Slashdot Mirror


How Has Post-9/11 Legislation Affected You?

goldspider asks: "I hope this is received in the spirit it was intended in. In a recent Reuters article, the Internet as a whole has been referred to as 'collateral damage' of the U.S.-led War on Terrorism, because of the perceived loss in privacy and online rights as a result of post-9/11 legislation. I am curious to hear about some specific examples of how this legislation has personally or professionally affected the everyday lives of Slashdot readers."

978 comments

  1. Well, I'm Canadian... by Etriaph · · Score: 2, Informative

    ...so it hasn't really, sadly enough to say. But I think the even affected everyone on the continent in some way or another.

    --
    "It's here, but no one wants it." - The Sugar Speaker
    1. Re:Well, I'm Canadian... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      heh. if only that were true. thanks to the war on terror canada nolonger controls it's own borders.. just that one step closer to becomming the 51st state.

    2. Re:Well, I'm Canadian... by Reece400 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm Canadian, and it's affected me a great deal. Slowdows at borders and airports, insame codes of conducts for schools, cancelation of any and all school trips for my school board far almost a year, Many many battles against school admin. have happened because they refused to lower the flag until the next day, and after they suspened ppl who went home because they're relatives worked there and they wanted to see if they were okay, etc. I think that it has effected every North American citizen, and beyond, in ways that they may or may not notice, Because most of us only look for the positives in things, not the negatives, which all of these effects seem to have been...

      Reece,

    3. Re:Well, I'm Canadian... by Kwikymart · · Score: 2

      I'm Canadian as well.

      I've since graduated HS, but my school was nowhere near as anal about things. For fucks sake, students carry around knives on beltloops in plain sight.. and I carried around a knife as well with a 10cm blade in my backpack. If they didn't want you to bring something to school they would tell you not to bring it; no suspensions were given out for things like that. You could get up in the middle of class and walk out for no reason and the teacher wouldn't even give it a second thought. The administration wouldn't care if you came and went without a doctor's note or such crap. I think maybe a couple of fieldtrips were cancelled for a few weeks after 9/11 because of government policy, not the school's. This is not a school in Nunavut either, it was a suburb of Vancouver. My school had about 1500+ students, so it was about medium sized.

      I'm glad that I went to a school like mine, not some overly retarded fear-mongering anti-terrorist frenzy school. The initial attack on 9/11 ignited the fear, the people where what spread it and made it something it wasn't.

      --

      Buying a Dell computer is equivalent to dropping the soap in a prison shower.
    4. Re:Well, I'm Canadian... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also Canadian, but _greatly_ moved. I doubt I'll be able to watch much of the 'anniversary' footage without wanting to weep...just as I want to weep when I hear about the daily bomb attacks in the Middle East, or the social persecution happening in any country involved in that sort of thing. The list goes on ad nauseum, but I don't want that to detract from the impact that this event, in particular, has made on me. Any catastrophic event of this magnitude should have an effect on everyone, regardless of what their latitude and longitude happen to be today.

    5. Re:Well, I'm Canadian... by Opie812 · · Score: 0

      If that happens I'll be taking pilot lessons

      --
      I'm not a nerd. Nerds are smart.
    6. Re:Well, I'm Canadian... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      holy fuck! the united states is a godamn police state! you can't even bring FINGERNAIL CLIPPERS to school! if that isn't conditioning then there's no such thing. americans might as well start imagining being in a concentration camp for one hour each night - it'll soften the blow for that instance in the future when they occupy one.

    7. Re:Well, I'm Canadian... by wom · · Score: 1

      I also am a Canadian, and it has caused me trouble. I travel to and through the US, as I have for 35 years, and I have never seen such a collection of inefective processes forced on every traveler as recently. There was the plane hijack era where everyone was a hijacker, but that was calm compared to this "everyone is a terrorist" attitude. Does ayone really think that a trained terrorist needs a metallic or explosive weapon to kill people? Does anyone think that the next attack will be by terrorists that managed to smuggle devices by air? Do you not think that amongst the many billion people on this planet that there is not a few who look like a sane caucasian and are pro muslim reactionism? Just a small rant on behalf of me myself and I.

      --
      Trouble, a mistake or fun, your choice
    8. Re:Well, I'm Canadian... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm also Canadian, in fact, I'm an IT worker for the Federal government, and it has affected us at work. We used to be able to just walk in the building by showing our pass to the security guards at the elevator entrance. Sometimes, they didn't even bother to check. A little over six months after 9/11, they had installed scanners at the entrance, which meant a new computer system and new ID cards, outsiders can no longer get in just by signing in, they must be accompanied by someone who works in the building. Mail is scan by X-ray as are all deliveries brought into the building.

      On the positive side, when we require new equipment, all we need to do is just say "more secure" and, magically, money appears.

    9. Re:Well, I'm Canadian... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now thats uncalled for, comon, where all (NATO) in this behind you, as we have been for a hundred years (Canada, France, and Britain at least), its about time everyone realizes that Canada and the U.S are probably one of the closest pairs of allies in the world.

    10. Re:Well, I'm Canadian... by boomer_rehfield · · Score: 1

      actually, the question should be, do anyone here REALLY think than anyone on a plane is going to let a terrorist brandish ANYTHING? I mean really... think... if 4 guys got up on a plane with knives tomorrow... exactly how long do we think they would last? I'd be willing to start the pool...buck a pop... 5000-1 odds if he shows a box cutter....


      you 'are' correct... a terrorist can kill people with anything.... but my point here is about the security and the belief that they will try the same, exact, thing, again....... and no kidding...what happened to just diverting the plane to cuba...gah..

      --
      Carpe Canem - Seize the Dog
    11. Re:Well, I'm Canadian... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am from Toronto.Last week I was stopped and searched on La Gauardia airport after I spent 7 weeks at my brothers place in Bronx.I think America is making a overkill with their security controls.Little is good.To much is a overkill.

    12. Re:Well, I'm Canadian... by Fig,+formerly+A.C. · · Score: 2, Informative
      Related reading:

      http://www.michaelmoore.com/books-films/ stupidwhitemen/onlinechapters/part01.php

      Sorry, you'll have to cut and paste. I'm lazy. :-)

      --
      Murphy was an optimist.
    13. Re:Well, I'm Canadian... by TildeMan · · Score: 1

      Sure, a plane full of passengers can overtake 4 men with box cutters. But the hijackers can at least take down a few people before defeat... would you like to be first in line and risk your life instead of that of someone else? Human nature...

    14. Re:Well, I'm Canadian... by boomer_rehfield · · Score: 1

      I would gladly be the first in line. I may be a bad person to ask regarding that due to my military career.

      --
      Carpe Canem - Seize the Dog
    15. Re:Well, I'm Canadian... by macdaddy357 · · Score: 2

      You left a space in that link. It's http://www.michaelmoore.com/books-films/ stupidwhitemen/onlinechapters/part01.php This one should work.

      --
      How ya like dat?
    16. Re:Well, I'm Canadian... by Reece400 · · Score: 1

      That's about what it was like at my school before too, but unfortunatly, in Ontario, the government created a standard code of conduct that all ontario school have to follow,, the school no longer has much of a say in what happens, plus there have been a couple hitlist and a bomb scare at my school recently, so they've really begun craking down :S, strangly, no one really cares about pocket knives tho, while we get suspended for "replica" firearms,, it seems more messed up day by day... There was never any need for it, we were, and are still not, in any great danger, it is basically a US affair. Ontario, if not most of Canada just seems to be taking it's usual place as an extension of the USA :(. Reece, PS. Your school's actually 3x the size of mine...

  2. Oh God by Gizzmonic · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Please let this be first! I'm in Washington DC this week, so it makes sense.

    --
    (-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)
    1. Re:Oh God by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      shut up, you cornball.

  3. -1 Troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ugh.

  4. Freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    weee!!!!

  5. Well if your at college ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative
    Denial of service attacks - are now considered an act of domestic terrorism.

    So I guess that you could say that what used to just piss people off is now considered domestic terrorism. Some people OBVIOUSLY overreact to situations and play on the emotions. I would really like to seem some legislation against PROFITING on 9/11.

    1. Re:Well if your at college ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From the article:

      The attack on Western's service was similar to an attack on Internet hub, Yahoo, and popular action site, eBay, in 2001.

      I searched eBay and found plenty of action figures and action games, but no actual action. Just what kind of *action* does eBay have? Am I missing something?

    2. Re:Well if your at college ... by theSkyjet · · Score: 1

      You know, I couldn't agree more. Where were all the flags and God Bless Americas _before_ 9/11? Suddenly when someone can make a profit, patriotism is the thing! If everyone is so darned proud of their country why don't they show it in a little more useful way than pasting Flags on every flat surface. Say, by actually _helping_ their community or something! Capatalism at its best.

    3. Re:Well if your at college ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      "Some people OBVIOUSLY overreact to situations and play on the emotions

      I agree completely.. Has anyone else seen the Anti-Drug commercials saying that by buying drugs we help terrorists. This angers me since every sack I ever bought has been straight from Mexico. I believe they are just doing this to make drug users feel responsible for 9/11 . There is no need to rehash these memories to make a point especially when they in no way relate to what happened.

    4. Re:Well if your at college ... by reallocate · · Score: 2

      No, they're doing it because terrorists in more than one country (e.g., FARC in Colombia, Taliban in Afghanistan) raise money by controlling the drug trade. You don't honestly think your money really goes to Jose and Maria on their family farm?

      --
      -- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
    5. Re:Well if your at college ... by k-0s · · Score: 1

      "I agree completely.. Has anyone else seen the Anti-Drug commercials saying that by buying drugs we help terrorists. This angers me since every sack I ever bought has been straight from Mexico. I believe they are just doing this to make drug users feel responsible for 9/11 . There is no need to rehash these memories to make a point especially when they in no way relate to what happened."

      You know whats even funnier about those commericals? Ok get this, if buying drugs helps finance terrorists then our last two presidents Clinton & Bush have help finance terrorism, Clinton with his weed, Bush with his coke. I dunno it just seems someone didn't think this through when making the commericals.

    6. Re:Well if your at college ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I didn't realize that to be honest. Just was talking to someone about this and they referenced a 48 hours show about the taliban and how they controlled the opium trade to finance what ever they wanted.. Sorry for posting w/o researching.. but I can see with confidence that 100% of my money has went to "Jose and Maria" on thier family farm since being only 100 miles from the border and weed wouldn't be the same quality if it were shipped from columbia or any other country. It doesn't have the shelf life of other stuff..

    7. Re:Well if your at college ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean like "selling" photos of yourself looking out the windows of Air Force One on Sept. 11th, 2001? Oh, wait, those were political "contributions"...

    8. Re:Well if your at college ... by reallocate · · Score: 2

      >> Sorry for posting w/o researching..

      No need to apologize. Everyone else is posting without thinking.

      --
      -- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
    9. Re:Well if your at college ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Commercials rely on people not thinking too much.

    10. Re:Well if your at college ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...Bush with his coke...

      Don't forget his incompetence. That helps terrorists more than anything.

    11. Re:Well if your at college ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +1 mods +1!!!!!! PARENT IS SPEAKING THE TRUTH! and now i need to write nonsense, since the slashfilter wont let me write in caps because it sounds like i'm yelling. I am yelling however.

    12. Re:Well if your at college ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think your concepts of cause and effect are backwards. Oh, and learn to spell something before you criticize it.

    13. Re:Well if your at college ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is it they say again?

      "Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel"

    14. Re:Well if your at college ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The government is half responsible for raising drug money for terrorists, it helps create the black market by making the drugs illegal. If the drugs were legalized and decently regulated, black market trading would become unprofitable.

      http://www.lp.org/action/files/!drugwar.pdf

    15. Re:Well if your at college ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Noelle Bush should be put in solitary confinement along with jose padilla for aiding terrorist. she was recently caught with coke ( http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=5 19&ncid=718&e=6&u=/ap/20020910/ap_on_re_us/jeb_bus h_daughter ). and of course since parents are responsible for their childrens actions, jeb bush should be thrown in the adjacent cell. for all that matters, we might as well have some of gw bush's over-reaching type of legislation on the books to convict the whole godamn bush family and let those cocksuckers rot in the brig for life with no legal representation.

    16. Re:Well if your at college ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Think about this then. The only reason drugs are controlled by terrorists, is because they won't let legitimate companies sell them. So in reality, it's the US government's own damn fault.

      Furthermore, most of the pot smoked in the US is grown right here. And everyone knows stoners are too lazy to blow things up.

    17. Re:Well if your at college ... by sg_oneill · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Has anyone else seen the Anti-Drug commercials saying that by buying drugs we help terrorists. This angers me since every sack I ever bought has been straight from Mexico.

      Yup. And do you know what the worst thing is?

      Even discussing this sort of stuff can get one branded as "unpatriotic" or "insensitive". Having worked in the media , it was clear that a HUGE chilling effect came over it, even over here in australia.

      Whereas we SHOULD ask questions like "Hey , is this interference in the mid east part of the cause of S/11. Why where we funding the taliban?", we havent been asking that, because any given question can be answered with "SHH! WHERE FIGHTING TERRORISTS! BOW YOUR HEAD IN SHAME!"

      And the cycle goes on... And get's nuttier too. Questioning govt anti-hacker legislation can get one branded as "un-patriotic". ditto for fcking phone tapping legislation, drug legislation, camp X-ray legislation..... Any questioning is..... "unpatriotic"

      So maybe we should give up , hey guys?... Freedom of speech is dead in the water. MIA.

      Those founding fathers would not be impressed with a president who claims "There should be limits to freedom". (Rant ends here)

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    18. Re:Well if your at college ... by reallocate · · Score: 2

      That's assinine. People who break the law are responsible.

      --
      -- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
    19. Re:Well if your at college ... by EvanED · · Score: 2

      And Bush's niece with her cocaine

    20. Re:Well if your at college ... by Darby · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No, they're doing it because terrorists in more than one country (e.g., FARC in Colombia, Taliban in Afghanistan) raise money by controlling the drug trade.

      Dude. Wake up.
      The CIA is one of the major players in the drug trade.
      Crazy conspiracy theory? No. Just a very short memory on the part of most Americans. Recall The Iran Contra Hearings?
      It was testified on TV before congress that our government sells drugs to support terrorist countries. This is a demonstrated fact.

      And the Taliban, for fucks sake ?!? They instituted the death penalty for Opium cultivation , or don't you remember that either.

      Also, the war on some drugs causes massive amounts of money to go to police and prisons to incarcerate Americans who choose to cultivate a freaking plant.
      It's *very* profitable to have drugs illegal since the government gets paid twice.

      Buying an SUV does far more to support terrorism than buying drugs does. Where do the terrorists get most of their money? Oil.

      Please make at least a token effort to do your patriotic duty and inform yourself rather than spewing lies that any bit of common sense reveals for what they are.

    21. Re:Well if your at college ... by SCHecklerX · · Score: 4, Informative
      The libertarian party ran an ad about that in USA Today (I think that was it..)

      Check it out:

      http://www.lp.org/action/files/!drugwar.pdf

    22. Re:Well if your at college ... by TKinias · · Score: 1

      And the Taliban, for fucks sake ?!? They instituted the death penalty for Opium cultivation , or don't you remember that either.

      You can criticize the Taliban for many things, but I personally admire their stand on opium. They just didn't put up with it, unlike the current (U.S.-installed) Afghan government, under which the poppy fields once more flourish.

      --
      In principio creauit Linus Linucem.
    23. Re:Well if your at college ... by Observer2001 · · Score: 1

      >And the Taliban ... They instituted the death penalty for Opium cultivation , or don't you remember that either.

      According to a recent article: "When the Taliban ruled Afghanistan, according to Pakistani intelligence officials, it actively engaged in opium and heroin production, and allowed al Qaeda to raise funds through taxing the cultivation of poppy, the raw material for heroin."

    24. Re:Well if your at college ... by Squareball · · Score: 2

      The only reason that buying drugs pays terrorists is becuase it's ILLEGAL. If it was LEGAL there wouldn't be a 17,000% markup. Libertarian Party

    25. Re:Well if your at college ... by kaybee · · Score: 1

      This parody drug war ad is funny:

      The Drug War

    26. Re:Well if your at college ... by kaybee · · Score: 1

      Prohibition was the catalyst for the Mafia's rise to power. You could blame the government for creating the very profitable black market, or you could blame the people buying the alcohol.

      But a good portion of Americans were buying the alcohol anyways... not because they supported organized crime, but because they had always bought alcohol before. The government was the one that made the change, so I think they were responsible.

    27. Re:Well if your at college ... by tarogue · · Score: 1

      Obviously, you're not.

      Your = possessive.
      You're = contraction of you are

      Example:
      "You're post exhibits your lack of grammar."

      Call me troll, but the mis-use of "your" bugs the crap out of me.

      --
      Life sucks, but death doesn't put out at all. -- Thomas J. Kopp
    28. Re:Well if your at college ... by uncoveror · · Score: 2

      Oil financed Al Queda. Telling a kid with a dime bag of pot that he is helping Osama is an obscenity. Bush senior wanted the death penalty for drug "king pins." The problem is that any kid caught with a dime bag, or named by an informant is one when a prosecuter is running for judge, or a "tough on crime" judge is up for re-election.

      --
      The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
    29. Re:Well if your at college ... by spoco2 · · Score: 1

      Erm... hang on... your example is wrong too... if we were to expand it, it would be:

      "You are post exhibits your lack of grammer"

      It would have been better to use, for example, the following:

      "You're showing your lack of knowledge of grammer in your post"

    30. Re:Well if your at college ... by spoco2 · · Score: 1

      And then I was showing my lack of spelling, by writing grammer instead of grammar... humph :p

    31. Re:Well if your at college ... by macdaddy357 · · Score: 2

      Laws are made to disenfranchise and incarcerate the poor so Boom and Muffy Country Club will be safe from the likes of us. They don't apply to rich people like the Bushes. They can snort Coke all they want.

      --
      How ya like dat?
    32. Re:Well if your at college ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The media for the first time has trouble saying the word, but she was caught with crack. She will be smoking not snorting it.

    33. Re:Well if your at college ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your defence of the sand crabs is laughable.
      The one who would get the death penalty for
      selling drug were the one doing it to finance
      the opposition to the Taliban. The funds of
      the drug sales were supposed to go to
      Al Qaeda and the Talibans only.

    34. Re:Well if your at college ... by MoneyT · · Score: 2

      Not quite. Ever hear of any black market cigarettes? YOu know, 50,000 a box? ANd those cigarette dealers that are getting busted all the time? ANd the killing sprees because some poor junkie just has to have his cigarette?

      No?

      That's because they're legal. Believe me, if cigarettes became illegal tomorrow, there would be a huge black market. The value of a single cigarette would shoot up ten fold. Why? Because there is a high demand. Drugs are the same way.

      --
      T Money
      World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
    35. Re:Well if your at college ... by Mark+Garrett · · Score: 1
      The government is half responsible for raising drug money for terrorists, it helps create the black market by making the drugs illegal. If the drugs were legalized and decently regulated, black market trading would become unprofitable.

      So then you mean that we'd have to raise the bar to heroin, opium, or cocaine for our "illegal drug" category? Or would all drugs become legal for all purposes?

      I guess that having about 1/4 of the population addicted to crack, heroin, or morphine from the least ethical and most greedy pharmeceutical company available would be "a step in the right direction". Also, those stupid mobsters would never find a new crime to make a bit o' fast cash off of, so they'd be quickly out of business. Excellent.

    36. Re:Well if your at college ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the...

      We are the ones who gave them 43M last year to make that stance....

      Wow, do people really have this short of memories??

    37. Re:Well if your at college ... by chamenos · · Score: 1

      i agree. and actually pot is LESS harmful than alcohol, and even less harmful than tobacco. its rather absurd that pot is illegal in most countries but not tobacco or alcohol. the fact that some countries like amsterdam have already legalized marijuanna proves this.

      to any moderator who might think this is a troll post, well...its not. go do a google search on how marijuanna was made illegal and the real scientific facts about marijuanna, compare it with those of alcohol and tobacco, and you'll see how absurd the whole thing is.

      try www.smokedot.org

    38. Re:Well if your at college ... by DEBEDb · · Score: 2

      It's possible that if you legalize softer drugs,
      people would just do them more. There may be
      a spike in usage, but it will level off. Look
      at Netherlands.

      --

      Considered harmful.
    39. Re:Well if your at college ... by GlassUser · · Score: 2

      Got a PNG?

    40. Re:Well if your at college ... by DEBEDb · · Score: 2

      They didn't put up with opium growers cause
      they wanted a monopoly.

      --

      Considered harmful.
    41. Re:Well if your at college ... by Suppafly · · Score: 2

      Look at Netherlands.


      What about the Netherlands? Its a common misconception that drugs are legal in the Netherlands.. drugs aren't any more legal there than they are in the US. Do they have a some what laxer stance towards drugs, yes. But are they legal, no.

    42. Re:Well if your at college ... by _ganja_ · · Score: 2

      This worries me terribly. Of course the CIA has been caught dealing in drugs but is this a very short memory or is this the memory hole in action?

      The Taliban did a lot to stem the opium cultivation (death sentence) however, since the US oil puppet guys has had control, Afghanistan farmers are replanting for a massive poppy crop. The worrying thing is that you can now find various articles in major newspapers that claim the Taliban supported the drugs trade.

      Does anyone remember that after Andy Card told Dubya about the second plane, he continued to sit for more 20 minutes reading about a goat?! In a recent interview with CNBC Nightly News, Andy Card gives the impression that as soon as Dubya was informed, he left the school children he was reading to and came to the aid of the crisis.

      He who controls the past controls the present and he who controls the present controls the future.

      1984 is a must read especially as whoever is pulling Dubya's strings seems to be using it as a play book.

      For years America has been putting puppet governments in other people's countries and now we have finally done it to ourselves. Arrhh.. the sweet sweet smell of poetic justice.

      What amazes me is that when a perpetual motion Dolorian is presented before the /. crowd they instantly smell a rat but with things that matter a great deal more, they fail to think critically at all. Always look who benefits from a given situation and you see the instigator.

      Do you really believe that some bunch of Afghanistan cavemen could have pulled off 9/11 unaided? Or that a passport of the lead highjacker could survive the 9/11 crash and float to earth?
      How about the fake tape that was peddled as the evidence for the Afghanistan bombing? Check the pictures if you don't believe the tape was fake, they are on the net.

      There is a lot that obviously doesn't add up to even the dumbest retard but as long as Americans can keep their standard of living they will always turn a blind eye to criminal activities of their government. That is the path of least resistance but that lazy attitude is exactly what is being used against you. Its a lot nicer to think America is the world's policeman instead of the world's #1 rouge state looking to conqueror middle eastern oil fields.

      Learn, as knowledge protects you from every lie and deceit anyone can pull over you.

