Don't spread the myth. The only ones who were harassed or arrested were the ones who engaged in violence, criminal trespass, or other actions which went beyond speaking their minds.

You're the one spreading a myth, bud. A few minutes with Google puts the lie to your claim:

• mass arrests in San Francisco
• Brett Bursey was arrested for "trespassing" while on public property with an antiwar sign - and is now facing federal charges
• Thomas C. Frazier arrested for trying to carry an anti-war sign
• Anti-war veterns not allowed to march
• Protestors arrested after violating unconstitutional restraint of demonstrations in Lafayette Park
• Protestor beaten in Santa Cruz

Don't spread the myth. The only ones who were harassed or arrested were the ones who engaged in violence, criminal trespass, or other actions which went beyond speaking their minds.

You're the one spreading a myth, bud. A few minutes with Google puts the lie to your claim:

• mass arrests in San Francisco
• Brett Bursey was arrested for "trespassing" while on public property with an antiwar sign - and is now facing federal charges
• Thomas C. Frazier arrested for trying to carry an anti-war sign
• Anti-war veterns not allowed to march
• Protestors arrested after violating unconstitutional restraint of demonstrations in Lafayette Park
• Protestor beaten in Santa Cruz

Don't spread the myth. The only ones who were harassed or arrested were the ones who engaged in violence, criminal trespass, or other actions which went beyond speaking their minds.

You're the one spreading a myth, bud. A few minutes with Google puts the lie to your claim:

• mass arrests in San Francisco
• Brett Bursey was arrested for "trespassing" while on public property with an antiwar sign - and is now facing federal charges
• Thomas C. Frazier arrested for trying to carry an anti-war sign
• Anti-war veterns not allowed to march
• Protestors arrested after violating unconstitutional restraint of demonstrations in Lafayette Park
• Protestor beaten in Santa Cruz

Howard Zinn for President!

1. All you are doing here is proving my original point, which is that it is possible to construct a long list of reasons why any nation should put its own house in order before pointing the finger at others.

Lest you forget, the US was quite happy to trade with apartheid South Africa, Saddam Hussein's Iraq, etc. And, unlike France, the US is responsible for actually destroying democracies and creating dictatorships on a wide scale, especially in Latin America. A prime example of this is the US overthrow of a democratically elected Chilean government in favour of a fascist dictatorship in 1973, something which Colin Powell recently described as "unfortunate". Gee, thanks Mr Powell.

Oh, and by the way, the French did not threaten the use of a veto with regards to a UN resolution supporting an invasion of Iraq. For a veto situation to occur, a proposed resolution must be before the Security Council and a two-thirds majority of the Council must support it. For one thing, no such resolution was ever tabled. For another thing, the overwhelming majority of the Council was opposed to a military solution at that point in time - most wanted more time for the UN weapons inspectors to do their job, as Hans Blix, the head of the inspectorate team, had requested. So, even if there had been a vote, any French "no" vote wouldn't have been a veto, because the required support was non-existant.

2. And this is addressed to the moderator who decided to slant this thread in favour of their own world view, how the fuck is my grandparent comment flamebait?

Just who is it flaming and how? I challenge the person who moderated it as such to give a reasonable explanation of why it's flamebait. Just because you disagree with something, it doesn't make it inflammatory. Seriously, look the word up in a dictionary, because you have no clue as to what it means.

1. Afghanistan, 1998, 2001, 2002, 2003
2. Bosnia, 1994, 1995
3. Cambodia, 1969-70
4. China, 1945-46
5. Congo (now Zaire), 1964
6. Cuba, 1959-1961 ("Bay of Pigs" invasion)
7. El Salvador, 1980s
8. Grenada, 1983
9. Guatemala, 1954, 1960, 1967-69
10. Indonesia, 1958
11. Iran, 1987
12. Iraq, 1991-2000, 2003 (The U.S. government used radioactive bombs in the first war against Iraq. See United States War Crimes Against Iraq for what appears to be an accurate history.)
13. Korea and China, 1950-53 (Korean War)
14. Kuwait, 1991
15. Laos, 1964-73
16. Lebanon, 1983, 1984 (both Lebanese and Syrian targets)
17. Libya, 1986
18. Nicaragua, 1980s
19. Panama, 1989. The U.S. government called it "Operation Just Cause". The link is to a U.S. military web site.
20. Peru, 1965
21. Somalia, 1993
22. Sudan 1998. There are doubts

How confident do you feel about visiting all the mosques in your city to speak with lots of muslim people about their faith? (an activity that's harmless, but may cause you to be added to various agencies' watchlist)

How about participating in non-violent activist groups? (anti-war protestors have been placed on a "no fly list")

How about being critical of your government in a highish-profile way?

All sorts of groups are being classed as "potential threats" these days. You'd be surprised at some of them.

Also, many of the post-911 laws have been passed with no sunset clause. Legislation generally requires significant effort to be removed from the books when it is no longer needed. Whilst we have (arguably, relatively) benign governments, people are unconcerned ("their power will only be used for good!"), but if an extremist government came to power, all the legislational infrastructure is there to establish a repressive state in no time at all.

--