      Unpatriotic to question the Government? Well that's what they would have you think, but when as it ever been American to blindly follow a leader?

      --

      A journey of a thousand miles starts with a brutal anal raping at airport security

    43. Re:Well if your at college ... by dpt · · Score: 1

      Obviously, you're not.

      How ironic.

      "You're post exhibits your lack of grammar."

      Jesus Fucking H. Christ!! You *stupid* monkey!

      That is wrong. This is correct:

      "Your post exhibits your lack of grammar, and you're a stupid monkey."

      Get it?

      Call me troll, but the mis-use of "your" bugs the crap out of me

      Well, this reply may have been a very subtle troll - it's hard to credit, otherwise.

    44. Re:Well if your at college ... by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      The U.S. paid the Taliban $24 million to change thier stance on Opium. I'm betting some of that money went to taking out the WTC.

      Jaysyn

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    45. Re:Well if your at college ... by AntiNorm · · Score: 2

      Link for those that don't feel like using cut-n-paste

      --

      I pledge allegiance to the flag...
      of the Corporate States of America...
    46. Re:Well if your at college ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not often one bugs the crap out of oneself. Heh.

    47. Re:Well if your at college ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guess who refined the opium to become heroine? ISI, Pakistan's secret service, aided financially and logistically by the CIA. This ain't no crazy conspiracy theory, but a widely know fact. At least in Europe.
      Looks like the CIA never learned from its "mistakes"..
      And afaik, they've been doing it before, during and after the Taliban ruled Afghanistan.

    48. Re:Well if your at college ... by xtremex · · Score: 1

      So, you're saying that the ONLY reason people don't do drugs is because they're illegal? If heroin were legal tomorrow, I STILL wouldnt touch the crap

      --
      If you're not a Liberal in your 20's, then you have no heart.If you're still a Liberal in your 30's you have no brain.
    49. Re:Well if your at college ... by xtremex · · Score: 1

      I have the stance of I don't care WHAT the hell you snort or shoot up your veins...it cleans out the gene pool. Honestly, put someone in prison for having coke? Give them MORE coke...the sooner their heart explodes, the better :)

      --
      If you're not a Liberal in your 20's, then you have no heart.If you're still a Liberal in your 30's you have no brain.
    50. Re:Well if your at college ... by GutBomb · · Score: 2

      perhaps you need to spend less time smoking weed and more time remembering high school geography. amsterdam is not a country, but a city in the netherlands.

    51. Re:Well if your at college ... by z_gringo · · Score: 1

      Depends on your definition of Drugs. Marijuana is certainly legal in Amsterdam.

      You are correct that The harder drugs are not legal, but they might as well be.

      --
      -- -- Warning. Do not stare directly at the sun.
    52. Re:Well if your at college ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you know where your stuff comes from? Unless you grow it yourself in Mexico I woulnd't be so sure.
      Many drug cartels are clear-cut terrorist organisations. Read up on the Medellin.

    53. Re:Well if your at college ... by Paul+Jakma · · Score: 2

      God you're a f$ckwit.

      The previous poster is correct, yet you contradict him without any evidence or rationale as to why.

      Marijuana is *illegal* across the Netherlands - including Amsterdam. However, many city councils have decided they will not prosecute offenses involving soft drugs, and they have published the guidelines by which they decide whether to prosecute or not. If the local "DA" has a policy of not prosecuting, then the police arent going to waste their time arresting people for these offences either.

      However, the fact remains that cannabis is illegal in the Netherlands.

      --
      I use Friend/Foe + mod-point modifiers as a karma/reputation system.
    54. Re:Well if your at college ... by MelloHippo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Check out the NY Times Op-Ed column from Sept. 10, 2002, by the Economist Paul Krugman. You have to log in, but it's free... http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/10/opinion/10KRUG.h tml This guy has a pair of big brass balls...

    55. Re:Well if your at college ... by MelloHippo · · Score: 1
    56. Re:Well if your at college ... by z_gringo · · Score: 1

      No need for Name Calling.

      The only evidence I have is that it is advertised, and sold in bars / coffeeshops. They even have menus featuring different varieties, effects, etc... Not to mention that every t-shirt shop, and other turist shitholes are full of adverts for it.

      Then there are the huge plants growing in front of I don't know how many shops in the city.

      There are also head shops, growing shops, bookstores, etc..

      I admit that I have absolutely ZERO knowledge of the local legislation, but it is difficult to imagine that something illegal could be so prominently displayed in so many places.

      --
      -- -- Warning. Do not stare directly at the sun.
    57. Re:Well if your at college ... by Gannoc · · Score: 2
      And the Taliban, for fucks sake ?!? They instituted the death penalty for Opium cultivation , or don't you remember that either.

      Umm, if you went and tried to sell drugs on a corner that another gang was handling, you'd be given the "death penalty" too.

      They made it illegal so they could control it.

    58. Re:Well if your at college ... by rczyzewski · · Score: 0

      Let the government handle the drug trade, that will fuck it up.

      My prayers go out to those not affected by the events of 9/11. May they find in their souls the spirit that has touched those who have been affected.

    59. Re:Well if your at college ... by calbanese · · Score: 1

      The commercials neglect a much better way of financing terrorists. Own a car? If you do, then you are giving more money to "terrorists and the countries that harbor them" than by smoking the occasional joint. I wonder what Ford or GM would think of that commercial?

      "I helped kill a Jew! - I drove my SUV to work today and didn't carpool."

    60. Re:Well if your at college ... by Gonarat · · Score: 1

      Actually there is at least a grey market for Cigarettes, if not a black market. Here in Kentucky, the Cigarette tax is $0.03 per pack. People come to KY to buy cartons of Ciggys to sell outside the State. The Indian Reservations near Buffalo, New York also have the same situation -- people come in to the Reservation from Pennsylvania, New York, and Ontario to avoid the State Taxes. Not all of these cartons are bought for personal use. There are also internet sales from KY and the Reservation also.

      --
      Beware of Sleestak
    61. Re:Well if your at college ... by Paul+Jakma · · Score: 2

      well, if you have zero knowledge of the legal situation then how in gods name can you go and post a comment to say it is legal? in reply to a poster who stated that despite the evident tolerant attitude towards drugs, they remain illegal? Evidently, this poster must have some reason to make such a statement, could you not have questioned him as to his reasons for making this statement, instead of posting completely incorrect speculation as statement of fact?

      If you dont know its true, then at least make it clear your assertion is speculative.

      If i called you a name, i sort of apologise, but i just sometimes suffer from flare-ups of annoyance by people who post things to places when they evidently have no real clue of what they are talking about.. i get even more annoyed when they deliberately contradict someone who evidently /does/ know.

      In a nutshell: By statute drugs are illegal. However, by policy the regional prosecuting authorities do not prosecute cases of personal drug use or small-scale commercial trade in soft-drugs, and hence neither do the police take action. BTW: cases of large scale dealers/makers/growers of both soft and hard drugs *are* pursued by the dutch police and legal authorities.

      --
      I use Friend/Foe + mod-point modifiers as a karma/reputation system.
    62. Re:Well if your at college ... by Fig,+formerly+A.C. · · Score: 1
      So then you mean that we'd have to raise the bar to heroin, opium, or cocaine for our "illegal drug" category? Or would all drugs become legal for all purposes?

      Marijuana is the main cash crop. That is the baseline source for all the dealers. The other drugs are just upsells. But if you take away that main source of income, the other drugs alone won't yield the same cash. Think how much money a store would not make if they could only sell $100+ items...

      I guess that having about 1/4 of the population addicted to crack, heroin, or morphine from the least ethical and most greedy pharmeceutical company available would be "a step in the right direction".

      How is this any different from having 1/2 the population addicted to cigarettes from the least ethical and most greedy tobacco company available? How about the least ethical beer company?

      Personally, I think having the quality of the drugs regulated would be "a step in the right direction".

      Also, those stupid mobsters would never find a new crime to make a bit o' fast cash off of, so they'd be quickly out of business.

      I'm not as worried about the mob as I am the street gangs (who derive most of their income from illegal drugs, incdentally).

      Also, if drugs were legal, prices would drop and the addicts would not need to go to extreme measures to support their habit.

      Other than the fact that it keeps the DEA in a job, I just don't see the advantage to spending $800,000 an hour funding this "War on Drugs". It's stupid.

      Mind you, I don't use any of these substances except the occasional mixed drink, I'm not saying this because I want to use them: I'm just questioning the logic of the situation.

      --
      Murphy was an optimist.
    63. Re:Well if your at college ... by greenrd · · Score: 2
      Uh.

      Point of fact: They did put up with it, until the US told them not to in exchange for some hard cash. However, this business relationship didn't last very long...

    64. Re:Well if your at college ... by Mark+Garrett · · Score: 1
      So, you're saying that the ONLY reason people don't do drugs is because they're illegal? If heroin were legal tomorrow, I STILL wouldnt touch the crap

      Nooope. I don't think that was implied anywhere. While I was actually thinking of it as hyperbole, the number I used (1/4) was actually a feasible limiting user ratio for the plethora of highly addictive drugs that would be freely available.

      If the "ONLY" reason people don't do drugs is because they're illegal, then the numbers would be looking more toward the upper range (well above 50%), no? (I'm assuming that mass production would make addiction fairly affordable.)

    65. Re:Well if your at college ... by Mark+Garrett · · Score: 1
      Marijuana is the main cash crop. That is the baseline source for all the dealers. The other drugs are just upsells. But if you take away that main source of income, the other drugs alone won't yield the same cash. Think how much money a store would not make if they could only sell $100+ items...

      How will this change the nature of what is causing the problem in the first place? I think that there would be plenty of money to be made from selling cocaine, crack cocaine, meth, etc for criminal societies to 'get by'. If such a small incentive as 'reduced profitability' were enough to damage such organizations, they would have moved to legitimate business long ago.

      How is this any different from having 1/2 the population addicted to cigarettes from the least ethical and most greedy tobacco company available? How about the least ethical beer company?

      Though not exactly my point, it does kinda suck, no? :)

      By anyway... my side point there was that heavily regulated drug production would likely not be 'mom and pop' in the meth lab, but it would be another corporate machine. My main point was that cheap mass-produced drugs would not necessarilly be a good thing.

      I'm not as worried about the mob as I am the street gangs (who derive most of their income from illegal drugs, incdentally).

      Yep, they do. However, if the drug money dries up, they'll find something else do do, maybe more risky, but higher profit per time spent. Maybe fewer criminals would be left, but the remaining become more of a threat.

      Also, if drugs were legal, prices would drop and the addicts would not need to go to extreme measures to support their habit.

      Quite possible. You would also then have the increaced societal costs of having a higher addiction rate in the population.(higher addiction caused by destigmatization + less monetary cost deterrent + confidence in relative safety of the product)

      Other than the fact that it keeps the DEA in a job, I just don't see the advantage to spending $800,000 an hour funding this "War on Drugs". It's stupid.

      For one, fine items like opium and cocaine will not be legalized in the United States anytime soon. A certain amount of thet money is going to try to help certain countries combat overwhelmingly powerful criminal organizations that fund themselves by selling in the U.S. It is only right and responsible that the U.S. tries to help combat these organizations with funding/equipment/training/etc.

      How much of the drug production in Colombia is marijuana?

      How much of the "War on Drugs" is being directed toward the operations of criminal organizations (that would still be around after any legalization you could think of)? (I ignore the case where 'criminal' loses its meaning)

      Does any go toward border patrol that probably needs to be in place anyway?

    66. Re:Well if your at college ... by xtremex · · Score: 1

      I agree w/ you there...it is true that if it were legal, it would be more accessible....it would rise sharply, then taper off

      --
      If you're not a Liberal in your 20's, then you have no heart.If you're still a Liberal in your 30's you have no brain.
    67. Re:Well if your at college ... by vook · · Score: 1

      Heh, rehash. Anyway, yeah, I agree, those drug commercials are bull. Why don't they say "When you fill your gas tank, you're funding terrorism." That's much more accurate. Or they could say "When we stocked Iraq with arms in the 80's, we helped reinforce them as a Middle-east threat, and inadvertantly helped them kill one million in the region." or "People don't kill people, guns do". Same difference.

  6. Canadian border by Surak · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I live a few miles from the Canadian border. I've been searched at least 20-30 times since September 11 going across to the Casinos in Windsor.

    I'm sick of people saying "Oh, it doesn't bother me because it makes me feel safer." It DOES bother me, and NO, it DOESN'T make me feel safer. If someone wanted to get across the border with explosives or something, they're gonna do it and these stupid spot checks aren't prevent it.

    1. Re:Canadian border by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wasn't searched when I crossed the border. It hasn't affected me.

    2. Re:Canadian border by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lemme break it down for you:

      If they don't check people crossing the border, then that check point can be used to traffic unwanted items into the country.
      If they do check people crossing the border, then noone will attempt to traffic unwanted items into the country.

      Now, which is more difficult to bare? The inconvenience of the search, or another 9/11 style attack?

    3. Re:Canadian border by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, yeah, border checks have never stopped anyone from getting across the Canadian border with explosives. Except for that guy who was going to bomb LAX on the eve of y2k.

    4. Re:Canadian border by Anonymous+Cowrad · · Score: 1

      These searches aren't preventing "another 9/11 style attack" at all. Those guys weren't smuggling anything into the country.

      --

      --
      pants ahoy
    5. Re:Canadian border by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm so very sorry that our searches inconvenienced you. I guess we shouldn't do anything, huh? If people will find a way, then I guess we should just let them.

    6. Re:Canadian border by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Absolutely right-----those border checks don't give one more safety...just more hassle and time wasted. And I'll bet those Detroit casinos are getting a lot of extra business that used to go to Windsor, now that Windsor's a bigger hassle. I myself have gone to Greektown's casino ever since 9/11.

      Also, even if the "border check" was totally ironclad, then any potential terrorist would just cross somewhere between the border stations.

    7. Re:Canadian border by bartash · · Score: 2

      This is an example of a badly design security process. It isn't actually making anything more secure. There is a nice piece in the Atlantic:
      http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2002/ 09/mann.htm

      --
      Read Epic the first RPG novel.
    8. Re:Canadian border by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      That fucking border is fucking four fucking thousand fucking miles fucking long, much of it in the fucking middle of fucking nowhere, and some of it under fucking water. You could fucking move the fucking Brooklyn fucking Bridge across if you weren't a fucking moron.

      "noone will attempt to traffic unwanted items into the country"? Fucking fuckwit.

      Yeah, they may catch the occasional fucking idiot, but that's fucking all.

    9. Re:Canadian border by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And your solution to the problem is??
      -
      ^
      \
      Thats what I thought. Just another whiner.Besides having a gambling problem.

    10. Re:Canadian border by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree. It bothers me very much. I live in Windsor and commute every morning to Detroit. When I moved here, it was a 5 minute drive, It was 5 hours on Sept 12. They need to reinstitute the canPass/Sentri system we had before. I guess it would take thourough background checks, but it would be so much nicer than the lineups.

      Hey INS: DNA sample me, use facial recognition, or put a chip in me. I dont care if you want a camera on me 24/7 - but stop eyeballing me every morning or asking me if I really am a Developer or if I know an opening in our IT department for your nephew.

      I dont know how much I trust their tech though, my car fits under the new gate to stop people from entering the tunnel on the Detroit side.

    11. Re:Canadian border by codingOgre · · Score: 1

      Hmm, I seem to remember a certain individual named "Jose Padilla" that was caught by an alert border gaurd. This guy was entering the country with intentions of making a "dirty bomb". These checks can catch the random idiot terrorist and are worth it.

      --
      Space may be the final frontier, but it's made in a Hollywood basement. --Red Hot Chili Peppers, Californication
    12. Re:Canadian border by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 5, Interesting
      "I'm sick of people saying "Oh, it doesn't bother me because it makes me feel safer." It DOES bother me, and NO, it DOESN'T make me feel safer. If someone wanted to get across the border with explosives or something, they're gonna do it and these stupid spot checks aren't prevent it."

      It is so annoying at the borders. Going to the US with my father driving can be trying because he has one of those huge islamic-reminiscent beards (although he's not islamic) and the US border people always root through the car, look in all your containers, make a mess of everything, and don't put anything back where it was. Rude asholes. Do unto others as you would have done unto you. (If you're not white or with white people, you generally experience great discrimination at the US border crossing over from Canada. Sad but true. It's happenned to my family on numerous occasions, before and after 9/11.)

      On a similar note, a friend of a friend was driving from (Alberta) Canada to the Utah early this year to attend the Salt Lake City Olympics (as a spectator) and one of the guys he was going with was Islamic and wore a turban. They got across the border without too much trouble but on the interstate, there was a period of about 15 minutes where there was a state trooper car front of them, another behind them, and one on the side, totally boxing them in. The troopers backed off eventually, but still, it is unnerving and (both this the first story are) proof that just the way you look can bring about great discrimination from fearful people.

    13. Re:Canadian border by _ph1ux_ · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "just the way you look can bring about great discrimination from fearful people"

      lots of Geeks have known this their whole lives....

    14. Re:Canadian border by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Islamic ?? People who follow Islam are called muslim , not Islamic. Moron !

    15. Re:Canadian border by smithmc · · Score: 1

      Now, which is more difficult to bare? The inconvenience of the search, or another 9/11 style attack?

      I take it you've been lulled into believing that the searches will prevent such an attack.

      --
      Downmodding is the refuge of the weak. Don't downmod, make a better argument!
    16. Re:Canadian border by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 2

      And you are just as guilty as he when you assume the ones killed were all of his kind.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    17. Re:Canadian border by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice use of the word fucking.

    18. Re:Canadian border by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jeez, you'd think jonkatz could get a lower ID on his troll account....

    19. Re:Canadian border by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i think someone;s a little cranky......

    20. Re:Canadian border by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      These searches aren't preventing "another 9/11 style attack" at all. Those guys weren't smuggling anything into the country.

      Give the guy a cuddly toy! Yes, the only thing the 9/11 terrorists brought into the country was their intelligence and education. It would be more sensible to put a ban on the entry into the US of bright, independently minded people than to embark on almost equally futile bombing missions in Afghanistan, Iraq and whatnot. Learn a bit more about your enemy.

    21. Re:Canadian border by Bingo+Foo · · Score: 2
      Uh, I support the checks too, but Jose Padilla was followed for days if not months before he entered the U.S.

      There were agents who followed him on the plane, and watched him the whole time until it touched down in Chicago. That's when they stood up and arrested him.

      A better example of the efficacy of random checks would be the 1500 pound truck bomb that Israelis found in a spot check before the new year last weekend.

      --
      taken! (by Davidleeroth) Thanks Bingo Foo!
    22. Re:Canadian border by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fucking right, brother. You fucking tell 'em. Dumb fuckers.

    23. Re:Canadian border by Obfuscant · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Lemme break it down for you:

      Please do. We are too stupid to understand without you.

      If they don't check people crossing the border, then that check point can be used to traffic unwanted items into the country.

      Nobody "traffics" unwanted items. Every item "trafficed" into the US from Canada is wanted by somebody. Did you mean to say they can use that checkpoint to traffic ILLEGAL items? Well, yes, if they don't check people, people can traffic illegal items through that checkpoint. Even if they do check people, people can traffic illegal items through that checkpoint. Is there some point to your statement?

      Here's an old story. Every day, a young boy rode his bicycle across the US-Mexican border into the US. Every day, the border patrol agent checked the boy for drugs or other illegal contraband. Every day, the boy had none of these things on him. The border agent was SURE that something was amiss, but he just couldn't find any smuggled goods on the boy. So, one day, he asks the boy, "What are you smuggling?" The boy tells him. "Bicycles."

      If they do check people crossing the border, then noone will attempt to traffic unwanted items into the country.

      Isn't it interesting how much contraband the customs people still manage to confiscate even though the mere fact they are looking for it, according to you, proves that nobody will try to bring it in?

      Now, which is more difficult to bare? The inconvenience of the search, or another 9/11 style attack?

      Both are difficult to bare [sic]. Since the 9/11 attack had absofuckinglutely nothing with people trafficing contraband into the US, checking people crossing the border for contraband will do absofuckinglutely nothing to prevent another 9/11 style attack. The excuse for searches in violation of the 4th Amendment is specious and an insult to anyone who values the freedom that our parents and sons and brothers and sisters and etc fought and died for.

      In fact, the "searches" now being conducted at airline checkpoints are doing nothing to prevent another 9/11 style attack. People brandishing fingernail clippers are not a threat. Gramma and her knitting needles are not a threat. Achmed getting one of his buddies that works at the airport to smuggle in a big knife IS a threat, but guess who isn't going to be passing through the long lines at the security checkpoint? Right, Achmed's friend. And Beanbrain wearing C4 shoes is a threat, if he was smart enough to know that you don't use a lighter to trigger electric detonators, but guess who was told to "come back tomorrow please" by foreign "security" agents, instead of being arrested?

      No, the solution to another 9/11 style attack has already been put in place, and it doesn't involve searching anyone. It is simply that anyone who tries it is going to get the shit beat out of him by other passengers and his death will NOT get him into Heaven and his family will NOT be honored for his sacrifice. He will be a laughing stock and his family will be disgraced.

      The assumption that hijackers value their own lives is what cost the four airplanes on 9/11. The assumption that above all else, the hijacker will not kill everyone on board because he would die, too, is gone. Isn't it a shame that our mad dash for the feeling of safety will have actually hampered any passenger response to the next hijacker. Completely disarming the only people who will be able to act to save lives is stupid and counterproductive.

    24. Re:Canadian border by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You claim that since it's not possible to completely prevent these incidents, we should make 0 attempt do so.

      What kind of rationalization is that?

      What if we found that by increased security since 9/11 they prevented just *one* death per year. Just one. Is your convienence worth that measly one death? Would you be willing to be that one person? How about your mother? Have a wife? Kids? Well, I do, and I'm here to say that the minor inconvienence we're talking here is NOT worth human lives.

      It is also worth mentioning that part of the security in security checks is that since people expect to be searched, they will not attempt to cross with illegal items. Since checkpoints are under heavy scrutinity, a would-be terrorist would have to resort to crossing the border in an unconventional place, which WOULD get noticed by an alert border surveilance.

      I won't deny that security checks are inconvenient, but the fact is that they can and do deter incidents.

    25. Re:Canadian border by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the words of The Boondock Saints. You certainly illistrated the diversity of the word.

    26. Re:Canadian border by Doug+Neal · · Score: 1

      Dude. Chill. You'll live longer. :-)

    27. Re:Canadian border by ces · · Score: 1

      What if we found that by increased security since 9/11 they prevented just *one* death per year. Just one. Is your convienence worth that measly one death? Would you be willing to be that one person? How about your mother? Have a wife? Kids? Well, I do, and I'm here to say that the minor inconvienence we're talking here is NOT worth human lives.

      By that same twist of logic we should engage in house-to-house searches, national IDs, government collections of personal infromation, being subject to search or survellence any time a government official thinks we are guilty of doing something "suspicious".

      Look at how well all of the sorts of nonsense in vouge since 9/11/2001 in the name of "fighting terrorism" has worked in the "war on drugs". Drugs are easier to get than ever and are smuggled into this country in wholesale quantities (by the shipping container and semi-truck load).

      Feh! I don't believe we want to win the "war on terror" any more than we want to win the "war on corprate crime" or the "war on drugs".

      --
      Happy Fun Ball is for external use only.
    28. Re:Canadian border by shadowbearer · · Score: 1


      This is the most insightful set of comments I've seen on /.
      yet concerning 9/11, and it DIDN'T GET MODDED UP.

      Sigh.

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    29. Re:Canadian border by hkhanna · · Score: 2, Informative

      ...a friend of a friend was driving from (Alberta) Canada to the Utah...and one of the guys he was going with was Islamic and wore a turban.

      Okay, you should know something. If someone has a turban and he is in America, he is NOT Islamic. There is no possible way. Muslims do not wear turbans out of their home country. I'm willing to bet that the man you are talking about is a Sikh. A Sikh is very, very different than a Muslim (although whites/Amercians generally lump them as one in the same. It's like calling a New Yorker a Frenchman.) Anyway, my point is that I don't understand all this discrimination against people with turbans since they are NOT muslim! They are a peaceloving people called Sikhs. We have nothing to do with Islam. We're not decsended from Abraham, we're decsended from Hinduism. It's the damn media's fault that we're persecuted during this time (yeah, I'm a Sikh--my dad wears a turban.) Anyway, just thought I'd share my thoughts. </rant>

      --

      Think nothing is impossible? Try slamming a revolving door.
    30. Re:Canadian border by DrFrob · · Score: 1

      We could prevent all murders and acts of terrorism by locking people up in their houses and having robots deliver food and do work. Hey, that'd be great, I could just sit on my ass all day and read slashdot!

    31. Re:Canadian border by Kindaian · · Score: 1

      Feh! I don't believe we want to win the "war on terror" any more than we want to win the "war on corprate crime" or the "war on drugs".

      Governing by decreet is a nice thing... it works wanders in public opinion, but in reality... DOES NOTHING to solve the problems in the first place...

      I could be considered an expert in that area (as most portuguese people unfortunatly ;)

      Cheers...

      P.S.- Car accidents and driving regulation changes are a current joke in Portugal, with the former be the higher in the world and the later be updates yearly or less [with no pratical effect of course]...
      In the US they go a step further... they form a new "task force" or "crack team" to couple with the problem... which helps in the short time... but in the long term does nothing...

    32. Re:Canadian border by g00set · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you're not white or with white people, you generally experience great discrimination at the US border crossing over from Canada.

      um...The US was not attacked by white Canadians.

      It was attacked by young radical Islamic fundamentalist men. Does it suprise you that greater attention is paid to people fit this description? Or would you prefer we waste every last resource frisking old ladies from Alberta just so it does not make you feel *uncomfortable*. Oh the discrimination!

      --
      ... and furthermore ... I don't like your trousers.
    33. Re:Canadian border by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      although whites/Amercians generally lump them as one in the same.

      Please do not equate Americans with whites.
      Last time I looked around, this was still a big, unwieldy melting pot.
      America is real. Race is fiction.

    34. Re:Canadian border by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you'll find that if he has a turban he is in all liklihood going to be a Sikh, not Muslim.

    35. Re:Canadian border by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 1
      "If someone has a turban and he is in America, he is NOT Islamic. There is no possible way. Muslims do not wear turbans out of their home country. I'm willing to bet that the man you are talking about is a Sikh."

      I am somewhat familiar with the Sikh faith. There have been some problems in Canada regarding the ceremonial daggers and no-weapons laws. A polititan here got in trouble for making anti-Sikh remarks some months ago.

      And I do believe the guy I was talking about was born in Canada so, as you say, it does not make sense that he is Moslem. I do not know him personally, but I believe you are right about the turban/country issue.

      Thank you for clearing that up. +1 informative to you.

    36. Re:Canadian border by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "And of course we all know, there is no possible way Canada could be a Muslim's home country."

      Read the parent. The guy was in the US at the time, travelling from Canada.

    37. Re:Canadian border by DEBEDb · · Score: 2

      Tou-fucking-che!

      --

      Considered harmful.
    38. Re:Canadian border by smithmc · · Score: 1

      What if we found that by increased security since 9/11 they prevented just *one* death per year. Just one. Is your convienence worth that measly one death? Would you be willing to be that one person? How about your mother? Have a wife? Kids? Well, I do, and I'm here to say that the minor inconvienence we're talking here is NOT worth human lives.

      Yeah, you're right. Let's strip- and cavity-search and x-ray every single person that crosses the border. After all, that might save one more life, so it's worth it, right? Better yet, let's close the border altogether and require visas applied for a year in advance to travel to Canada. Maybe psychiatric evaluations would be in order as well? And a signed statement swearing eternal fealty to Father Amerika?

      Not reasonable, you say? But why is your definition of "reasonable" any more valid than mine?

      --
      Downmodding is the refuge of the weak. Don't downmod, make a better argument!
    39. Re:Canadian border by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 1
      "It was attacked by young radical Islamic fundamentalist men. Does it suprise you that greater attention is paid to people fit this description? Or would you prefer we waste every last resource frisking old ladies from Alberta just so it does not make you feel *uncomfortable*. Oh the discrimination!"

      Part of my point is that it was like this before 9/11 as well. The discrimination was not generated by the terrorist attacks, only amplified.

    40. Re:Canadian border by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i couldn't fucking agree fucking more with fucking you. oops. fucking freudian slip there. i'm fucking sorry.

    41. Re:Canadian border by Nightpaw · · Score: 0, Troll

      Yeah, you Sikhs are pretty cool guys; I dig the long-ass hair and the holy books with purple gods on the covers. Plus, there are some pretty hot Sikh chicks. I might have to stop getting haircuts and go straightedge...

    42. Re:Canadian border by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You over simplify to assume white people sail through customs. Long hair, beard, tattoos, an earing, bumper stickers, anything set customs off.

      Our custom guards tend to be ignorant assholes. It might help to hire more hard-working immigrants for the job.

    43. Re:Canadian border by robotbebop · · Score: 1

      What's funny is people think this kind of discriminatory nature has only occured after 9/11. I went to see a Mariners game a few years back (when it was the Kingdome) with this youth group I was in. The van that I was riding in got to the border, they made us park at the office and they removed the Chinese kid; (He was from China, I think he was an exchange student) The officers searched his bags, asked him if he had any bombs or was planning on making any, if he was collaborating of any terrorist orginizations, crap like that. We were stuck for 20 minutes, he was the one and only kid that was removed and searched. We all thought it was stupid, we all wanted to say it was bullshit, but nobody really wanted to swear in front of the youth pastor :D

    44. Re:Canadian border by sheriff_p · · Score: 2

      Or rather, lots of people who take no pride in their personal appearence. Don't tar me with the same dysfunctional brush that you tar yourself with please.

      --
      Score:-1, Funny
    45. Re:Canadian border by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, you Sikhs are pretty cool guys; I dig the long-ass hair and the holy books with purple gods on the covers. Plus, there are some pretty hot Sikh chicks. I might have to stop getting haircuts and go straightedge...

    46. Re:Canadian border by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Going to the US with my father driving can be trying because he has one of those huge islamic-reminiscent beards (although he's not islamic) and the US border people always root through the car, look in all your containers, make a mess of everything, and don't put anything back where it was. Rude asholes. Do unto others as you would have done unto you. (If you're not white or with white people, you generally experience great discrimination at the US border crossing over from Canada. Sad but true. It's happenned to my family on numerous occasions, before and after 9/11.)

      Oh get over it. I'm white as white can be and have been searched numerous times during border crossings. Why do you have to turn everything into a racial thing? If terrorists are going to cross anywhere it's going to be over the largest undefended border in the world. I commend the border agents for cracking down. Before 9/11 when going into Canada and coming back the worst I ever had to say was where I was born, where I was going to, and how long I was saying. "OK, move along".

    47. Re:Canadian border by bogado · · Score: 2
      With enouth money, you can certanly convince a "frisking old ladies from Alberta" to pass the US border with almos anything.

      --
      []'s Victor Bogado da Silva Lins

      ^[:wq

    48. Re:Canadian border by mark-t · · Score: 2
      on the interstate, there was a period of about 15 minutes where there was a state trooper car front of them, another behind them, and one on the side, totally boxing them in
      If I had been driving, I would have gotten someone else in the car to pull out our camcorder, and recorded what these guys were doing. I would have then began driving slower and slower, seeing whether or not they were still boxing me in. Wanna bet they would have all quickly gone away once they realized that a camcorder was on them?

      I would have only continued to drive like that for a couple of minutes or so before I would have had to pull over and stop the car. Driving like that for an extended period is unsafe in the extreme.

    49. Re:Canadian border by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey Canada boy, it's me, your favourite America troll. Anyway, I just thought I'd come and visit. How ya been? Anyway, back to my point, there were many terrorist attacks before the September 11th attack. All the way back to Delta Force, arabs hijacking planes for some obscure goal and saving their Islamic brothers was a given. Remember the Oklahoma city bombing, everyones favourite arab counter example, when the original police sketch of the bomber was arab and it wasn't? Sure, we got burned once for discrimination, but most attacks have been from arabs. Seeing as the arabs are a minority, and most attacks have been from them, it only makes sense to search them more. I mean, leave out skin colour on a police description in the name of not discriminating is a joke. But I'm here on the Canadian border and all the arabs I've talked to have been supported by the community, not discriminated against. Even if we have to search them more, which is discrimination, it doesn't mean we're burning crosses on their lawns, setting up apartheid, or killing all the arab farmers. Ah well, you're Canada boy, nobody cares about attacking Canada. If they ever do, maybe you'll understand. And just curious, how many arabs do you know personally? Around here discrimination isn't really an issue because there's like 1 arab (maybe, I never met any), 1 african, and like 10 african americans at my old school. And we usually went out of our way, in our yearbook for example, to get pictures of them out there. Anyway, talk to ya latah.

    50. Re:Canadian border by unitron · · Score: 2

      The guy caught by the alert (female) border guard near Seattle was Ahmed Ressam.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

  7. Well, for starters... by Soulfader · · Score: 5, Informative
    The source of the list found here:

    Overview of changes to legal rights:
    By The Associated Press

    September 5, 2002, 11:44 AM EDT

    Some of the fundamental changes to Americans' legal rights by the Bush administration and the USA Patriot Act following the terror attacks:

    • FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION: Government may monitor religious and political institutions without suspecting criminal activity to assist terror investigation.
    • FREEDOM OF INFORMATION: Government has closed once-public immigration hearings, has secretly detained hundreds of people without charges, and has encouraged bureaucrats to resist public records requests.
    • FREEDOM OF SPEECH: Government may prosecute librarians or keepers of any other records if they tell anyone that the government subpoenaed information related to a terror investigation.
    • RIGHT TO LEGAL REPRESENTATION: Government may monitor federal prison jailhouse conversations between attorneys and clients, and deny lawyers to Americans accused of crimes.
    • FREEDOM FROM UNREASONABLE SEARCHES: Government may search and seize Americans' papers and effects without probable cause to assist terror investigation.
    • RIGHT TO A SPEEDY AND PUBLIC TRIAL: Government may jail Americans indefinitely without a trial.
    • RIGHT TO LIBERTY: Americans may be jailed without being charged or being able to confront witnesses against them.
    It's depressing when I show this list and someone says, "Wow, I had no idea it was so bad."

    It's even worse when they say "So?"

    1. Re:Well, for starters... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The question was - How has it affected you? Or even anybody you know?

    2. Re:Well, for starters... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So?

    3. Re:Well, for starters... by soapvox · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You are right it is worse when they say so, and I think the biggest thing that has changed since September 11 for me is the fact is now MORE people are willing to give up thier freedoms for security that isn't really there. I fly every week and I don't mind the extra searches and SFO is actually getting speedy, what I do mind is the fact that I feel it necessary to double think everything I email or post online because I KNOW that it is more scrutinized than before. And people just go along with Ashcroft in his quest for justice by denying US citizen rights they are given by our constitution, and if I am not mistaken terrorist don't like Americans because of thier freedoms, like freedom to follow whatever religion you want with out being targeted for it like a lot of Islamic groups are now being watched for, like the freedom to say what you like about the government without fear of retaliation, if we are not careful the terrorist will win by default if they take away our freedoms. If you want to fight terrorism, excersize your freedom of speech and tell Ashcroft to back off!

    4. Re:Well, for starters... by MrEd · · Score: 3, Funny

      Now available in an easy-to-digest comic form!


      http://archive.salon.com/comics/boll/2001/12/20/bo ll/index.html



      Thanks to Ruben Bolling's Tom the Dancing Bug, of course.

      --

      Wah!

    5. Re:Well, for starters... by HaeMaker · · Score: 2

      Great post...

      One more:

      The Right of Habaes Corpus: Those declared "enemy combatants" are never arraigned, nor have to be told why they are being held.

      You covered this with RIGHT TO TRIAL, but its even worse they you describe.

    6. Re:Well, for starters... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That list is completely bogus, Newsweek took different parts of the act out of their context to provide a slanted view -- hell -- the ACLU is more object on this one. :)

      FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION::

      What the hell do they think "criminal activity" is? They don't have to suspect criminal activity just terrorist activity - hrmm, that makes sense?

      FREEDOM OF INFORMATION::

      Where are the facts on this? If they've secretly detained hundreds of people without charges how does Newsweek know about it?

      FREEDOM OF SPEECH::

      Yes, and? When was it legal to leak information regarding national security? Not saying this is necessarily a good thing, but its nothing new...

      RIGHT TO LEGAL REPRESENTATION::
      Yes, but information obtained by listening to these conversations cannot be used to further criminal investigations.

      FREEDOM FROM UNREASONABLE SEARCHES::
      Yes, it sucks. A note, this again cannot be used to further criminal investigations.

      LIBERTY + SPEEDY AND PUBLIC TRIAL:
      This only applies to non-US citizens.

      I'm certainly not saying that the current situation regarding civil liberties is a good thing, but some stories really just blow it up for some headlines.

    7. Re:Well, for starters... by tenchiken · · Score: 2

      Everyone held inside of the US on immigration charges or in X-ray have had forms and options given to them to reveal to media whom they are. Several have feared for the safety of their famalies in Afganistan if they are revealed (Northern Allience is not all that hot), so they have chosen not to.

      Almost all >95% of the people held in immigration charges have been deported at this point. The remaining 5% are people that we really might not want Al-Qeda to know we have (the downside of a cell structure is that while your enemy can not easily get to your membership, neither can you, esp if they are "sleeper cells" like say, the 9/11 crowd was.).

    8. Re:Well, for starters... by Telex4 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You're quite right, except for your assertion that islamic extremists hate americans because of their freedom. If they did, they'd just try and come to america. They hate america because the american government has done so much harm to the rest of the world in the past 50 years, and it has done so little to help the rest of the world. That and they're insane :)

    9. Re:Well, for starters... by Loki_1929 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "LIBERTY + SPEEDY AND PUBLIC TRIAL:
      This only applies to non-US citizens."


      I'm sure that's very reassuring to Jose Padilla, the American Citizen who was born and raised in the US, who was arrested in Chicago in May and is now sitting in a US Military brig without any charges against him, and with no access to a lawyer or to his family. Oh wait, he probably can't read this. Hmm....

      --
      -- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
    10. Re:Well, for starters... by no+reason+to+be+here · · Score: 1, Interesting
      They hate america because the american government has done so much harm to the rest of the world in the past 50 years, and it has done so little to help the rest of the world.


      brush up on your history. ever hear of the marshall plan? that helped out a few people. others might claim the fall of soviet-style totalitarian communism was a good thing, too. the US also played a central role in starting the IMF, UN, and other such agencies devoted to helping out the rest of the world. furthermore (i can't remember exact numbers, so forgive me) the US spends more on foreign aid than the next 9 richest countries combined.

      yeah, the US does so little to help out the rest of the world. the only rue thing in your post is that fuckers like bin-Laden are insane.
    11. Re:Well, for starters... by Telex4 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yes, I've heard of the marshall plan, and that wasn't within the past 50 years. Brush up on your history, and look at all of the military ventures America has been involved in sincee 1952, then you might go some way towards understanding why a lot of people hate America (and not all of them are insane, a lot of them only let their hatred out in words, rather than mindless violence).

      You can hardly attribute the UN and the fall of the USSR entirely to the USA. Hell, the USA didn't even support the League of Nations after Woodrow Wilson left the scene. Look also at the impact the IMF have had. Look also at the fact that the amount of aid the US has given as a percentage of its GNP has fallen consistently in the last 50 years.

      The only way to explain every person in the world who dislikes or disagrees with various American policies by your argument is that they are insane. Surely that should make you reasses your argument?

    12. Re:Well, for starters... by Mikeytsi · · Score: 1

      No, they hate us because we're allies with Israel, and Islamic Extremists hate Jews.

      --
      I've been called a "Fucking Dick" by better people than you.
    13. Re:Well, for starters... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope you live in a big city right down the street from him. Now say again you want him freed.

    14. Re:Well, for starters... by joshki · · Score: 2

      You forfeit your citizenship when you take up arms against the US. I, for one, am quite glad that Abdullah al-Muhajir is in a military brig with all access to his terrorist friends denied. He gave up his citizenship, and his rights as a citizen, when he took up arms against the US. Neocon has written a very insightful comment in his journal regarding this. Check it out for some excellent information about what constitutes an unlawful combatant.

      --
      I do not read or respond to AC's. If you want a discussion, log in. Otherwise, don't waste your time.
    15. Re:Well, for starters... by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 2

      While I agree that those who claim the terrorists are after the US because they hate our freedom are full of it, so too are you. You claim that if freedom was the issue they'd just come here. Bull. The people who bring up the argument about freedom are NOT talking about the terrorists wanting MORE freedom. They are claiming the terrorists want there to be LESS freedom in the world, so NO, if their argument was right the terrorists would NOT want to move to where there is more freedom. You are arguing against the opposite of the opinion actually being held.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    16. Re:Well, for starters... by Suicyco · · Score: 2

      Why would ANYBODY hate americans because we are "free"? What does that have to do with their lives in their part of the world? Thats a truly twisted tale the government has pursued with great relish. "Terrorists" hate america and its people because we kill, bomb and maim their citizens in the pursuit of "freedom." You honestly think an arab in Iran hates you because you can choose your religion? No, he hates you because you payed, in taxes and votes, for the people who supported the Shah, who support the "freedom fighters" who killed his family in his own country, who support murderous regimes to preserve your gasoline prices. THATS what "terrorists" hate. (Now I'll patiently await the goon squads to show up for "supporting" terrorism....)

    17. Re:Well, for starters... by jmweeks · · Score: 1

      Your argument is invalid as you are begging the question. If citizens are locked up indefinitely without trial, then how do we know they've forfeited their citizenship? That's like saying the guilty have forfeited their right to a fair trial: how do we know they're guilty without the trial? There is much complaint in certain circles about the ACLU et al trying to "protect" criminals. In reality, all they wish to do is prevent those who are innocent from being placed in a situation where the determination of their (lack of) guilt is supressed.

    18. Re:Well, for starters... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They hate america because the american government has done so much harm to the rest of the world in the past 50 years

      They hate america because america supports israel.
      This goes waaaay back. Before the United States were even formed. Thousands of years.

    19. Re:Well, for starters... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well by the same rules...they can throw your ass in a hole and throw away the key.

      and by your rules...no one has to prove a thing.

      you would think an america born america raised citizen has some rights.

      if he's so guilty, surely the charges can hold up to a little scrutiny...?

      i'd like to see someone PROVED to be guilty first before they are strung up.

    20. Re:Well, for starters... by tenchiken · · Score: 2

      Iraq hates is because we won't let them take over nations next to them, poison their kurdish minority, use biological weapons on Isreal, Kill random guests at parties and do all sorts of other anti-social behavoirs.

      Don't get me wrong, I strongly oppose the embargo on Iraq. I opposed it when the Libarals first suggested it in the early 90's.

      That being said, I agree with Condi Rice. "We must take steps to make sure that the next smoking gun is not a mushroom cloud".

    21. Re:Well, for starters... by RollingThunder · · Score: 2

      So, in other words, those who do as the Founding Fathers figured would be needed - overthrowing a corrupt AMERICAN government - are unamerican.

      Boggles the mind.

    22. Re:Well, for starters... by ghack · · Score: 1

      e gave up his citizenship, and his rights as a citizen, when he took up arms against the US.

      What is the legal precedent you site here?

    23. Re:Well, for starters... by neocon · · Score: 1

      If you would actually follow the case, you would know that the decision that a suspect is an enemy combatant is subject to full judicial review. Mr. al-Muhajir, for example, is appealing his designation as a combatant in a Manhattan courtroom, and has had full access to counsel at every stage of the process to prepare this appeal.

    24. Re:Well, for starters... by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      Had the United States backed the flawed and toothless League of Nations for decades upon decades the world would have been a worse place. Remeber it was the League that stood by while Italy gassed Ethiopian villages. Would you have had the League bluster and talk while Poland was divided and millions killed in Eastern Europe?

      The Cold War and a policy of military, political and economic containment coupled with defence spending and technology advancements brought the Soviet Union to it's knees. The very bad part of it all was the fact that the Soviet Union was in much worse shape economicly and socially than we thought.

      As for aid, why should the United States give aid to foriegn states that will not use it for positive goals? Israel uses it's aid for agriculture and to keep a military that ensures it's survival, without aid like that there would be a political and refugee problem the likes of which no one has seen since 1945 Europe.

      The United States, the United Kingdom, France, the Republic of China and the USSR founded the UN and the United States threw the most money into it's founding. Including providing the headquarters in New York City and some of the most valuable land in North America. Other than the five Permanent Members of the Security Council and Switzerland, no other country has done 1/50th as much for the UN.

    25. Re:Well, for starters... by joshki · · Score: 2
      Do you think that's what he had in mind? I seriously doubt the founding fathers had the wanton murder of innocent (well -- mostly) civilians in mind when they wrote the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

      My personal views run almost as far to the libertarian as you can get -- but when someone tries to murder civilians, I say lock him up and throw away the key. There is most likely a very good reason he's being held as he is -- just because you put a terrorist in prison doesn't mean he can't accomplish things if he's allowed to communicate with his cell. I do think he should have a trial, but I also understand that intelligence agencies have to be cautious with when they release information. Other people's lives are at stake as well, and as I said earlier, he forfeited his rights when he took up arms against the American people.

      On that note -- you raise an excellent point. Should an American citizen be able to take up arms against a corrupt government? The answer, of course is spelled out in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. But -- if one were to do such a thing, would it surprise you if they were treated in the same way? They would have committed a crime against the government -- We laud Nathan Hale today as a hero, while we forget that he was rightly hung by the British troops because he committed an illegal act(A military person dressing in civilian clothes in a war zone is to this day a war crime). Did he commit a moral wrong? Most Americans today would say no (I agree) -- but he broke the law, and paid the ultimate price for it.

      While I may not agree with all the things the government today does, it's nothing like what the colonists revolted against. To compare the government today to the English government of the 1770's and Abdullah al-Muhajir to the colonists is sophistry -- it ignores way too many key points to be a valid argument.

      I'm surprised my comment hasn't been modded to karma hell yet -- I'm sure it's only a matter of time...

      --
      I do not read or respond to AC's. If you want a discussion, log in. Otherwise, don't waste your time.
    26. Re:Well, for starters... by Loki_1929 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "I hope you live in a big city right down the street from him. Now say again you want him freed."

      I wish I were. If he moved next door to me, I would immediately walk over and give the man a hug and thank him. He is the test case that will (hopefully) stop future administrations from trying to annihilate the Bill of Rights. He might be guilty, he might not be; I don't know and I can't make a sound judgement, nor can anyone else. Our government has taken away our right to judge him, and taken away his right to be judged by us.

      If I were a judge and the case were handed to me, I'd order him freed immediately and order an investigation into his treatment in this brig. At this point, I don't care if he stepped off the plane with the bomb in his hands - you've violated virtually ever rule of law regarding the treatment of a suspect. Not only that, you've violated the spirit of the Material Witness law. In which court case was he to be testifying? To what crimes was he a witness? The answer, much the same as most of the other answers from the DoJ lately, is "we don't know."

      Feel free to cower behind despots like Aschcroft. If you're too afraid to live free and too cowardly to engage in the difficult task of securing democracy for ALL , then bow down to your masters. I don't think I'm alone when I say that I'm more terrified of my own government than I am of the "terrorists." This "heightened alert" that was put out today was lapped up by the media conglomerate lapdogs, who so dutifully played into Ashcroft's hands by terrifying the public into submission with fantastic stories of imminent death and destruction.

      Your problem in particular is that you have continued to soak-in the ever-flowing river of hysterical cries of the Bush Administration. You've been trained for the last 12 months to believe that the price for security is less freedom. You've been told again and again that your benevolent government would never do anything not in your best interests, and that whatever laws are passed that may restrict freedom don't actually apply to you; only to those terrorists guys. You've been lulled by the soothing words of those in power who tell you that everything will be alright if you do as we say and don't ask questions. Well guess what, I'm asking questions, and I'm demanding answers.

      I love my country. I love it enough to risk my own personal safety by speaking out against our despotic attorney general. It hurts me to think that everything our ancestors built for us could be destroyed; not by a foreign enemy, but by elected leaders. Folks, people make mistakes, and we made a big one putting these people in charge. I supported Bush all the way until the beginning of this year. Now I look at all that has happened and I say to myself, "my God, what have we done?"

      The truth is that our best defence against any aggressor is now, and always has been our freedom. In the War of 1812, the White House and many other buildings in our capital city were burned to the ground. Our capital was nothing more than a smoldering ruin. Did we junk our Constitution? Did we enact sweeping changes in our laws? No. Our ancestors had the courage to stand by their convictions, and stood in the face of certain destruction proclaiming that they will either live as free men, or die. To those men whose faces we see carved into stone at Mount Rushmore, freedom was more important than life. Let history never judge us as the cowards who hid in fear, but as patriots and defenders of liberty who continued the proud tradition of staring death in the face and refusing to back down from our ideals. Sept 11 shocked us out of our complacency; don't let anyone use it as an excuse to destroy the very thing we puport to hold so dear.

      So yes, I do wish I lived close to Jose Padilla's home. I would feel no less safe there than I do sitting right here. And at least then I'd have the chance to thank him for all he's done for our country, and to apologize for what we have done to him. If 200 million Americans raised their voices in chorus, calling for the freedom of Padilla, he would be home tomorrow. It is as much our fault that he sits in that brig as it is our government's. So what do you say we make sure it never happens again?

      --
      -- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
    27. Re:Well, for starters... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The tree of liberty must be watered regularly with the blood of patriots"
      -Thomas Jefferson

    28. Re:Well, for starters... by Suicyco · · Score: 2

      Ummm... Iraq DID take over a "nation" next to them (if you can call a corporate monarchy with no citizens rights a nation). They DID use biological weapons on the kurds. They bombed Isreal as well, though not with bio weapons.

      And your point is? That is the Iraqi government. That is not a 20 year old idealist willing to sacrifice his own life to further a cause. Do you think the average Iraqi civilian supports the Iraqi government? No. But they still hate you as an american. For good reason. The west CREATED the Iraqi government, armed it, trained it and kept a blind eye on it, WHEN IT SERVED THE NEEDS OF THE WEST.

      Oh, and have you ever heard of the Shah of Iran? Ever heard of Saudi Arabia? Ever heard of East Timor? Ever heard of.... oh, thats right, the US doesn't support terrorism.

      BTW, the Saudi regime is the most brutal and violent so-called government is the middle east. Public beheading anyone? For masturbating?

      Yeah, we do need to take steps to make sure the next smoking gun isn't a mushroom cloud. One we create over an impoverished middle eastern nation to make YOU feel safe.

    29. Re:Well, for starters... by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      The United States 9th Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on this in World War Two concerning a Italian soldier captured while fighting the United States Army. He was born in the United States and moved to Italy during the 30s.

      http://www.nationalreview.com/kob/kob090402.asp

      Citizens and non-citizens alike can be classified as enemy combatants. Gaetano Territo, an American citizen, was captured fighting with the enemy in Italy during World War II. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that his citizenship had no bearing on his lawful detention, which had lasted three years by the time of the court's decision.

      "Military belligerents violating the international laws of war are tried before a panel of military officers, not juries of their peers -- no matter what the Taliban may seek as a condition. Such military commissions received extensive use in the Civil War, and were affirmed by the Supreme Court in the famous World War II decision sentencing General Tomoyuki Yamashita to hang for the brutal atrocities he ordered against civilians in the Philippines. When Yamishita petitioned the Court for habeas corpus, the Court rebuffed him stating that the war power delegated by Congress includes administering a system of military justice for the trial and punishment of those combatants who have committed war crimes. No case contradicts this. The Civil War precedent, Ex parte Milligan that nominally questions the availability of military tribunals where civilian courts remain open, was later confined to its unique domestic insurgency facts, and specifically the fact that Milligan was not -- in international parlance -- an "unlawful belligerent." Terrorists clearly are."

      http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-km ie c101101.shtml

    30. Re:Well, for starters... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't get me wrong, I strongly oppose the embargo on Iraq. I opposed it when the Libarals first suggested it in the early 90's you foolish idiot. All those billions of dollars from oil sales would NOT have gone to the women and children, it would not have gone for medicines or aid for Iraqi's poor...
      it would have gone to their weapons programs
      think a little where we'd be sitting right now if they had an extra few hundred billion sitting in their warchest!

    31. Re:Well, for starters... by Wesley+Everest · · Score: 2
      A large minority of civillians (about a third) were loyal to the British Empire and were against the American revolutionaries. Torture and murder of these civillians was pretty common. A quick search on google came up with this.
      My personal views run almost as far to the libertarian as you can get -- but when someone tries to murder civilians, I say lock him up and throw away the key. There is most likely a very good reason he's being held as he is -- just because you put a terrorist in prison doesn't mean he can't accomplish things if he's allowed to communicate with his cell. I do think he should have a trial, but I also understand that intelligence agencies have to be cautious with when they release information. Other people's lives are at stake as well, and as I said earlier, he forfeited his rights when he took up arms against the American people.
      You do realize that this is precisely the logic used by the Iranians when took the hostages in the American Embassy back in 1979? They had evidence that some of the embassy employees were working for or with the CIA to help prop up the Shah and his infamous secret police. At the time, it was an outrage that the alleged CIA agents were being held incommunicado -- Iranian spokesmen publicly spoke of the need for security and that the captives might pass information back to the U.S. that could result in the death of many Iranians. Are you saying that perhaps the Iranians were right? That holding people incommunicado is justified in the name of national security? Or do you have two standards for actions of governments -- one for governments you support, and a different one for governments you are opposed to?
      My personal views run almost as far to the libertarian as you can get
      From your post here, I'd say you have a long way to go before you could use the word "libertarian" to describe your views. I suggest you do some thinking about what your ideology really is and either change your outlook to be actually libertarian or be honest to yourself and admit that you are far down the authoritarian end of the spectrum.
    32. Re:Well, for starters... by scenic · · Score: 2
      key. There is most likely a very good reason he's being held as he is -- just because you put a terrorist in prison doesn't mean he can't accomplish things if he's allowed to communicate with his cell.

      Your reasoning is flawed by two glaring errors. First, you say there is "most likely a very good reason he is being held as he is." The problem is that we don't know, and more importantly, the branch of government that is supposed to check a potentially overzealous action by the executive wasn't involved in the decision.

      Your reasoning also assumes guilt before innocence. Look, we don't know if he is a terrorist. But, in this climate, we're all happy to assume he is one... after all, there was that John Walker Lindh fellow, so it must be true.

      This is dangerous reasoning. To argue that you can't control someone's access to the outside world while they're in prison, and then to use that as justification for throwing a guy in jail and forgetting about the key... wow.

      Sujal

      --

      politics, food, music, life: FatMixx

    33. Re:Well, for starters... by sawka · · Score: 1

      Why?

      Extremists, dictators, and people who enforce a rigid social, economic, or religious order are generally afraid of information and freedom. Why do you think communist countries limited their citizens' access to information? Why do dictatorships run their own state media and censor content? They filter information to rob people of the means to make informed decisions -- the basis of freedom. American ideals and freedoms are very infectious and can cause a great deal of upheaval in closed / non-democratic countries. The people at the top and the people who benefit from the current status quo in these countries have a lot to lose, even from just the symbol of free America. They hate us because our success and our ideals threaten their way of life and their power.

      I'm not saying that everyone hates us for this reason... but certainly there are some...

    34. Re:Well, for starters... by Nazmun · · Score: 1

      Citizens and non-citizens alike can be classified as enemy combatants. Gaetano Territo, an American citizen, was captured fighting with the enemy in Italy during World War II. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that his citizenship had no bearing on his lawful detention, which had lasted three years by the time of the court's decision.

      You do realize that you mentioned the word "court." Very different from the executive branch holding someone for as long as they want without proving anything at all to the public.

      To not realize this is unfortunately quite pathetic.

      --
      Hmmm... Pie...
    35. Re:Well, for starters... by TKinias · · Score: 1

      Quoth Loki_1929:

      Let history never judge us as the cowards who hid in fear, but as patriots and defenders of liberty who continued the proud tradition of staring death in the face and refusing to back down from our ideals. Sept 11 shocked us out of our complacency; don't let anyone use it as an excuse to destroy the very thing we puport to hold so dear.

      Damn, Loki_1929, someone needs to mod you up. Unfortunately, I'm not the one to help today.

      Whatever happened to "Live free or die"? Shame on the cowards who call themselves patriots.

      --
      In principio creauit Linus Linucem.
    36. Re:Well, for starters... by tenchiken · · Score: 2

      First of all, The "west" created Iraq? Umm try again. The UK and France created the unholy mess that is the middle east with constant back stabbing, broken treaties and leaving the Jews to fend for themselves. We have kept the west out of the Middle East as much as possible (go lookup the Suez Debacle with UK/France) as well as forcing them to give up thoose regions of the world after WWII.

      We gave the Middle East self-determination. They have squandered in to a pit of religious extremism.

      Second of all, fact checks:
      The gov't of Saudi Arabai has been around almost as long as the US. We did not create Iraq, we gave them weapons because they were by far the lesser of two evils during the 80's (imagine how bad the Islamists would be if Iran had conquered Iraq.).

      That being said, while I reject the porely written arguments which do not have factual basis above, I agree with the fact that Saudi Arabia is scum, and had you looked at some of my other posts, you would have noticed.

      BTW, they will hate America just as long as the Germans, Japanese, S. Koreans, and Afgani's did.

      I am proud, and continue to be proud of the role the US has played in the world . Have we screwed up alot yes? Right now we are being punished because the french and the british had no clue that drawing lines w.r.t ethnic minorities might have been a good idea. We are being punished because A Celiphate 1200 years ago decided that Isreal would make a nice addition to Islamic vacation stops, and a pope decided that a new way to unify europe in the form of the crusades would be nice. The US is targeted because the British backed the Syrians rather then the Isreali's in 1947 and because the French and the British tried to re-take the Suez.

      I for one will root for the day that we can simply build a wall around the only functional democracy in the region, and tell the Saudi's and egyptions to go play by themselves in a corner.

      As for your last argument, It is my deepest wish that we never unleash nukes ever again (I have a history degree with a focus on WWII), that being said if Iraq ever uses a WMD against us or ours (US, Europe, Japan, Taiwan, Canada, Mexico, Latin America), Hussain will be glassed.

    37. Re:Well, for starters... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As opposed to the three billion Hussain currently funnels out a year? You mis-understand my point. We should have diposed Hussain by force, proclaimed a democracy, spent a few billion rebuilding the landscape, and left a functional state their instead of trying to play to local sensabilities (which have no sense) and Media cameras.

    38. Re:Well, for starters... by thehappygit · · Score: 0

      This is not quite as bad as the others, because the constitution specifically allows habeas corpus to be suspended during a crisis.

      The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.
    39. Re:Well, for starters... by joshki · · Score: 2

      I don't know much about the Iranian hostage crisis -- I vaguely remember it, as I was quite young when it happened. However, if your analysis of the situation is correct, then as far as they were concerned, they may have been doing what was best for their national security. However, your comparison is fatally flawed either way. Jose Padilla-Muharij is not a diplomat. He does not, nor did he ever have, diplomatic immunity. We treat foreign diplomats with a great deal of respect -- the worst thing we can do to them is require their removal from the country. Iran held our diplomats and overran our embassy, and that breaks all kinds of international laws. Try again.

      --
      I do not read or respond to AC's. If you want a discussion, log in. Otherwise, don't waste your time.
    40. Re:Well, for starters... by joshki · · Score: 2
      I'm sure the evidence against him is highly classified. Regardless of what you may think, the people who run these sorts of things don't just put someone in prison for no reason -- there is all kinds of oversight on the intelligence community. I'm sure you're not cleared to know what actions have been taken, and what oversight has been conducted, on this case.

      So, no -- my reasoning isn't flawed. When the evidence against him is declassified 10-20 years from now, you may very well see why. Or not -- I don't have any specific knowledge, I just realize that to an extent we have to trust the people we've elected to positions of responsibility. If we don't, our style of government doesn't work. Of course, if you disagree, the polls open in a couple of months -- make your vote heard.

      --
      I do not read or respond to AC's. If you want a discussion, log in. Otherwise, don't waste your time.
    41. Re:Well, for starters... by Quixote · · Score: 2
      You forfeit your citizenship when you take up arms against the US.

      Of course you do. Bowever, shouldn't it be proved first in a court of law??. Why did they try Timohy McVeigh, then? Why didn't they just hang him from the nearest post, or (as you suggest) just take away his citizenship and throw him in a military brig for 300 years? Tim McVeigh, who blew up 168 men, women and children had more rights than this Padilla character! I'm not saying he's innocent; but if he is guilty, try the bastard and hang him for all I care! But try him in a court of law first before you presume his guilt!

    42. Re:Well, for starters... by scenic · · Score: 2
      I agree that trust in our elected officials is essential. I also understand that the evidence is highly classified.

      The problem is that it's really more or less impossible to maintain any oversight in these conditions, and that should be suspicious. To trust our elected officials is one thing... to believe that they are incorruptible is quite another.

      For that reason, even Congress has intelligence committees with a few senators that are cleared for most classified data. We now have a special court that is appointed to do the same thing. As far as I've heard, Padilla's case hasn't made it in front of them.

      I'd make one final point: Our history is replete with examples of corruption and private vendettas at the highest level. I would be happy to point out many examples. Timely disclosure to the public at least about basic charges seems the least the government could do. 10-20 years behind bars on a mistake or an overzealous prosectution seems pretty harsh.

      Lsat thing (really, this time :)... your reasoning is still flawed because you're assuming guilt. To trust our officials means that those arrested are always guilty. Just the mere likelihood of such an outcome doesn't justify ripping up the Constitution.

      Sujal

      --

      politics, food, music, life: FatMixx

    43. Re:Well, for starters... by inKubus · · Score: 2

      I watched an interesting talk given by Noam Chomsky on CSPAN. For those who have never heard of Chomsky, he's a world famous anthropologist and political activist.

      Anyway, he was talking about (among other things) pretexts used by "America" to justify other actions totally unrelated to the original pretext. For instance, the cold war was used as a pretext to place our influence all around the world in the form of military bases in other countries, aircraft carriers, submarines, etc. The important point, since that is all obvious, is that whether or not the threat actually existed, we did this stuff anyway.

      I don't really know how to explain it all as eloquently as Mr. Chomsky, but he went on to describe the FIRST war on terror, began in 1981 by the Regan administration (many of the same people are in the current Bush administration). Firstly, there was a war on terror declared after the olympic shootings, then deadly narco-trafficers were used as a pretext to attack and occupy Nicuragua. Then there was the invasion of Panama, etc.

      It was almost like, as he said, they knew that the cold war was coming to an end and a new pretext needed to be created.

      It goes on and on. It doesn't make much sense, but it goes to show that the people in power will use a crisis or situation or pretext to further their own goals. In the case of the present "war on terror", the goal was to implement almost Stalinist policies into the state--such as the ironically named "U.S. Patriot Act" and other such nonsense.

      Of course, the real reasons lie hidden beneath lies. One can naturally assume that it has a lot to do with the largest energy source on earth being located in the gulf and the fact that a lot of people with a very different religion live on top of it, and EVERY country wants a piece of the action underneath (ie: russia, china, india, france, germany, etc, etc, etc)

      Of course, crazies have been talking about some agents of the U.S. or israel being responsible for the 9/11 incident but that's a small detail. It doesn't really matter who did it; the results are what count. The current administration is going out of its way to blame all the changes on Terrorists, yet this threat has been here since the 1950's and we've never done anything because we all know that nothing we can do will ever protect ourselves.

      Just, please, remember to trust very little anyone who tries to blame anything on some unseen entity, especially when they appear to be profitting from it..... anyway, we'll see what happens tomorrow.

      --
      Cool! Amazing Toys.
    44. Re:Well, for starters... by ces · · Score: 1
      --
      Happy Fun Ball is for external use only.
    45. Re:Well, for starters... by joshki · · Score: 2
      I think the reason that McVeigh was tried was that there wasn't any link to any semi-organized terrorist group. There weren't any intelligence sources to protect, no foreign governments to keep at bay(or overthrow), etc.

      Personally, I think the only thing McVeigh had to do with the OKC bombing was possibly driving the truck there and waiting to get caught. I mean, come on -- driving around Tulsa in a car with no license plates (that's a guarantee you'll get pulled over -- midwest cops don't mess around) and a gun in a shoulder holster??? Talk about class A, Grade 1 STUPID! I doubt he had the intelligence to make a fertilizer bomb -- as simple as they may be to make. It would be nice to know who really master-minded it -- unfortunately, I doubt we'll ever know for sure.

      --
      I do not read or respond to AC's. If you want a discussion, log in. Otherwise, don't waste your time.
    46. Re:Well, for starters... by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2
      Why would ANYBODY hate americans because we are "free"?
      Because that freedom is gained at the expense of other people's expense.

      Ask any chilean what they think of the US backing the dictatorship of pinochet...

      Or any filipino about the US backing the dictatorship of marcos...

      Or any spanish about franco...

      Or any afghan about the talibans...

    47. Re:Well, for starters... by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2
      Ummm... Iraq DID take over a "nation" next to them (if you can call a corporate monarchy with no citizens rights a nation).
      A "nation" which was formerly part of Irak, but which was excised by the britshit in 1960 so they could control the oil there...

      Saddam was just taking back what was his...

      It also lasted for a while, until Busch's personnal interests were threatened. So, a massive P.R. campaign was launched to turn the american public opinion against Saddam. And the rest is "history".

    48. Re:Well, for starters... by mosch · · Score: 2
      Hey, I just called TIPS and told them that a terrorist named joshki is the ringleader of terrorist operations, they'll be over to arrest you and hold you indefinitely shortly.

      Hope you don't do anything evil, like smoke pot, or use strong encryption.

    49. Re:Well, for starters... by jgalun · · Score: 1

      To begin with, the Iranians are not Arabs.

      Secondly, you are right that hatred of our freedom has been harped upon too much. On the other hand, we should not simply discount cultural reasons altogether. The American empire since World War II has been trying to create a certain kind of world - one with open borders, liberal values, free trade, etc. I happen to believe that this is a basically good mission - turning the rest of the world into replicas of the US and Western Europe. Others may disagree. I am not going to argue about the methods used. But some extremists do hate this mission, and its representative, the US, because of the mission itself. People who reject gay rights, women's rights, secular government, etc., reject America's mission, and are willing to strike out at the US for it.

      I am not saying this is the only reason why the Muslim world hates America. But at the same time, we should not discount the fact that Islamic fundamentalists hate many values associated with the West.

    50. Re:Well, for starters... by jgalun · · Score: 1

      Ask any chilean what they think of the US backing the dictatorship of pinochet...

      Not all Chileans hate the US for this reason. Why? Because Chilean society was very split, and many Chileans supported Pinochet. I'm not arguing that supporting Pinochet was a good thing to do, or that many Chileans don't hate the US for this reason, just that not all do.

      Or any spanish about franco...

      That's funny, the Spanish civil war was fought by, you know, the Spanish. Foreign countries, mainly the Nazi Germans and the Soviets, took major part in it however. The Americans did not take official part. I believe there were groups of Americans who took part, the Abraham Lincoln brigade if I'm not mistaken. But they fought against Franco.

      Or any afghan about the talibans...

      America did not support the Taliban. Lots of people confuse this issue. America supported many Mujahadeen who fought the Soviets in the 1980s. Once the Soviets were gone, US support ended, and various Mujahadeen warlords fought for control over the country. The Taliban swept in in 1996 largely because of support from Pakistan's ISS and because the Afghan people were tired of the corruption and constant fighting of the Mujahadeen warlords, and thought the Taliban would create stability and relatively good governance. As they discovered, the Taliban weren't that great either. But the US never supported the Taliban regime, and in fact were on quite bad terms with the Taliban (the US never recognized the Taliban regime).

    51. Re:Well, for starters... by Loki_1929 · · Score: 2

      You know what we need here at /. ? A comments box for moderators to put the reason WHY they modded something the way they did. I'm left wondering why on Earth someone modded this as "overrated" at 3, and yet if they tell me, they can't moderate the story and lose that mod point. It would also help meta-moderators to figure out if the mod really was fair or unfair.

      --
      -- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
    52. Re:Well, for starters... by jgalun · · Score: 1

      I wish people would apply Occam's Razor to politics. People of all sides always see the need to come up with these complex arguments, always involving the other side lying and hiding their true motives, to show that their opponents are evil. But frequently in politics, the obvious answer is correct.

      I don't see why it makes more sense to believe that Bush always had the intent to create a Stalinist police state (which, by the way, the US is most certainly not - compare Camp X-Ray to the Gulag, and compare the tactics of the FBI to the 1930s version of the KGB and you will see the obvious differences) and simply used 9/11 as an excuse than to believe that terrorism wasn't viewed as as big a threat before 9/11 as it was after 9/11, and people are reacting because they now perceive terrorism as a bigger threat.

      Of course, people will use pretexts to justify unrelated items. Right now, everyone in the world is trying to present their own conflicts as part of the war on terrorism - Columbia with FARC, China with separatism in its Muslim province, Israel with the Palestinians, India with Pakistan, etc. Maybe they're justified, maybe they're not. But it's a bit silly to start saying that Bush is only fighting terrorism because his allies profit from it and he can use it to support other aims. Because were that the case, then I, who did not vote for Bush, who has never voted Republican, who does not profit from the war, and who opposes many of Bush's policies, would not support the war on terrorism. Yet I do support much of the war on terrorism. And I am not some idiot been led around by the nose - I was a history major at the #1 liberal arts school in America, an extremely left-wing institution where Bush is considered a piece of shit.

      If you had asked me before 9/11 would I support going after Bin Laden, I'm not sure if I would have. After 9/11 I would. And I say that because Bin Laden is not an "unseen entity," but a very real entity. And I say that with the knowledge that terrorism existed before 9/11 - but also with the knowledge that 9/11 raised terrorism against Americans to a new level, and suggested that we really had do to something about it this time.

    53. Re:Well, for starters... by joshki · · Score: 2

      You obviously didn't read my bio.

      --
      I do not read or respond to AC's. If you want a discussion, log in. Otherwise, don't waste your time.
    54. Re:Well, for starters... by oh · · Score: 1

      if I am not mistaken terrorist don't like Americans because of their freedoms

      I can't say what motivates most "terrorists", but I have read (offline) very compelling evidence that that the September 11 attack was over military bases in Saudi Arabia.

      The US armed Afghani militants to get them to fight a holy war to get the USSR out of Afghanistan.

      Osama and friends see the US as either occupying or supporting a US friendly dictatorship over the country that has some of the holiest sites in Arabia.

      The other reason that a lot of the Arab world hates the US is its persistent support of Israel.

      In that conflict the Arab dead outnumber the Jewish dead by a factor of 6 or 7. Some elements of the Palestinians commit atrocities against Israel. Remember that all adult Jewish Israeli citizens have had military training and are effectively on call to resume military service at any time. The Israeli army and government commit atrocious acts as well. Using helicopters to fire rockets into a car carrying a 3-year-old boy and using a 1-ton bomb on an apartment building spring to mind. One of terrorist recruitment videos showed a child, I think 9 or 12 years old, bleeding to death in his father's arms, a father who couldn't carry him to safety because he was sheltering from bullets being fired from Israeli army snipers.

      In my opinion, both sides are as bad as each other, and both sides deserve condemnation by the international community. The US however consistently supports Israel at every turn. It supports Israel, it vetos resolutions in the UN that call on Israel to support basic human rights, and it walks out on a conference on racism because Arab countries want to describe Israel (the Jewish state mind you) and being racist.

      That and any student of international history of the last 100 years should know how many acts the US has been involved in that could fit the definition of terrorism now being used by the US.

      Please try and understand the truth, and the whole truth. Yes the people who flew those aeroplanes into the world trade centre were fanatics, and hated the US. But that is not the whole truth. You can't just pick and chose the bits of the truth that you like, and say that this is the truth.

      Oh well, there goes my karma, but it had to be said.

      --
      Democracy isn't about no one telling you what to do. It's about everyone telling you what to do.
    55. Re:Well, for starters... by Badanov · · Score: 1

      Many may have been brainwashed for the passed 12 months about threats, and it may be hysterical, but there is nothing in the world more wrong and hysterical than liberals who will stump for the rights of a petty criminal who got caught playing jihaddist.

      --
      Dawn of the Dead
    56. Re:Well, for starters... by 1lus10n · · Score: 0

      well i dont have mod points (i have NO karma) but i will say this. i have this article linked in my email and my GAIM away msg. you said what i wanted to say.

      amen

      MOD PARENT UP !!!!!

      i swear if this doesnt get a +5 the mods are really on crack

      --
      "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." --Albert Einstein
    57. Re:Well, for starters... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >I watched an interesting talk given by Noam Chomsky on CSPAN. For those who have never heard of Chomsky, he's a world famous anthropologist and political activist.

      Actually, Chomsky is better known as a linguist. He's also pretty far to the left and generally hasn't liked US government policy for--what--35 years? You're free to take his words as gospel, but I'd take them with very large grains of salt.

    58. Re:Well, for starters... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forfeit your citizenship when you take up arms against the US.

      Actually, little undereducated buddy... you don't.

    59. Re:Well, for starters... by neocon · · Score: 1

      Please actually read the citation provided, as well as the link to the Supreme Court case Ex Parte Quirin which joshki provided above. Judicial review of the designation of a suspect as an enemy combatant is available (Mr. al-Muhajir is appealing his designation as a combatant in a Manhattan courtroom right now), but those who are enemy combatants can be detained as needed.

    60. Re:Well, for starters... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2

      Ever hear the line about the 1st ammendment? The one that goes like this: "Of course [flag-burning|pornography|communist manifesto|etc] should be protected by the 1st ammendment - nobody wants to censor mom & apple pie, it is only the controversial stuff, ideas and expressions that many people dislike, that need protection."

      Samething goes for punks like Padillo. If the full course of rights and freedoms of the American citizenry don't apply to the smallest amoung us, then the rest of us are cheated out of our rights as well. Padillo's right to a public trial is also about OUR right to SEE his trial. The public good is far better served by having the government obey the law than it is for them to break it - no matter what the character of the person is whom they are persecuting.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    61. Re:Well, for starters... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      And at least then I'd have the chance to thank him for all he's done for our country


      Ease up with the drama, would you? The guy may be unfairly imprisoned without access to lawyers, but he's hardly Nelson Mandela.

    62. Re:Well, for starters... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My guess is someone who didn't want to label it as a troll for whatever lame reason, but didn't want to see the "US bashing" that aparently takes place in the post.

      Personally I gave it an insightfull rating, as it's a very thought out post that clearly isn't trolling.

      Plus it's a very good read. It's been a VERY long time since I've read a post that I'd label patriotic that didn't make me want to vomit.

    63. Re:Well, for starters... by Badanov · · Score: 1

      You should also be aware of the great body of law concerning the 1st amendment. If you did you would realize the first amendment does not apply to criminal law. You are mixing sentiments. But that's okay. You have my permission to wallow in your abject ignorance of US Constitutional law. Just make sure Padilla cannot continue his activities, constructing bombs, etc...

      --
      Dawn of the Dead
    64. Re:Well, for starters... by ces · · Score: 1

      If we can give McVeigh a fair trial and access to due process then I don't see why we can't offer the same protection to those currently being accused of involvement in terrorism.

      --
      Happy Fun Ball is for external use only.
    65. Re:Well, for starters... by ces · · Score: 1

      Well I just read your bio. I guess that makes you a spy for Al-Quida.

      The point here isn't that joshki is anything other than an upstanding patriot and citizen. The point is it is easy to say those accused of whatever the crime de-jour is deserve what they get until it is your ass on the line.

      The republic is dead, long live the Emperor!

      --
      Happy Fun Ball is for external use only.
    66. Re:Well, for starters... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From the comic: john Ashcroft recently revealed the reason he will not identify 553 people detained as a result of the terrorist investigation its for their own privacy interest!
      Have you thought about what it must be like to be released.... but with everyone knowing your a "suspected terrorist"? I think there are people who will simply ignore that pesky "suspected" part even easier then the goverment does, and then feel free to revenge the deaths of the 911 victims on you.

      The question I wonder about, would this situation even excist if there was openness in the first place during these arests? (with people arested on imigration charges, this might avoid people thinking of these "suspects" as terrorists)

    67. Re:Well, for starters... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please... do NOT compare Western Europe with America. Just like the post someone made earlier about saddam attacking "us and ours" in which Europe was included in the "ours" bid.

      Contrary to what our stalwart, annoying, irritating and generally backward politicians want, Europeans do NOT want Europe to be like America. Nor do we appreciate being called yours..

      Generally speaking, I still have hope for our basic rights in Europe. Basic rights like relious freedom and privacy. America is (almost.. I'm ever the optimist) a lost cause.

    68. Re:Well, for starters... by kev0153 · · Score: 1

      I think you are safe. I don't think Aschcroft reads slashdot.

    69. Re:Well, for starters... by Anonymous+Custard · · Score: 1

      Why did they try Timohy McVeigh, then? Why didn't they just hang him from the nearest post, or (as you suggest) just take away his citizenship and throw him in a military brig for 300 years? Tim McVeigh, who blew up 168 men, women and children had more rights than this Padilla character! I'm not saying he's innocent; but if he is guilty, try the bastard and hang him for all I care! But try him in a court of law first before you presume his guilt!

      Duh, we only tried McVeigh because we knew he was guilty. We don't waste our time with trials for people who we don't think we can prove guilty; instead, we just pass offensive and misleadingly named red-scare like legislature that allows us to avoid the pesky trial process altogether.

    70. Re:Well, for starters... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2

      If you did you would realize the first amendment does not apply to criminal law.

      Ba-fucking-loney.

      Maybe in your twisted inner world, but not in the one the rest of us live in. One obvious example - Alien and Sedition Acts (1798) and their history in front of the supreme court.

      Of course that's all a red herring on your part. An ANALOGY shows by example not by specifics. You clearly are too dense to understand that.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    71. Re:Well, for starters... by Yunzil · · Score: 2

      Just make sure Padilla cannot continue his activities, constructing bombs, etc...

      That's the crux of the issue, isn't it? How do you KNOW he's guilty of any of that if he doesn't have a trial? The government said so? In that case, we might as well get rid of the judicial system because, naturally, if the cops arrest someone, they must be guilty.

      Don't get me wrong, I think he probably IS guilty, but that's for the courts to decide. If the government really has enough evidence to hold him without trial forever, then they surely ought to have enough to get a conviction in a court of law; and after that, they can hold him until his corpse rots away.

    72. Re:Well, for starters... by GooberToo · · Score: 2

      Dang it! If I had only seen your post before I commented elsewhere I would of modded you up!!!

      Someone, please mod this post up. jmweeks is absolutely correct here. The president is violating one or more American's civil rights.

      More people need to understand that how serious this is. If you don't speak out now...who will be around to speak out when they come for you!!!

      Bluntly put, this is NOT a question of his guilt or innocense. Rather, this is plain and simple, the President of the USA, is spitting on its constitution.

      Be an American and contact your representatives.

    73. Re:Well, for starters... by GooberToo · · Score: 2

      Detained as needed does not mean denial of due process or violation of their civil rights. In fact, they are supposed to receive due process under miltary law/tribunal rather than federal courts. Either way, they are supposed to receive some form of due process to ensure they actually qualify as an "enemy combatant".

    74. Re:Well, for starters... by jafac · · Score: 2

      suicyco asked:
      Why would ANYBODY hate americans because we are "free"?

      I replied:
      Come now - I've read militant Baptists, claiming to be "God's Soldiers" and "True American Patriots" who then went off and spouted flames about the ACLU being the work of the devil, and that people who speak out against president Bush are anti-American, and should be rounded up and shot for treason. And that people (specifically Californians) who engage in fornication outside of marriage should be sent to prison camps.
      Did you catch that? This person hates Americans because they are free, and desires that they be less free.
      Sure - the hatred of US policies and actions overseas has an impact, it bolsters the arguments, but the basic hatred is there. The mullahs are terrified that if the freedom as seen in the Western World and Israel were to spread to their countries, that they'd lose their tenacious grip on power. Horror of horrors! Can you imagine people - in a Muslim country - free to buy a beer? That's the true basis of the hate. The mullahs will do anything - say ANYTHING, to keep their sheep in line, and that includes fishing around for "dirt" and ways to blame their enemies for their problems. The fact that the US just happens to have a lot of blood on their hands ignores the reasons why those actions were taken, and grossly distorts the impact that these actions have on Arab and muslim lives.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    75. Re:Well, for starters... by Sharkeys-Day · · Score: 1

      Actually I just read an article yesterday about a Muslim who immigrated to America. He did not want to come because he thought America was "immoral and violent". Once he got here he saw that things are different, but guess where he got that impression from.

      Yes, from the ultimate American ambassidor: Hollywood. Most Islamic people are *very* conservative. The morals and violence depicted in movies casts us in a very bad light, and it can easily be concluded that "America" is to blame for increases in immorality and crime. (If Americans can blame it on video games, Muslims can blame it on Americans.)

      Whether you agree with that viewpoint or not, if you don't at least understand that viewpoint, you may be part of the problem.

    76. Re:Well, for starters... by neocon · · Score: 1
      Certainly. Mr. al-Muhajir is even now appealing in a Manhattan courtroom, with counsel, his designation as an enemy combatant. The judge in that appeal will be shown the (classified) evidence justifying his detention, and if the judge rules that he is not a combatant, then he will be remanded to the Justice department, for civilian arraignment or release.

      However, as long as he is held to be a combatant, he is a prisoner of war, and can be held until the end of hostilities if need be, just as those soldiers who fought against us overseas can be. He can also (as will likely happen) be tried for his violations of the law of war (taking up arms against us under cover of civilian garb, infiltration of civilian areas with the intent of committing an act of war), under military jurisdiction. If thus tried, he is entitled to the full protections of military law, just as would be an American soldier charged with a crime.

      This is the same as anyone caught in battle, here or abroad.

    77. Re:Well, for starters... by RegularFry · · Score: 1
      The Taliban swept in in 1996 largely because of support from Pakistan's ISS and because the Afghan people were tired of the corruption and constant fighting of the Mujahadeen warlords, and thought the Taliban would create stability and relatively good governance. As they discovered, the Taliban weren't that great either.

      Need to dredge my memory here, but as far as I remember the arms pipeline set up by the ISS and the CIA for the mujaheddin was reinstated under Pakistani control for the Taliban's benefit. Whether there was any CIA involvement at that point is open to debate, but I doubt it, somehow.

      Interestingly, initially the Taliban did create stability and did manage to get rid of corruption and violence in large areas, usually by getting rid of whoever was causing the problem, and then handing power straight back to whoever was the legitimate local leader. To start off with, they had no interest in national leadership. However, at some point between 1994 and 1996, this changed, along with a load of new faces in the upper levels. There is a fair amount of suspicion around the place that this change was entirely due to ISS infiltration, rather than merely their support. Now, it is interesting to speculate whether there was CIA involvement in the ISS-Taliban arms pipeline, and thence in the (possible) ISS infiltration, given that the Taliban *were* a stabilising factor in an unstable region that some very large US firms were trying to invest in.

      --
      Reality is the ultimate Rorschach.
    78. Re:Well, for starters... by Nazmun · · Score: 1

      So you think he was fighting in a battle, eh? It's one thing to actually see someone fight against you and hold them but this is not that. People easily make mistakes...

      --
      Hmmm... Pie...
    79. Re:Well, for starters... by neocon · · Score: 1
      Pretty clearly, you didn't bother to read the precedent (linked by joshki above, via my journal).

      In 1942, the German SS landed two teams of commandoes onto the shores of Long Island and Florida, from submarines, with instructions to blow up power plants, Jewish-owned businesses, and other civilian targets. One of those landed was a US citizen who had returned to Germany in 1939 to fight for Hitler's Reich.

      Fortunately, these commandoes were caught before they succeeded in blowing anything up. By your definition, since they were not fighting _at the moment they were caught_, they weren't combattants. Needless to say, this is not what the Supreme Court ruled.

      Similarly, Mr. al-Muhajir enterred the nation in order to commit an act of war. This makes him a combattant -- there is no need to wait for him to actually explode a radiation device in a major US city before he gains this status. There's nothing new in this practice, as discussed extensively elsewhere in this thread.

  8. My biggest problem is airports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Like everyone else, there's the delay...

    But, unlike most people, I use an insulin pump. Most security people aren't keen on seeing someone with a small mechanical device and tubes attached to their body. Also, the insulin, needles, lancet, etc all get a good look through. I get stopped and have my bags inspected pretty much every time I go through. It's made me use air travel as a last resort.

    1. Re:My biggest problem is airports by Tackhead · · Score: 5, Insightful
      > Like everyone else, there's the delay...
      >
      >But, unlike most people, I use an insulin pump. Most security people aren't keen on seeing someone with a small mechanical device and tubes attached to their body. Also, the insulin, needles, lancet, etc all get a good look through. I get stopped and have my bags inspected pretty much every time I go through. It's made me use air travel as a last resort.

      (Be thankful they don't make you drink the insulin the way they did with those women and their breast milk :)

      How has the legislation affected me? Will, since those drooling $5/hour morons are now drooling $10/hour federal employees, and as a result of my poor ability to take shit from dumb fucks who think that Congressional Medals of Honor, 2-inch GI Joe guns, and bottles of breast milk somehow constitute security threats, but who, as federal employees, can now throw me in jail for saying "WTF?" and can also no longer be fired when they exercise poor judgement, I call on everyone who's had it with the bullshit to...

      Take the car.

      No security goons. No having to remain silent while Guido dildoes your girlfriend's crotch or copping a feel off your mom's bra. (Why yes, it was women in underwire bras who hijacked four aircraft and destroyed the WTC and damaged the Pentagon, how could I have thought otherwise?)

      Plug that laptop with 20G of MP3z into the stereo system and hear your favorite music over the engine noise. (Delayed by a traffic jam? No matter, the music sounds better when you're not doing 80 MPH just to keep up with traffic!)

      Every six hours, pop into a small town and eat a nice hot meal. Screw McDonald's - find a random greasy spoon and eat with the locals. Or surrender to your lusts and have a dozen fresh Krispy Kremes.

      The roadways are still free. You can get there in the same amount of time, with a lot less hassle, and you can see all the things you can't see stuck in a metal tube through a six-inch perspex square.

      See the American countryside in air-conditioned comfort or lower that ragtop and let the breeze blow your hair as you take that twisty 2-lane blacktop through the national park instead of the boring interstate.

      Finally, remind yourself as you stop by each "scenic viewpoint" and snap a few pics with your digicam that there are things about America that are too big for 19 Islamic terrorists - or even a Hill full of idiotic Congressmen and a TSA full of unaccountable bureaucrats and their $10/hour lackeys - to destroy.

    2. Re:My biggest problem is airports by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 2

      And this is the bullcrap I was talking about in my post. The cavity searches aren't finding anything. Now, the increased awareness this has caused has casue the CIA and FBI to catch things before they happen. Like they guy they caught with in 2 miles of the whitehouse with an arsenal. Like the freaks with the pic of Osama and all kind of chemicals and bomb making equipment. All of this TSA bullcrap has not done anything to "increase" security. The CIA and FBI actually doing their jobs has. Why were there not A-A batteries by the whitehouse already?

      --

      Gorkman

    3. Re:My biggest problem is airports by Qrlx · · Score: 2

      Well I don't use an insulin pump, (knock wood) but I have flown five times since You Know When. The security thing with airplanes has always annoyed me. Why is it that I can hop on a train with complete ease, possibly even buying a ticket from a conductor, but air travel has all these extra hoops you jump through?

      Anyway, that was the question I used to ask myself, in the Pre-Apocalyptic Era. Now, I have to tack on, what was the purpose of all those security checks in the first place if they didn't stop 9/11?

      But there IS an upside: You no longer have assholes bringing their rolly-cart laptop case, a regular suitcase, and one of those garment baggie things on as carryons. It's horrifying, but from my perspective that's what 3,000 deaths has achieved: People obey the rules regarding carryons now. (That used to piss me off so much, when I'd be getting on the plane with my one measly carryon and I'd have to check it at the gate because people before me brought like three or four huge-ass carryons on.)

      That and the fact that drinks were free for like a few weeks after 9/11 was nice. (I flew on 9/14, the day that the No-Fly Zone was lifted I think.)

      As for the erosion/suspension of civil liberties, that has filled me with a nagging worry and FUD. I realize that it's pretty unlikely that I am the next Enemy Combatant, but I'm quite aware that if our Maximum Leader decides I am, I'll spend the rest of my life in jail. That *scares* me. Being scared of what our government can do and will do to its own citizens (as if I wasn't after Waco and Ruby Ridge) -- it's tough to quantify, as is evident from most comments here, but it definitely affects me. Mostly it makes me dream about moving to a smaller, less prominent country in the southern hemisphere called New Zealand.

      One more thing about airport security: On my last flight I had an unopened bottle of champagne in my carryon. We never got around to drinking it after the wedding; I figured that security would take it from me, but they didn't. Are they really supposed to let you through with big glass bottles that could easily become sharp jagged edged knives? Another friend at the wedding had one of those credit-card sized metal multifunction tools in his wallet,with a screwdriver and box wrench and a sharp edge. Security told him: "Some security guards might not let you take this on the plane. But I'm going to let you take it on." Hello???

      I think that the major airlines were criminally negligent when they formed little companies to pay immigrants eight bucks an hour to provide security. All in the name of saving a few bucks, and making shareholders happy. Those bastard CEOs should be held criminally accountable, which will probably never happen. But I bet when the lawsuits come, American and United are going down, while the execs cry all the way to the bank. Not even 9/11 can change Business as Usual.

    4. Re:My biggest problem is airports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Why is it that I can hop on a train with complete ease, possibly even buying a ticket from a conductor, but air travel has all these extra hoops you jump through?

      It's kind of hard to steer a train into the side of a building?

    5. Re:My biggest problem is airports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They seem quite easy to derail though.

    6. Re:My biggest problem is airports by Dalcius · · Score: 1

      The roadways are still free.

      Just you wait. Heh.

      I can smell this country becoming more communist every day.

      I'm only half-way kidding.

      --
      ~Dalcius
      Rome wasn't burnt in a day.
    7. Re:My biggest problem is airports by Dalcius · · Score: 1

      I should add:

      I was referencing the times in the Soviet Union in which to go on a trip, you had to put in a request to the local police, get approved, let them know when you left and check in with the local police when you arive.

      This was heard from an old english teacher of mine who took a trip to Russia as part of a "teacher exchange" thing. This was derived from a conversation with a Russian who was amazed at the freedoms we have in the U.S.

      --
      ~Dalcius
      Rome wasn't burnt in a day.
    8. Re:My biggest problem is airports by chill · · Score: 2

      Broken Arrow with John Travolta

      Hijack train, place nuclear/chemical/biological explosive on it. Run in into a large city. Detonate.

      Steering trains into buildings isn't necessary.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    9. Re:My biggest problem is airports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Strange

      I also have an insulin pump, but in the four times I've gone through airport security checks since 9/11, not once have I been searched or stopped.

      Before I step through i try say to the guard, "I have insulin dependent diabetes and this is my insulin pump". They usually just nod and tell me to continue through the gate. When nothing beeps (it never has), they just wave me past. On my lastest trip, I didn't even bother mentioning it, and they just let me through.

      Also, never once has any airport security guard felt the need to search through my baggage, even though i pack lancets, needles, and insulin unobstructed in a carry on bag.

      i dont know if its scary or funny that I get through so easily, but from what you're saying, its clearly not the same everywhere

    10. Re:My biggest problem is airports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well said, Sir.

    11. Re:My biggest problem is airports by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2
      Hijack train, place nuclear/chemical/biological explosive on it. Run in into a large city. Detonate.
      Obviously, you know ZIP about railroads.

      You see, trains don't have a steering wheel. That's the little tiny icky bitty detail you forgot about...

      Trains only go where the track goes. And (surprise!) it's not the guy in the train who decides where the train goes. Hoooo, noooo. Heaven forbids!

      It's a bunch of guys in a control center who remotely control the switches who decide where the trains go. And, no, forget about hacking into the control system; it's foolproof. It really is: it has been developped and debugged throughout the last 150 years.

    12. Re:My biggest problem is airports by Trespass · · Score: 1

      Goddamn right.

    13. Re:My biggest problem is airports by Qrlx · · Score: 2

      It's kind of hard to steer a train into the side of a building?

      And it's pretty easy to fly a plane into a building, as we witnessed on You Know When.

      Well, I guess it's a little hard to fly a plane into the White House. It's only like two or three stories tall, with taller buildings on three sides. The World Trade Centers were pretty easy to hit, and I pulled off a similar feat in the 80's flying a Cessna into Chicago's Hancock Building in Microsoft Flight Simulator 2 on the Commodore 64.

      I don't think that flying is any safer. But going through security and everything is definitely a major pain in the ass. Air travel in the first place pretty much sucks, and now it sucks a lot worse.

      I almost feel guilty; the exent of my legislative injury being so mundane compared to the death of all those people. But then again I guess that unless you are a lawyer working the liability case, or a librarian, or you're currently being held prisoner in a facility run by the United States military and don't have access to a lawyer, let alone Slashdot, or even Constitutional rights, the Patriot Act and what not don't really, directly, affect you.

      At least not yet.

      Wouldn't you just love to know what they're monitoring, now that they can basically monitor any communication so long as it relates to investigation of a foreign national on American soil? If you work in tech, you probably work with a foreign national. There's all the justification they need to intercept your phone calls, dsl connection, whatever. I wonder if they're finding anything good or if the terrorists are too slick. I have to think the terrorists are pretty slick, and how do you deal with a signal/noise ratio of 50 terrorists / 280,000,00 people? Seriously, folks, if that can be accomplised via today's technology, that is very very scary. Noone who has power willingly gives it up.

    14. Re:My biggest problem is airports by stephenbooth · · Score: 2

      Trains can be quite nice as well. They're usually faster than driving (well from major city to major city at least) more environmentally friendly and give you a chance to work/read/sleep (not advisable activities whilst driving).

      Stephen

      --
      "Don't write down to your readers, the only people less intelligent than you can't read" - Sign on Newspaper Office Wall
    15. Re:My biggest problem is airports by chill · · Score: 2

      No, I didn't forget about a steering wheel.

      Several trains run thru the middle of cities such as Chicago, Pittsburgh, Denver, Cleveland, Orlando and others.

      I was talking about picking a train that runs where you want to go -- not 'steering' or 'hacking'. Sorry, I should have been clearer.

      As far as an alert switchmaster routing you somewhere else... maybe. Maybe that is the plan. Here in Florida people worry about rockets launched with satellites that have nuclear (plutonium) fuel. If they blow up, the worry isn't that they blow up OVER LAND (they won't) but that the wind will be blowing inland and blow a cloud of plutonium dust over Melbourne or Orlando. So -- do you need to be IN a city or upwind?

      Either way, loads of trouble.

      Sorry about not being clearer to begin with.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    16. Re:My biggest problem is airports by greenrd · · Score: 2
      Why were there not A-A batteries by the whitehouse already?

      Well, there were AA batteries in Genoa because of fears of exactly a Sep 11 scenario.

      These and other inconvenient facts show that Bush was lying when he said that they had no idea that aircraft would be used as terrorist weapons like they were on Sep 11.

      Given that, your question is a very good one.

    17. Re:My biggest problem is airports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Second this.

      Trains have 120 volt AC power outlets -- great for laptops. An onboard snack-shop. BATHROOMS! Lots of legroom. (I could straighten my legs out, while seated. I'm 5'10"!) Private (sleeping) sections, including private bath/shower arrangements. Carry-on baggage limitations that are easily more than double the size of airplanes. Laptop cases, diaper bags, etc are not counted towards that limitation. Cost wise, booking the day before you travel, and traveling in the business section, is comparable to the absolute cheapest booked-three-months-in-advance airfares. You can change plans at any time, and they will accommodate you. Heck, when I did this, they apologized for not being able to give me a refund. (I went to a different train station along the route, which was more convenient for me. Had purchased the ticket a week before, and gotten an advanced-purchase discount. Changing plans the day before I left, the price was slightly higher, so there was nothing they could refund. Can anyone imagine, even in your wildest dreams, telling USAir that you'd rather board in Pittsburgh instead of Cleveland, and getting a similar response?)

      Security? "Show id to the clerk when you get your tickets." Presumably, preferably your own. But that didn't seem to be a hard requirement. Airlines freak out over blunted child's scissors. The train folks didn't have a problem with my leatherman. Heck, they probably wouldn't have minded my smith&wesson carry piece.

      Contrast that with the airlines "Lets show everyone your underwear" bullshit that tempted me to start packing an oversized "marital aid". Or, at least, storing my peanut butter on articles of clothing normally warn under my pants. What's that? I'm not sure. Let me taste it. Thursday. Definitely Thursday. I never could get the hang of Thursdays...

  9. Just the horizion. by phaktor · · Score: 1

    I think what we will find is that right now many government departments are on a power grab. At first we will not be affected by the new laws but they will slowly increase the strangle hold that they have until they eventually control things. but hopefully by then we will figure out ways to get around there new holds.

    --
    I don't use eleetism in my Email
    1. Re:Just the horizion. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think what we will find is that right now many government departments are on a power grab.

      They had better get in quickly, while ther is still some power left to grab. Last I heard, Bill Gates was trying to keep it all for himself!

  10. I don't fly anymore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    News Flash to Airlines: Security checks make *you* feel safer and make the rest of us feel like cattle.


    The cost and hassle and privacy violations required to fly make me glad I have a car that will go 300k+ miles in its lifetime.

    1. Re:I don't fly anymore by Tackhead · · Score: 2
      > News Flash to Airlines: Security checks make *you* feel safer and make the rest of us feel like cattle.

      (What, you didn't feel like cattle before 9/11? What airline were you flying? :-)

      Actually, I don't think they even make the airlines feel safer. I think it's marketing/PR. Something so the cattle can feel safer without actually having to do the work of making it safer.

      Consider that we've got all the hassles and expense of idiots (oops, those "idiots" are now federal employees, and therefore immune from getting fired even Abdul gets on with a handgun because the federal employee was too busy fingerfucking your grandmother) in the name of security, but most of the measures that would really improve security, such as the installation of certain types of equipment at certain locations, and/or the use of certain technologies to better identify people who might present risks to aircraft, still haven't been taken.

      All the hassle. None of the security. And since you can't guess whether it'll take you 15 minutes or two hours to get from airport entrance to your flight, there's a significant chance that if your trip is 500 miles or less, it'll be faster to drive it than fly it.

      > The cost and hassle and privacy violations required to fly make me glad I have a car that will go 300k+ miles in its lifetime.

      Amen to that. My cutoff is 18-24 hours. I used to love flying, but now I'll gladly spend a day on the road to avoid it. Fsck the airlines. I'll drive.

    2. Re:I don't fly anymore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know, the sad thing is that the two most effective things, armed pilots and seecure cockpit doors, would take very little time and/or money to implement. But that would require actual action, not a bunch of passive feel-good measures.

    3. Re:I don't fly anymore by Tackhead · · Score: 2
      > You know, the sad thing is that the two most effective things, armed pilots and seecure cockpit doors, would take very little time and/or money to implement. But that would require actual action, not a bunch of passive feel-good measures.

      And they'd take very little time and more importantly, very little money to implement. From a Congressman's point of view, those are bugs, not features.

  11. How Has It Affected Me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



    It has, without a doubt, convinced me that Canada is the coolest fucking place in the Americas.



  12. Direct influence by Telastyn · · Score: 2

    Well, I work for a computer security company which was just aquired after a great year of sales after 9/11. Certainly the company would still be doing well, but perhaps not quite as well if people weren't directly interested in security.

    Thus 9/11 directly influenced my bank account, and likely many many other people's, albeit not in the same direction.

    1. Re:Direct influence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL...

      MSFT employee now, huh?

    2. Re:Direct influence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go read the question again, dumbass.

  13. Speech Restriction by Oliver+Newland · · Score: 0

    Before 9/11 I could say things like "Let's go fly planes into buildings" or "Wouldn't it be really cool if a plane crashed into the pentagon?" without people really suspecting much.

    --

    I got a 1600 on the SATs.
  14. Mixed emotions by tigerknight · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I can't think of anything that has directly impacted me as of yet, but there are things about the past year that are very disturbing.

    The biggest thing is that the government appears to be milking the 9/11 event for all it's worth in steps, releasing little tidbits of the story and new footage or new suspects found every time it wants to pass something through the houses without causing too much trouble with the public. Whip the public into a patriotic fervor of such levels that they willingly give up their freedoms in the name of staying safe and 'free of terrorists'.

    Examples would be the Citizen Corps program that Bush started, it's effectively eastern european 'secret police' all over again, call in your neighbor for suspicious activity and get them put on surveilance and possibly carted away. Also the 'Patriot Act' and a few other bills that are aimed at increasing the governments power over individuals, all in the name of 'freedom'.

    So have I felt any solid effects of anything since then? No. Can I see a picture start to form the way they've been manipulating (or attempting to) the public to push forward an agenda? Yes.

    1. Re:Mixed emotions by sparhawk6 · · Score: 1

      So what do you propose to do to prevent tragedies like that of 9/11/01? Posts that complain about the government's response are more legit when they propose a solution, in my opinion.

    2. Re:Mixed emotions by shadowbearer · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but I have to call you an idiot.

      A good solution? As to 9/11? How about Americans STANDING UP
      FOR THEMSELVES AND OTHERS.

      What happened to dying to defend your countrymen? What kind of
      wimps are we becoming? If even a handful of passengers on those flights
      would have acted to prevent what was happening, we'd be celebrating
      their sacrifice for freedom rather than mourning the many dead.

      Last week I acted as did several others to stop a homicidal lunatic
      in a bar from killing someone else. I did it because I AM WILLING TO
      STAND UP FOR MY FELLOW CITIZENS.

      You, sir, are a pathetic piece of shit who has NO IDEA WHATSOEVER
      what freedom is about, and posting what you did displays an incredible
      amount of ignorance about the concepts our country was founded on.

      Sorry for the rant, but sheesh......

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    3. Re:Mixed emotions by inKubus · · Score: 2

      Very remeniscent of early Stalinist doctrine, if anyone remembers.. That is, unless they've already erased that out of the history books..

      Read Noam Chomsky's book "9-11" for some very very insightful facts..pick it up tomorrow, in fact, if you can.

      --
      Cool! Amazing Toys.
    4. Re:Mixed emotions by jgalun · · Score: 1

      Isn't there a Nazi rule in Internet arguments? That whoever compares their opponent to the Nazis loses? We should have a Stalin rule too.

      There are some similarities between actions done by the US government and by Stalin. There are some similarities between actions done by every government and by Stalin. There are similarities between actions taken by PR agencies and by Stalin.

      I am not saying that it's illegitimate to learn lessons from what Stalin did, and try to avoid them happening elsewhere. But it's hardly a legitimate argument to say

      "Very remeniscent of early Stalinist doctrine, if anyone remembers.. That is, unless they've already erased that out of the history books.."

      And think that makes your case. First of all, I no one is erasing anything about Stalinism from the history books. The fact is, the people most likely to condemn Stalin and his tactics are the same conservatives running the war on terror. That does not mean that they might not use some of his tactics - you can use your own judgment there - but they certainly aren't erasing Richard Pipes' history books (a conservative Harvard professor, whose son is a conservative advocate for Israel) about the evils of Bolshevism. And until you show that the war on terrorism is leading to anything close to the 1930s KGB (I forget what its initials were in the 1930s), the purges, the show trials, the Gulag, etc., then your argument is very unfair. And I don't consider, "Well, the Republicans call anyone who doesn't support the war unpatriotic" to be at all comparable to Stalin's show trials and purges of all who opposed him. Last time I checked, Donahue was still on MSNBC, Wellstone was still in the Senate, Chomsky was still working at Harvard, etc.

      It's like those NRA people who say that just because Hitler had gun laws and the Democrats support gun laws, it means that the Democrats are like the Nazis...

    5. Re:Mixed emotions by radish · · Score: 2


      OK here's an idea, maybe America should think about maybe NOT pissing off half of the world? I dunno, but it seems to me if you want to stop people attacking you the best way is to stop giving them reasons to hate you.

      --

      ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

    6. Re:Mixed emotions by southpolesammy · · Score: 2

      I have mixed feelings on this point. If the government tells us that persons in America are going to be subject to a different level of privacy, then it should apply to everyone in the country. This includes all military members and government employees, including those who would approve and/or be the enforcer of these new regulations. I simply don't see that happening. There are no checks and balances that govern the military and government's actions in these matters; no oversight panel to make sure that what they are doing is the Right Thing (TM).

      I think we're giving up a little too much personal liberty without the equivalent return in increased personal security, and I don't see how we can change that back to ensure that we get back at least as much as we're giving.

      --
      Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.
  15. Outside of the US by yoinkslap · · Score: 0

    To be honest, there isnt a lot of change in New Zealand, and im guessing a lot of other countries around the world. there just isnt the paranoia, for lack of a better word, that there seems to be in the states.

    I remember on a public forum i frequent, someone posted the following:
    "I wonder what NZers would be doing a year after such a tragedy?"
    and the reply:
    "Calling for a new All Black coach, i expect."

    And to me, that just sums it up. Just my $0.02.

    --
    Dont ask me...Im just the bass player.
  16. well, to be honest.... by Em+Emalb · · Score: 2

    As far as the net goes with regards to 9/11...I have seen no changes whatsoever.

    Here's the deal for me:

    I don't download music, movies, or software that isn't free, nor do I download porn. (Shocked silence should ensue here I guess. Why look at porn when you have a beautiful woman at home?)

    I don't (moral obligation, lack of caring, whatever you want to call it) do activities that could bring me under suspicion of any government agency. (unles /. is viewed as a radical site--yikes)

    Anyhow, to use a phrase from the late, great DA:

    I'm mostly harmless.

    So, my access has stayed the same. I guess I am just a boring person.

    Yeah, I read the article too....*shrugs* the only thing that has caused me concern has been my apparent need for penis enlargement and breast reduction surgery..at least there are people in the world that think I need both, and want me to make lots of money out of the kindness of their hearts.

    --
    Sent from your iPad.
    1. Re:well, to be honest.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why? Because my beautiful wife loves to look at porn!

    2. Re:well, to be honest.... by kingkade · · Score: 1

      I hear where you're coming from, but what if some very probable coincidences (sp?) occurred like:
      - you happen to be born with brown skin and live here
      - you happen to have just returned from visiting, say, a family member in a mid-east nation like Saudi Arabia.
      - You happen to have been mistakely searched at an airport once.
      - maybe you went to the same school as a couple of suspected al queda operatives when you were a child in your birth country.
      - visited a website (purposely or accidentaly) about making bombs/other destructive devices from houshold items.
      - sent a joking email to another about how you were involved in every terrorist attack since the beginning of time.
      etc...

      I think you'll agree that for a person of Arab descent living here to have at least some of these pureley coincidental characteristics are not really THAT far-fetched.

      Now, all you have to do is be suspected of possibly being a terrorist courtesy of some software like carnivore or FBI/CIA agent, and they simply brand you an "enemy combatant" and that, in an instant, takes away ALL of your rights.

      There's a good chance you will be in custody for a while, lose your job maybe even your home, etc.

      And that's assuming you'll ever be seen again.

    3. Re:well, to be honest.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Why look at porn when you have a beautiful woman at home?

      We'll be the judge of that. Pics ?

    4. Re:well, to be honest.... by Em+Emalb · · Score: 2

      yes, I know. However, I was referring based on what had affected me. Since I am WASP, it wasn't a big deal.

      --
      Sent from your iPad.
    5. Re:well, to be honest.... by Em+Emalb · · Score: 2

      I thought about my statement I just made, and realized it could be considered racist. Please don't take it that way, I was merely referring (sarcastically at that) that my color and probably that alone was the reason I haven't been affected. Says a lot for the crappy times we live in huh?

      --
      Sent from your iPad.
    6. Re:well, to be honest.... by kingkade · · Score: 1

      I wonder if there are any electronic petitions circulating on the inet. know of any? seems the only way we have a voice to change this until 2 years from now, next november ;-)...

    7. Re:well, to be honest.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's strange, you fall into the classification of a criminal....the nice/gal next door type.

    8. Re:well, to be honest.... by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2
      (Shocked silence should ensue here I guess. Why look at porn when you have a beautiful woman at home?)
      To see how lucky you are?
  17. Well by Dark+Lord+Seth · · Score: 1

    It hasn't affected me in a significant way at all. I'm European though. But I still don't get the whole big idea around the Sept. 11 attacks. Worse stuff has happened in the past.

    1. Re:Well by Raven15 · · Score: 1

      True, but the problem is that lots of Americans are so reactionary and unaware, and the media and government are so hell-bent on using 9/11 as a means to their ends, be it profit, greater civilian control, or whatever. Obviously, exceptions abound, but middle class fear is this sluggish thing that's hard to stop once it starts moving.

  18. Nice timing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Did this REALLY need to be posted the day before Sep 11? No mention on /. of the brave firefighters who perished that day, or the other thousands of innocent people who died. Just someone griping because they think someone is going to take their precious internet anonymity away. Jackass.

    1. Re:Nice timing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>No mention on /. of the brave firefighters who
      >>perished that day, or the other thousands of
      >>innocent people who died.

      Oh yeah. Over the last year we've heard NOTHING about them.

    2. Re:Nice timing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      1) poster didn't complain, just asked.
      2) if we lose our freedoms because of the attack, all those people died in vain.

    3. Re:Nice timing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Look... we've all been blugeoned to death with the sappy/morbid news coverage of the towers falling and the deaths of people as a result of these attacks for far longer than was/is necessary.

      Every newscast seems to have a nightly "War On Terrorism" segment -- complete with a waving flag, Shrub's face, and dramatic music -- when nothing of any real import has happened that day. Pure sensationalism. Even bloody NPR (which I still enjoy, in spite of their narrow-minded stance on low-power radio) gets on my nerves these days with worthless coverage.

      Look, shit happens all over the world. It just finally happened to us. Sure we may get a 15-second blurb when a crowd full of people are mamed in a bombing in Ireland, but someone dared to bloody the nose of the world's "greatest nation" and suddenly George Bush scratching his ass gets a 5-minute segment on ABC News! I sometimes wish Mr. bin Laden would humble this country again because most people still don't get it.

      What has had far less conspicuous coverage is the fact that that Shrub Jr. and John Aschcroft have siezed far too much power than is comfortable than most people. The popular media doesn't want to appear anti-patriotic. Just look at what happened during the entire Bill Mahr (sp?) incident!

      It's sad, really. If bin Laden's goal was to attack the heart of the USA (it's freedoms), then he succeeded extremely well. The ironic part is that he coerced us (that is, the US itself) to destroy some of those freedoms on his behalf.

    4. Re:Nice timing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How the hell did the parent get moded to "Informative"... That is pure troll material.

    5. Re:Nice timing by pantropik · · Score: 1, Insightful

      That anonymity, and so many other things we risk losing, ARE precious. Your response is precisely what the powers that be are banking on. You see, there's a flaw in your logic:

      If we as American citizens have but a SINGLE less right or freedom than we did on September 10, 2001 then the terrorists won not by blowing up planes and buildings but by forcing us to destroy our OWN way of life.

      Do you really think they intended to strike a horrible physical blow against the United States with those planes? Of course not. That was just a by-product of the real intent: to show the American public that we are not safe. To strike fear into the hearts of every "middle-class" American everywhere who walks into an office building at 8am every morning. For the first time in their lives, those people had to consider: "What if it was THIS building?" And that fear is an insidious thing, like a tumor growing in America's collective subconscious.

      We had become complacent. Most Americans simply aren't concerned with American foreign policy simply because it has no immediate domestic effects. We watch our troops fighting on other continents, shake our heads sadly at the "necessity" of it, and then go back to watching sitcoms and football games. For the first time, we were shown that we are no less vulnerable than anyone else on the planet -- that, maybe, our giant cities, seats of government and commerce that could not be easily replaced, might make us even MORE vulnerable than some.

      Two buildings in New York were destroyed and the American economy was rocked to its foundation. TWO BUILDINGS. It was just a bloody nose, horrible as it sounds to say so. It could have been much, much worse. And that is what scares the average American into blindly accepting whatever "safety regulations" the Powers That Be deem appropriate to protect us from the ubiquitous "them" that we've all feared from childhood, be it the monster in the closet or the terrorist in the desert.

      Government is, at its heart, simply the sum of its human parts. Humans are, at their hearts, ambitious, maybe even greedy. As such, the general tendency of any government is toward expansion. Some governments do this all at once: that's called a revolution, and its often bloody and leaves the "winners" in a weakened, untenable position, leaving them easily toppled in yet another "revolution". This cycle can go on for generations. But the smart governments treat us all like lobster.

      They don't simply throw us into the boiling water, they gradually increase the temperature, allow us to acclimate, turn it up another notch ...

      Not too long ago, a devastating earthquake in India killed TENS OF THOUSANDS. Why aren't you and people like you screaming about that? TENS OF THOUSANDS. Dead. Wiped out. Gone. Whether it was a terrorist act or simply the whim of nature, they are just as dead. But that's a natural disaster, yes? We can't FIGHT that, can we? So it warrants a few minutes on CNN, a spot on the "World" page of the local paper, and maybe a few prayers here and there.

      Except, in many places around the world, under-funded research is being done to be able to predict earthquakes. Where is your support? Where is your rage that the governments of the world haven't united to fund this crucial research? If a way was found to reliably (or even NOT so reliably, any at all is better than none!) predict earthquakes, how many dozens of thousands of future lives might be saved? If it had happened 20 years ago, how many of those Indians, men, women, and children crushed like so much garbage in their own homes, might have been saved by early evacuation?

      This is just one example. There are doubtless many more. No offense, but people like you are exactly the kinds of people who will gleefully allow the Internet to become nothing more than a corporate/government (and THAT distinction is ever-blurring) playground. People like you will applaud while our rights wither away, because it's happening at a pace that doesn't seem immediately or obviously threatening. Instead of revolution, it almost seems to be a natural evolution. But take the long view and think -- really think and ask yourself -- is what we are evolving toward really the legacy you wish to leave your children? Your grandchildren? America is in a delicate situation. What we do now, the amount of ground we give in the name of "safety" will have real and powerful consequences in the not-too-distant future.

      How long before Americans who don't fit the WASP profile, and sometimes even those who do, can be stopped in the streets by any government authority and asked those fateful words:

      "Papers please?"

    6. Re:Nice timing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whine, whine, whine...

      More sentamentalist crap! Why don't you move to Europe!? Get out of my country! Let me see, if you are no longer able to do some trivial things on the "net" then that means that the US will soon turn into Nazi Germany circa 1942, huh?

      "Generals! Nuke Afgany-land, Iraq and this fucker's house, please!!!"

      You pussy!

    7. Re:Nice timing by armchairlinguist · · Score: 1

      Does anyone find it ironic that someone posted a comment disclaiming the value of anonymity as an AC?

    8. Re:Nice timing by Niles_Stonne · · Score: 1

      If we as American citizens have but a SINGLE less right or freedom than we did on September 10, 2001 then the terrorists won not by blowing up planes and buildings but by forcing us to destroy our OWN way of life.

      Thank you. I've been trying to find a good way to explain my feelings. This is perfect.

      --
      Sticks and Stones may break my bones, but copyright will always protect me.
    9. Re:Nice timing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you are a moron.
      I thank God that I can still post Anonymous.

    10. Re:Nice timing by sg_oneill · · Score: 2

      Did this REALLY need to be posted the day before Sep 11? No mention on /. of the brave firefighters who perished that day, or the other thousands of innocent people who died. Just someone griping because they think someone is going to take their precious internet anonymity away. Jackass.

      Ok dude , where to begin.... First of all, I lost a cousin in S11, and he was a NYPD cop. So does that mean that we should not discuss the issues? Better just rally round that ol' flag huh? HOLY FUCK! What are we thinking? The president is FUDing to the *MAX* about sending young 18 year old boys to ,potentially, there death in Iraq, and no we cant discuss it because it's september 11?

      Keep that line of thinking AC , big brother loves YOU!

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    11. Re:Nice timing by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      Real nice coming from an AC. Jackass.

      Jaysyn

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    12. Re:Nice timing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Firefights have always cracked me up. Recently, a firefighter drowned while kayaking a flooding river. Someone made the remark that they would think a firefighter would be smart enough not to kayak in a flooded river. I made the remark that they do run into buildings on fire.

      Are they brave, or are they just really stupid? I'll let you be the judge.

    13. Re:Nice timing by pantropik · · Score: 1

      Maybe you should try reading the other 99% of my post, which had nothing at all to do with the Internet. I simply referenced the net briefly because it was mentioned in the parent and because it is a symptom of (what I see, in my own fallible human way) the larger problem.

      There are ways to say things, and ways not to say them. If you had taken the time and thought to frame a reasonable reply, your message might actually have been heard, might actually have caused others to think.

      And you actually make reference to "trivial" things, which was the heart of my post, which you apparently missed altogether. It is the trivial things that matter most, because they are the easiest to miss. But taken cumulatively, the effect is frightening.

      Actually, it's more likely you're just an Anonymous Coward in more ways than one. I've tried to reply in as civil a manner as possible, since even people like you have the right to be heard ... for now.

    14. Re:Nice timing by mbrod · · Score: 1

      Over 30,000 people die every day from starvation around the world.

      Try to keep things in perspective.

    15. Re:Nice timing by inKubus · · Score: 2

      Wait until the fucking Communists come back.

      I think the time has come for us to do what we really have been needing to do for about a year now. Turn our fucking backs to the terrorists, the government, and all the other fucking assholes in the world and start enjoying our lives.

      WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE SOMEDAY. It doesn't make a difference WHEN. Sure, mod me flamebait if you don't get it--I'm capped.

      These god dammed masses with their red white and blue turbans and stupid laws and talk and bombs and patriotism can blow it out of their ass.

      I DON'T CARE, and I have a basic human right to not care.

      No laws, no amount of bombing, fighting, security equipment, idle talk, posting of messages, crashing of planes into skyscrapers, nuclear weapons exploding and destroying the world will EVER solve the problem of terrorism.

      THE ONLY THING WE CAN DO is to turn our backs and say "fuck it."

      --
      Cool! Amazing Toys.
    16. Re:Nice timing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Real nice coming from someone who can't spell Jason. Jackass.

      Lord Uppity Pennbridge-Smythe, Esq, GED

    17. Re:Nice timing by Badanov · · Score: 1

      Bin Laden's goal was to kill Americans and to cause terror. The only people going to jail are ragheads and jihadists who pose a potent threat to the USA.

      --
      Dawn of the Dead
    18. Re:Nice timing by chuckles1335 · · Score: 1

      If bin Laden's goal was to attack the heart of the USA (it's freedoms)

      September 11 was not an attack on freedom

      Usama (yes it is spelled right) bin ladin does not attack our freedom he attacked us to provoke us into attacking other islamic counries (iraq), increasing the hate, and therefore terrorism in the middle east towards the U.S.

      Usama's final goal in all of this is to remove US troops from Saudi Arabia and to destroy isreal to return the three holiest cities to islam, Mecca Medina, and Jerusalem, to islamic control, and eventually form one islamic nation, ofcouse with Usama in control.

      9/11 wasnt an attack on freedom it was one man and his followers to gain power by perverting their religon, and if you don't believe me here is a USA today article published before "attack on freedom" became the buzzword for 9/11.

      http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2001/09/15/osa ma-qna.htm

    19. Re:Nice timing by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      If you think the 1000 or so people detained in America since 9/11 are a "potent threat to the USA" then you had better wear a lot of mosquito repellent - just one bites you and you'd probably be sucked dry since a mosquito is probably more potent than those people.

      Close to 900 of those 1000 who have been detained have been released or deported WITH NO CHARGES FILED. In fact, NO CHARGES INVOLVING TERRORISM HAVE BEEN FILED AGAINST ANYONE so detained until just this last week.

      Oh, those other ~100? Languishing, no charges filed. No lawyers allowed.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    20. Re:Nice timing by Badanov · · Score: 1

      You make this sound like a bad thing. US law provides for long term detention of suspects, especially non citizens, without trial if there is a reasonably fear that they will participate in an insurretion. And I am happy to hear that some people have been departed to their shithole countries without trial. Maybe you can jerk off in front of their native country's generalissimo about rights. Read the law: the government does NOT have to give due process to people who are not citizens of this country if they reasonable pose a security risk to the nation. My question is why this hysteria? Why when 1000 people, mostly non citizens of this country, are causing people to behave this way? It's weird. It is as if the Sept. 11th attack never happened. You seem to think if Padilla and his Towelheadettes are given a public trial, the attacks against the US will stop. This nation is at war with these bastards. The rules which have applied e.g: 1) Blame the US for an attack against its citizens by Islamofscists. 2) Blame Israel for the attacks against it by Arab criminals 3) Republicans are all white fascists and we are heading for Nazi Germany aboard a cattle train 4) Democrats care and just want a just world 5) Blame the US. 6) Blame the US, etc (repeat as necessary) ... These rules no longer apply. Do yourself a favor and stop identifying with Islamocriminals and stop bleating about your bloody rights. They are not being harmed.

      --
      Dawn of the Dead
    21. Re:Nice timing by Mark+Garrett · · Score: 1
      [ahh... time to be long-winded]

      That anonymity, and so many other things we risk losing, ARE precious. Your response is precisely what the powers that be are banking on. You see, there's a flaw in your logic:

      Hmm... let's look at the logic presented here.

      Since when is anonymity classed as an "essential liberty" that Franklin would allude to? Anonymity is more or less the removal of responsibility from the exercise of rights. You have a right to do things, but you don't necessarily have a right to do them without anyone knowing about it. Freedom and rights are a power, lack of anonymity is its check.

      I guess the signatures of the Declaration of Independence should have looked like this:

      JOHN F'ING HANCOCK
      AC
      AC
      AC
      AC
      AC
      AC
      ...

      Where any significant danger is involved, loss of anonymity is a matter of course. If I want to drive a car in public, I can't (legally) do it anonymously. I can't even have an anonymous vehicle on public streets (non-free plates req'd). If I want to buy a firearm, I can certainly do so (last time I checked), but there is no anonymity about it.

      But that's beside the point...

      If we as American citizens have but a SINGLE less right or freedom than we did on September 10, 2001 then the terrorists won not by blowing up planes and buildings but by forcing us to destroy our OWN way of life.

      So, I suppose that I should retain my right to board an aircraft carrying a bladed instrument (along with a group of friends carrying knives).

      Small (even large) sacrifices of freedoms are a matter of course in society..., and no, I do not say that lightly. They are more or less the fabric of civilization... 'societal contract' as it were. Go and review the number of things that you aren't allowed to do, simply to ensure the stability of society and the preservation of individual rights. You may see the spectre of central and necessary liberty being quashed,... I'll wait and fight it when I see it happening. (Indeed, the holding of persons without identification is quite shady, but is this a matter of the government silencing citizens, or allowing them to retain anonymity? I haven't seen that addressed to my satisfaction. I'll have to look into it again.)

      Do you really think they intended to strike a horrible physical blow against the United States with those planes? Of course not. That was just a by-product of the real intent: to show the American public that we are not safe.

      Other motives:
      1 Attacking the United States has been an express goal of al Qaeda. An attack was necessary to continue and bolster fundraising.("Hey, look we're doing what we said we would!")
      2 Trying to get the West out of mid-east politics by giving those weak stomached Americans a bloody nose (see Somalia).
      3 Advancement of varied political goals in the mid-East.
      4 And yes, actual murder of Americans is a goal of the organization.

      The end goal is not the disruption of freedoms, etc in the U.S. (though I'm sure they would be entertained). It is either coertion to a political goal (historically shown futile) or for self gain.

      For the first time, we were shown that we are no less vulnerable than anyone else on the planet -- that, maybe, our giant cities, seats of government and commerce that could not be easily replaced, might make us even MORE vulnerable than some.

      And that's certainly much of the reason that al Qaeda has been so viciously pursued. After the advent of mechanized warfare, "defence" has become equivalent with "the ability to destroy agressors". That's why "forts" are mostly fancy storage facilities/dorms these days. Any walls/fences are to keep out the locals, rather than repel an invasion force.

      I guess you're arguing in favor of SDI to provide an active defense against airborne agressors. Whoo.

      And that is what scares the average American into blindly accepting whatever "safety regulations" the Powers That Be deem appropriate to protect us from the ubiquitous "them" that we've all feared from childhood, be it the monster in the closet or the terrorist in the desert.

      "Them"? I think pretty much everyone recognizes such adjectives in this context to mean 'the al Qaeda organization and affiliates'. And most people are more on the level of "demanding" or "desiring" proper security precautions, rather than "accepting" them. Democracy at work.

      Government is, at its heart, simply the sum of its human parts. Humans are, at their hearts, ambitious, maybe even greedy. As such, the general tendency of any government is toward expansion.

      So, assuming you're human, what personal ambition are you pursuing in your argument? What power are you trying to gain over other people? Why should I see what you're saying as anything other than self-serving drivel?

      Any motive you have can equally be held by a political activist or politician working in Washington (D.C.). In fact, while some politicians are driven by profit or power motive, of the few politically active people I've known, the reason they are involved in what they do is because of their personal convictions far more than for other people, on average. (It's like saying kids only like playing basketball because they expect to grow up and make assloads of money... if you don't want to do it... if you don't have personal convictions you want to follow through on, there are far more profitable and certain paths to take.) That's just my personal experience, though. YMMV.

      Take any particular group as a whole... politicians, police, firefighters, geeks... and you're going to get some flaming ass#^!&s. There are also some damn fine people amongst them.

      They don't simply throw us into the boiling water, they gradually increase the temperature, allow us to acclimate, turn it up another notch...

      Fortunately people are not lobsters. When it starts to get uncomfortable, they start to complain. By virtue of the American political system, any overriding concern that the populace has, the government listens to (or is replaced). You may not enjoy the results, but democracy is designed to address only the most important things first (as determined by the whims of the public). Non-critical issues are often left to languish until something or someone brings them to the fore.

      The point being, that while it may be nice to head off every approaching "bad thing", typically things will get straightened out when they start getting "out of hand". Trying to fight an idea or law on what you think it will eventually lead to is going to be hard and possibly even misdirected.

      BTW, the concept of "the government" in its current configuration working closely and quietly in concert to advance some secret transition of power structure is less realistic than all of them gathering around a large table, doing tequilla shots, and then stabbing each other in the face.

      Whether it was a terrorist act or simply the whim of nature, they are just as dead. But that's a natural disaster, yes? We can't FIGHT that, can we? So it warrants a few minutes on CNN, a spot on the "World" page of the local paper, and maybe a few prayers here and there.

      Yeah, people are more concerned about having enemies that are actively trying to directly affect them (or may have already had a direct affect on them) than they are about an effectively random (yet tragic) event on the other side of the world. Go figure.

      Except, in many places around the world, under-funded research is being done to be able to predict earthquakes. Where is your support? Where is your rage that the governments of the world haven't united to fund this crucial research? If a way was found to reliably (or even NOT so reliably, any at all is better than none!) predict earthquakes, how many dozens of thousands of future lives might be saved? If it had happened 20 years ago, how many of those Indians, men, women, and children crushed like so much garbage in their own homes, might have been saved by early evacuation?

      Riiight. We have one really good predictor of inevitability, so let's start by evacuating every city that lies on or near a known fault line. (Start with L.A. and New York... maybe St. Louis)

      Maybe people have been put off by the fact that after hundreds of years of research and massive amounts of technology, the weather can't be predicted worth crap, other than just observing massive self-sustaining weather patterns that have already developed and seeing that the're still coming... depsite the fact that the atmosphere is easily observable. (Curse you Weather Channel! heh) I find it hard to expect that plate-tectonics will be much less chaotic of a dynamic system... just a more slowly evolved one that we can't observe readily because of the miles of dirt in the way.

      What you're likely to get from this is that "oh crap, there's going to be a major earthquake in 35 seconds!" (okay, maybe they could get it up to 5 minutes or so)

      The only current solution deemed reasonable is in developing buildings that withstand earthquakes better. Perhaps this is under-funded, but then again, everything could use more funds. If 'prediction' were thought feasible, Japan and the U.S. (concerned with the West coast) would be dumping plenty of money into it.

      So how many lives would have been saved in India if they had used modern construction? I guess I'm supposed to be outraged that my government isn't tearing down buildings in India and building new ones for them? The Indian people aren't children. They are thusly allowed to make their own decisions and take care of themselves. It's not like the U.S. never tries to help out with natural disasters or anything.

      To summarize: Blah. Sleep.

    22. Re:Nice timing by pantropik · · Score: 1

      I think you were wrong in a few places. You seemed to horribly misunderstand what I was trying to say in a lot of places. I actually just wrote a really long response, trying to clarify things, since I felt maybe I wasn't clear in the original post.

      But then I realized it doesn't matter. You have your opinions, and I have mine. You chose to pick mine apart, rightly or wrongly, depending on who you asked and, maybe, what they had for breakfast and whether or not they had sex the previous night. That's just human nature.

      I doubt there's anything I could say at this point to rectify (what I perceive as) the misunderstanding. If I didn't get my points across clearly the first time around, I doubt I'd have any better luck the second.

      Anyway, thanks for the critique, and for trying to get me to see things from a slightly different perspective. That's always an interesting challenge, trying to overcome and see past one's own feelings, opinions, and sometimes silly ideas and preconceptions about the world. Apparently, in this instance, I wasn't up to the task.

      I appreciate your POV, but I'm afraid I just can't share it. =)

    23. Re:Nice timing by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2

      You seem to think if Padilla and his Towelheadettes are given a public trial, the attacks against the US will stop.

      NOT AT ALL.

      What I feel, and you so obviously are unable to comprehend is that if Padilla and any other person charged is given a public trial the attacks against the US by the US GOVERNMENT will stop.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    24. Re:Nice timing by Yunzil · · Score: 2

      You seem to think if Padilla and his Towelheadettes are given a public trial, the attacks against the US will stop.

      Of course not, but if they DON'T get a trial, then we have abandoned quite a lot of what we are supposed to be fighting for.

      This nation is at war with these bastards

      No, we are not. Get this into your head. Only Congress can declare war. They haven't. Therefore, we are not at war with "those bastards".

      Do yourself a favor and stop identifying with Islamocriminals and stop bleating about your bloody rights. They are not being harmed.

      You don't find it scary that the government can slap a "enemy combatant" label on anyone and hold them indefinitely? Hell, they could come and get me for making this post. Is that right?

      If anyone is identifying with the terrorists, it is you.

  19. Bloody Hell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Twice in the last year I have been hauled up for
    "compromising security on government computers".

    Once for running nmap against one of my own machines. Active network scanning is forbidden!

    Once for sending an e-mail to 30 people inviting
    them to see my wife and daughter perform in
    Fiddler On The Roof. Because I used Bcc, and
    only spammers do that of course...

    However, I can run snort or ethereal all day and
    night and intercept anything I want to, because
    they are passive agents and cannot be detected
    by the nids.

    SO, there is no real security, but they sure do
    rake anybody they can for the things they can
    detect.

    Oh, almost forgot... my friend **** joined the
    spook patrol (real agency name supressed) and
    put me down as a personal ref, so I got my
    phone tapped.

    Let me outta here, I'm moving to Mexico!

    1. Re:Bloody Hell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I highly doubt your phone was tapped because someone listed you as ref.

      How many phone taps do you think they can afford to do ?

      Jesus, maybe you are getting in trouble at work for just BEING STUPID.

  20. General increase in Hate... by SmoothCriminal · · Score: 3, Informative
    Being of East Indian ethnicity, I do feel the general hate level against the asain population including Arabs/chinese/Indians.


    Though this is a small percentage, it does hurt the people in the recieving end. The economy has made things worse when few people who lose jobs blame it on the H-1Bs.


    There was a restructuring in my company and now the message boards are full of hate.


    I guess the general hate level of the people has increased and also the economy is not helping.


    God Bless America...

    1. Re:General increase in Hate... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      go back home H1B dirtbag!

    2. Re:General increase in Hate... by echucker · · Score: 2

      Being of East Indian ethnicity, I do feel the general hate level against the asain population including Arabs/chinese/Indians.

      It's not just an ethnic thing- it's also a question of appearance and sterotypes.

      I know a gent here who's as white as Ward Cleaver. He served his country in Vietnam, and earns a good living as a painting contractor. Sounds pretty respectable, right? Well, guess what- he's been a victim of post-9/11 hate too.

      Why? Because he's a Sikh, and wears a turban and has a long beard.

      Remember folks, just because you have pasty skin doesn't keep ignorant, arrogant youths in a convenience store from calling you a sand nigger. :/

    3. Re:General increase in Hate... by h4x0r-3l337 · · Score: 1

      Figures that an unemployed, unemployable AC would make a remark like that.

    4. Re:General increase in Hate... by machine+of+god · · Score: 1
      God Bless America

      That's a very interesting use for that phrase. Almost like a plea, rather than what it usually means. I think that being something like "heil big brother". Maybe there should be one or two please's in there to help people understand.

    5. Re:General increase in Hate... by sg_oneill · · Score: 1, Troll

      Figures that an unemployed, unemployable AC would make a remark like that.

      Troll. Someone in *your* world tells you that he's getting hate directed towards him because his an Asian, and you just write him off as an unemployed AC?

      How 'bout I write you off as a teenaged troll fuck?

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    6. Re:General increase in Hate... by sg_oneill · · Score: 2

      Oh dude Sorry!... The moderation filter unlinked your comment from the original. I thought you where hassling out the unemployed asian guy.

      Could someone please mod down my original comment.(The one where I call h4x0r-3l337 a teenage troll)

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    7. Re:General increase in Hate... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      I say we systematically terminate each and every one of those stupid neo-nazi shitbags, not to mention any other racist organization (ie. those preaching white superiority, black superiority, blue superiority -- doesn't matter, they all have to die).

      Yeah, I may hate people too, but at least I have the sense to hate for the right reasons.

    8. Re:General increase in Hate... by AltismoMaster · · Score: 1

      with a handle like "SmoothCriminal", Why wouldn't people give you an evil eye? Think about it...

      --
      Create music
    9. Re:General increase in Hate... by jafac · · Score: 2

      Why? Because he's a Sikh, and wears a turban and has a long beard.

      - - -
      well, those Sikhs bomb the poor Hindus too. (poor Hindus - doesn't anybody in the region like them? The Christian invade them for 100 years, The Muslims bomb them. The Commies bomb them. Poor Hindus!)

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    10. Re:General increase in Hate... by perfessor+multigeek · · Score: 1

      Oh, the Protestants hate the Catholics,
      And the Catholics hate the Protestants,
      And the Hindus hate the Moslems,
      And *everybody* hates the Jews!

      But during . . . National Brotherhood Week!
      National Brotherhood Week!
      George Bush and Hillary are dancing cheek to cheek.
      Step up and take the hand
      of someone that you can't stand.
      You can tolerate him if you try.

      Ah, Tom Lehrer. The Master reigns still.

      --
      Data is the lever, rigor the fulcrum, brains the force that drives it all.
  21. The effects on me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As an airport security worker, I feel as though my obligations have multiplied ten-fold. My responsibilities - especially morally have also greatly increased.

    The only upside to 9/11 for me has been that people now respect me for the job I try to do much more, previously people griped when being security checked but now very rarely does this occur.

    But there are a minority who judge me as though I am poor at my job, especially in light of the current security breaches (check UK news sites) of people managing to smuggle the same weapons as used to hijack the planes on 9/11 on to aircrafts now.

    This despite the fact I do the job as I always have done, believing I am protecting the people - working as hard as I possibly can to make sure the tragic events never occur again.

    1. Re:The effects on me by DAldredge · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      No people do not have any more respect for you, they are just afraid that if they say ANYTHING you will have them delayed for a "THROUGH CHECK" and they will miss their flight.

      One last question. How may nursing women have you made drink their own breast milk to make sure it is "SAFE"???

    2. Re:The effects on me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The one thing I really dislike about airport security is that they are required to confiscate and not give you the opportunity to just leave with the questionable item to put it in your car or mail it to yourself or something. A friend had a pocket knife that was given to her when she was very little by her mother. It was on her key chain. She totally forgot she had it on the keychain. It's been there all her life. She accidently tried to go through security with it and they took it from her and wouldn't let her mail it to herself. It had great sentimental value to her. That just pisses me off tremendously. I just had to vent there - I really hope they change some of their policies.

    3. Re:The effects on me by Tackhead · · Score: 2
      > As an airport security worker, I feel as though my obligations have multiplied ten-fold. My responsibilities - especially morally have also greatly increased.
      >
      > The only upside to 9/11 for me has been that people now respect me for the job I try to do much more

      For what it's worth, before 9/11, I didn't gripe when checked, because I did respect what you did. (Even if, IMNSHO, many of your co-workers did it pretty poorly.)

      > previously people griped when being security checked but now very rarely does this occur.

      If I have to fly again, I'll continue not griping, because I've read about what happened to the people who questioned some of your co-workers' judgement.

      Don't mistake what was once respect for what is now simple fear.

    4. Re:The effects on me by azriel442 · · Score: 1

      i missed a flight due by simply asking if i could be frisked by a female and not the guy who couldnt stop staring down my shirt. whereas he told me no and decided that he was going to feel me up while he was at it. i complained, and was detained for enough hours to miss my flight. last time i was in that airport, the bastard was still working there. arent there laws for this kind of thing?

    5. Re:The effects on me by mbogosian · · Score: 1

      The only upside to 9/11 for me has been that people now respect me for the job I try to do much more, previously people griped when being security checked but now very rarely does this occur.

      That's because griping is to be interpreted by the Department of Homeland Security (i.e., Ministry of Defense) as an Unamerican Action, and is punishable by unknowable consequence against the accused.

    6. Re:The effects on me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If what you're saying is true, go find a laywer. Now. And fucking sue for every dollar you can get. The legal system seems to be the only way to get things done around America.

    7. Re:The effects on me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No one gripes about security anymore becuase the national guard is standing 10 feet away with semi-automatic weapons. I (An 18 year-ond, thin, white, female) have been patted down 6 of the 9 flights that I've taken since 9/11. My unattractive mother has yet to fall into the hands of security in the same airports at the same checkpoints. Can they pat me down even though I'm wearing tighter-than-painted-on clothing that is visibly not hiding anything? Sure I'm not going to stop them. Even though I didn't set off the metal detectors, I'm not going to argue with them. They have the government's authority and I have one lonely voice that couldn't even vote until last summer.

      I never had problems in security before the attack. As a former frequent flyer (I would rather drive now), I have to say that airport security does stink, but I would never tell that to airport personnel as they x-ray my flip-flops or drugtest my 11 year old brother's carry on bag and hassle the old grandmother in the next line about her wheelchair. Drugtests are fine, sure, but don't scare the poor kids. X-rays for 1/3 inch thick, worn, foam flip-flops? Ummm, does that really make sense? I think that security could be doing any number of more important things. And if they are going to select people to search, they should search everyone. I'm tired of my bag sitting alone on the table, my antique camera being handled and dropped by bored personnel, dirty clothes strewn about and feeling helpless to stop it.

  22. Laws and Courts by DrLudicrous · · Score: 1

    I agree that the Patriot Act has severely limited the freedoms of American citizens. BUT, in a few years a Democrat president will appoint more liberal justices to the Supreme Court. Right now, it is a 5-4 split, conservative-liberal. Once the balance is upset back in the favor of liberals, a la 1960's-1980's, the ACLU and other lawyers will being to challenge these laws. There is no way a challenge is going to fly with these courts and the general sentiments of the populace so soon after 9/11/01.

    1. Re:Laws and Courts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hopefully, he won't be like the last one and "accidentally" rummage through everyone's FBI files. Hopefully he won't use the Justice Dept and various cronies among the state governments to trump up charges against his political enemies.

    2. Re:Laws and Courts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A liberal Democrat will be the first to abuse these laws.

    3. Re:Laws and Courts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yea I can't wait until a Democrat gets back in power so that the Democrat can protect us.
      Protect us from evil corporations.
      Protect us from evil CEOs.
      Protect us from ourselves. Especially that.
      Democrats are in office to protect us from ourselves because we sure can't look out for ourselves.
      There should never be a situation where any citizen is ever threatened with any kind of harm.
      Ever.
      Thats how democrats think.

  23. I'm Portuguese by Cirruz · · Score: 2, Funny
    No, I live in Portugal, and if in Portugal authorities can't even regulate car drivers, they just don't care about terrorists!

    Worst, there's a great possibility that none terrorist knows where Portugal is, so we're pretty safe, I think.

    Invisibility kicks ass, Portugal is a stealth country!

    Cirruz

    1. Re:I'm Portuguese by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      God damn it, security through obscurity Doesn't WORK!

    2. Re:I'm Portuguese by DahGhostfacedFiddlah · · Score: 1

      "Portugal"? Is that a kind of fish?

    3. Re:I'm Portuguese by Cirruz · · Score: 1
      No, Portugal, as in "the country that discovered America, and the sea route to India".

      Didn't you know? That Colombo was being paid by Portuguese merchants?

      Don't even mention Spain.

      Cirruz

    4. Re:I'm Portuguese by geekoid · · Score: 2

      until they coe for your linguesa!

      mmm I love portugese sausage.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    5. Re:I'm Portuguese by Kindaian · · Score: 1

      Portugal is the best place to be in case of a III World War...

      Even FBI thinks it is a Spain province... so all missiles will end up in Madrid/Spain ROFL...

      More seriously... you should get a world map and study geography... because you just flunked the grade...

      But that is normal... americans (i'm not sure if you are american or not... but it applies fully to them...) are known to be ignorant of everything that happens outside their belly hole (and anything else in general)...

      When in doubt of anything think... do the americans do it? Then it is a simple and easy to do thing...

      Cheers...

      P.S.- I'm not anti-american at all... just anti-ignorance... and unfortunatly, americans have a lot to be desired in that chapter... they have the highest juvenille literacy to adult illiteracy in the world!!!

      P.S.S.- And yes, i'm portugese also! (and we have the best fish dishes in the world... IMNSHO)

    6. Re:I'm Portuguese by _ph1ux_ · · Score: 2

      as we have heard many many times here on Slashdot - security through obscurity is *not* the best solution.

      What you need is IPsec (International Portuguese security) - only when you implement this scheme will your country not get t3rr0r00t3d.

    7. Re:I'm Portuguese by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yo, I love Portugal. Your culture and food and people rock.

    8. Re:I'm Portuguese by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah he discovered a continent teaming with people.

      If that isn't an oxymoron, I don't know what is.

    9. Re:I'm Portuguese by ceejayoz · · Score: 2

      Looks like you've got a bug in your sarcasm detection code.

    10. Re:I'm Portuguese by nrlightfoot · · Score: 1

      I know where Portugal is. HA HA HA....

      --
      what sig?
    11. Re:I'm Portuguese by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually, the vikings discovered america, if you want to get technical :)

    12. Re:I'm Portuguese by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really ?

      Lajes in Azores is one of the principal ways for american planes to reach middle east.

      If I were a portuguese from Azores I *should* care.

      Also, I'm not like Mr. Bush that doesn't care about people - human behings. He's contantly talking about terrorist agains "American People",
      not "People" or "Free People".

      We, portuguese, care about all persons under violence.

  24. We've been affected by mduckworth · · Score: 1

    In our industry, although we are state and government regulated and completely legitimate, we are considered an "online gambling website", and as such through the legislation if we accept online account deposits via visa or mastercard we will be shut down. We've had to be very careful as a result of this legislation and it makes life unfun.

  25. Even less confidence... by ironfroggy · · Score: 1

    ...in our government. "Terrorism" is used as an excuse to let the government do anything they want. The problem is that we don't even know what terrorism is. It's just a type of war we don't like. What about when we fought for our freedom from the British? We fought indian style and they were appaled that we wouldn't face them in straight lines and bright colors. Anyone can go to war against anyone, whenever and however they like and we have to deal with it and not treat it as such a special case. Hell, 9/11 was nothing. We've killed alot more people than that.

    1. Re:Even less confidence... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to this BBC article, mroe civilians were killed by the US in Afghanistan than were killed here on September 11th.

      Just a thought.

      N407ER

    2. Re:Even less confidence... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what you get for letting criminals run your country.

      The cruise missle and smart bomb are enforcing a brutal democracy everywhere, even in places where the culture isn't democratic. If you let criminals and kleptocrats and petty dictators run your country, eventually they will do something that causes us to kill members of your family. How many daughters and brothers do you want to loose before you FUCKING LEARN, and run your OWN COUNTRY FOR YOURSELF ?

      It is a brutally wasteful way for the world to move forward, but eventually all the gene lines that are inclined to let other people be in charge of their lives will have died out, more from 3d world diseases, AIDS, poverty, etc than from US bombs, but we'll do our part.

      Are you listening, China ?

    3. Re:Even less confidence... by batemanm · · Score: 0
      What about when we fought for our freedom from the British? We fought indian style and they were appaled that we wouldn't face them in straight lines and bright colors.

      Not to disagree but to add a little more.

      The Americans also took part in terrorist attacks on the British, and no not just in the US. There were ships that came over and performed terrorist attacks on British soil. John Paul Jones was the captain of the ship that took part in the most famous attack and if you know your history he is said to be the Father of the US Navy. Kind of a hero.

      All countries have performed terrorist attacks at some point it is all a point of view thing.

  26. We're Fucked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, bush/runsfuck/ashcrap/riley want us to lie down and beg for our supper(rights). Well GOD DAMN IT, I am fucking sick and tired of sucking their rightwing, controlling, moralistic pencil sticks. They are still wrapped up in their cold war hysteria, and we get the benefits of it, a brutal insidious police state. I've never felt that our Govt is "for" the people, but I didn't think it was against ALL of us.

    The internet is just another way for them to control what we hear,see and do in this country. Land of the FREE- freedom to be egotistical, imperialistic, unilateral, capitalistic pigs. The internet "could" be a clearinghouse of knowledge to brighten the minds of humanity. Ok, there's probably too much PRON(hell it's got to make $$ somehow), but there is WAY more good information out there than bad. And you can't pull a Micro$oft, and try to hide problems hoping others wont find them.

    Educate the masses to think for themselves and make thoughtful, incisive decisions, and then give them the freedom to use their discretion...that's what freedom is.

    Let's hope that this "WAR on TERROR" doesn't demonize other peoples/cultures the way the "WAR ON DRUGS" (read action to provide tons of cash for constituents..law enforcement,pharmaceutical, oil companies,etc).

    Hopefully BUSH will figure out how much of a gullible DUMB SHIT he is, and maybe think twice about what is conniving cronies are "advising" him to do. Heck, he wasn't even creative enough not to use his dad's cabinet!

    The internet is being hammered on all fronts from corporations (ie. M$) trying to monopolize it, Countries (ie China) trying to control it, and right wingers trying to sanitize it. We need to all speak up and keep it as free as it has been.

    Don't try to stop progress, learn to cope/adapt to it.

    1. Re:We're Fucked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The internet is just another way for them to control what we hear,see and do in this country"

      There is no 'them' and no such control of the internet. Unless you have one of those gambling sites :)

      "Let's hope that this "WAR on TERROR" doesn't demonize other peoples/cultures the way the "WAR ON DRUGS" (read action to provide tons of cash for constituents..law enforcement,pharmaceutical, oil companies,etc)."

      No, the dope fiends who are the targets of the war on drugs only demonize themselves.

      "Hopefully BUSH will figure out how much of a gullible DUMB SHIT he is, and maybe think twice about what is conniving cronies are "advising" him to do."

      He is smarter than Gore, smarter than Nader, and smarter than you. That is why he is taking the wise actions.

      "Heck, he [Bush] wasn't even creative enough not to use his dad's cabinet!

      That is another example of how smart he is. He went back to the last time the cabinet was appointed with the intent of getting the best in order to serve the public interest.

  27. 9/11 effects by bsDaemon · · Score: 2

    Let's see...My father is a capitain with USAir. My mother used to work on wallstreet. Many of her friends still worked in the towers; 53 people from her old parish died. Our president turned out to be a facist. airport scenes of the USA look like those from movies such as 'Spy Game' and that Russel Crow movie about the hostage negotiation gone bad. I'm starting to feel like I live in East Germany.

    1. Re:9/11 effects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm starting to feel like I live in East Germany.

      And did you ever live in East Germany? Of course not, you know nothing about how awful it was (I had relatives there) but being uninformed except for movies doesn't stop the average slashdot moron from spouting groundless speculation!

      Our president turned out to be a facist.

      So Bush is suddenly a fascist? Again, you must know absolutely nothing about fascism to make such false comments. Americans are blessed with such freedom as to bring tears to my eyes, and all losers like yourself can do is bitch and moan, instead of realizing how great you have it here.

      Get back to studying moron, that exam isn't too far away.

    2. Re:9/11 effects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My apologies. You Have Been Trolled By A Democrat.

    3. Re:9/11 effects by kevcol · · Score: 1

      Hyperbolize much?

  28. Too much 9/11 by Pollux · · Score: 5, Funny

    I am curious to hear about some specific examples of how this legislation has personally or professionally affected the everyday lives of Slashdot readers."

    I'm sorry, but we've done too much to "commemorate" September 11. What's done is done, and let the dead bury the dead. We should not brand Arabs as guilty and evil. Bush did a poor job handling 9/11. He has killed too many innocent lives in Afghanistan. Iraq should not be an American target. Why don't we just...

    *** Knock *** Knock *** Knock ***

    "Hello? Yes, how can I help you? Yes, I am loyal to my country. What? Hey! Where are you taking me?!?"

    ---

    How has it affected me? I'm worried about what I say in public; that's how it's affected me.

    1. Re:Too much 9/11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The dead are a bit too busy being dead to bury anyone.

    2. Re:Too much 9/11 by TKinias · · Score: 1

      *** Knock *** Knock *** Knock ***

      "Hello? Yes, how can I help you? Yes, I am loyal to my country. What? Hey! Where are you taking me?!?"

      That someone moderated this as `funny', I find rather chilling.

      --
      In principio creauit Linus Linucem.
    3. Re:Too much 9/11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually, i find it funny too and yet sad.

      we all know that all arabs must be killed. there are no good arabs except a dead and bullet riddled arab. whenever i see one of those arab whores walking around, i want to fucking kill them.

      hopefully bush will set it off right. cause if these arab niggers act the fool, it's gonna be arab season.

    4. Re:Too much 9/11 by DaytonCIM · · Score: 1

      ***Looks around. Makes sure no one is watching or listing***

      I know how you feel.

    5. Re:Too much 9/11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fuck ya kill them all

    6. Re:Too much 9/11 by goon+america · · Score: 1
      Of which are you more afraid: of what you say in public or of death from above while you're just minding your own business?

      If you chose the former, you probably don't live in NYC.

    7. Re:Too much 9/11 by cosmosis · · Score: 2

      Exactly!

      Before 9-11, I was intensely happy, I saw a great future for myself and my children - now I worry, worry, worry. It all started when Ari Fleisher said, "Americans need to watch what they say, and watch what they do". It was a major slip-up on his part, or was it? The bottom line is, and sadly ironic, is that I do indeed watch what I say. I'm afraid of our own government.

      I continue to hear increasing rumors of detention camps for Americans, Operation TIPS, and other totalitarian nightmarish stuff being cooked up by the shadow government. The Bush cabal is out of control in their power drunk lust and war mongering. It is indeed a rogue administration in charge of a rogue nation, as most people outside of the US keep telling us. But we are so immersed in the most sophisticated propoganda machine in history that we are too blind to see it. Before 9-11 I felt safe in my home, now because of the government, not some terrorist (as they want us to believe), I am afraid. The only thing terrorist have accompplished is to make me afraid of my own government. Were they doing us all a favor when they showed us the real man behind the current?

      I'm even afriad of typing this very post. I worry that anytime now I will be geting that knock on my door too. Except it won't be a knock, but a battle-ram knocking down my door!

    8. Re:Too much 9/11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >The only thing terrorist have accompplished is to make me afraid of my own government.

      Might I suggest that the terrorists (indirectly) brought your own paranoia to the surface? If you're really so afraid of the US government, wouldn't it have been prudent to post as an AC?

    9. Re:Too much 9/11 by geekee · · Score: 1

      What, so we shouldn't have done anything in Afghanistan? It an attitude like that that will result in another catastrophe like 9/11. You cannot have peace at any cost, especially when your enemies motives are irrational and not espoused by the majority of people in the religion for which they claim justifies their actions. Civilian deaths are inevitable in war. The Afghan govt. is responsible for their deaths for giving the terrorists shelter in Afghanistan. Omar paid for his palace with their blood as well as terrorist bribes. Insurance companies say its only a matter of time before someone detonates a nuclear device in New York and your attitude is that we shouldn't do anything. You need to face reality.

      --
      Vote for Pedro
    10. Re:Too much 9/11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This was modded "funny" (and it is!) but it's also a very telling statement about the USA since 9/11. I feel exactly the same way myself. As a matter of fact, I'm due to make a short speech for an international relations group here in Japan, and I'm so worried about saying anything anti-US--not because of reactions from the Japanese, but because the US government might be listening--that I actually had a nightmare recently where a uniformed arm grabbed me from behind while I was speaking.

      Paranoid? Maybe, but I think there's plenty of reason to be.

      Posting anonymously, for obvious reasons. (Though I'm sure Big Brother can find out who I am anyway...)

    11. Re:Too much 9/11 by RadioactivePorpoise · · Score: 1

      This comment is funny at the outset, but just plain scary at the end. It's affected me the same way- I'm worried what I say in public, at work, around friends.
      Right after this happened everyone and their brother started putting american flags on everything and got all wrapped up in this patriotic fever- talking about how the muslims are just evil- pretending that we never did a thing to provoke this act.
      They're still trying to whip up the war machine as we speak....Try to express a dissenting opinion and suddenly you're an unpatriotic godless terrorist

    12. Re:Too much 9/11 by inKubus · · Score: 2

      "How has it affected me? I'm worried about what I say in public; that's how it's affected me...."

      And who knows what effect that has had on the future? I mean, you are not alone. I too feel the same way, and I'm sure MANY other Americans do also. What impact has this had? It's uncountable, unfathomable. What things haven't been stopped that should have been. What things haven't been said.

      From tomorrow on, I am going to say what I feel, regardless. If they take me to jail or execute me, that will be the price I pay for excercising my freedom. If I can't be free, what is the point of living? They are trying to turn us into robots, slowly but surely.

      (by "they", I am not sure who I mean. It could be a group of men, or some aliens, or perhaps society itself, acting in unison. I don't believe there's a grand conspiracy of intelligent making; perhaps it is the nature of the beast we live within?)

      --
      Cool! Amazing Toys.
    13. Re:Too much 9/11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There were people minding their own business in the civilian cities of Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Panama City, the villages of Cambodia and Vietnam, Grenada, Santiago in Chile, Guatemala...

      Funny how when people have the power to screw people around they get upset when finally someone kicks back.

    14. Re:Too much 9/11 by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2
      How has it affected me? I'm worried about what I say in public; that's how it's affected me.
      That's too bad. Why should you be afraid of voicing your opinion? (hint: my .sig)
    15. Re:Too much 9/11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you say bush did a poor job handling 9/11... do u think you could have done a better job? and if so how?

    16. Re:Too much 9/11 by dalutong · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ahh -- but didn't the terrorists think that we were self-serving businessmen with "irrational" motives which were not shared by the majority of the members of our dominant religion?

      and maybe they think that america is just a shelter for their terrorists (a.k.a. afluent businesspersons who don't give a shit about the effect american foreign policy and private action overseas has)

      is it just a different perspective? (and no, most of the world doesn't support either of the two sides -- esp. before 9/11)

      --

      What comes first, finding a teacher or becoming a student?
    17. Re:Too much 9/11 by myrashka · · Score: 1

      Yanno - it's scary to me this was moderated as funny...this guy is serious...and it's a sad commentary to think we might be afraid of what we say in open forums like this because some moronic idiot who doesn't think when he does his job might actually take something like the patriot act to it's insane and irrational extremes (or worse yet, that idiot Bush might claim me an "enemy combatant" essentially stripping me of my citizenship (earned by birth) and rights for something I just say). You say this isn't possible? Think how many times you've been the victim of stupidity in a beauracracy out of control.

      Regard what Pollux said as the very frightening core of how every one of us - and our freedom is affected by the changes in our government of 9/11.

    18. Re:Too much 9/11 by Qrlx · · Score: 2

      Thank you, that was one of the most insightful things I've read, on Slashdot or elsewhere. Brilliant.

    19. Re:Too much 9/11 by Carter+Butts · · Score: 2

      Of which are you more afraid: of what you say in public or of death from above while you're just minding your own business?


      If you chose the former, you probably don't live in NYC.


      Perhaps you should try looking to the side, or below you, from threats. New Yorkers (and everyone else) have orders of magnitude more to fear from traffic accidents and accidental slips and falls than from malevolent aircraft.


      (And I won't even mention the threat posed by what's on your dinner plate...)


      -Carter

    20. Re:Too much 9/11 by geekee · · Score: 1

      In the US, we believe in the protection of the rights of individuals. They can choose what they want to believe,as long as it doesn't interefere with the rights of others. Terrorists do not believe this. The Taliban does not believe this. They attacked the US. We basically left them alone before to believe whatever they wanted. Even the 93 attempt on the WTC and 2 Emabssy bombings later, we left them alone. I think 3000 deaths is reason enough to take a stand aginst those who believe they can destroy our way of life. I'm tired of hearing about how bad our foreign policy is, when if you look at the facts, we're always stepping in to help oppressed Muslims. The difference between the terrorist and the US, the US doesn't intentionally target civilians. If you can't see the distinction, then I feel sorry for you.

      --
      Vote for Pedro
    21. Re:Too much 9/11 by dalutong · · Score: 2

      the US may or may not intentionally target civilians. i'll go with you on that for now.

      but how many people have died because of America? not 3000? i think no.

      our military industrial complex provides most of the weapons aronud the world. look it up if you'd like. we are always told that they get these things from the black market of old USSR weapons. bullshit.

      before we attacked IRAQ in 1991, they were our buddies. we gave saddam weapons for oil. (they have the world's second largest oil reserve, after all)

      and how many palestinians have died at the hands of american-funded israeli guns? not american-funded? well shit, where did that 96 billion we've given them over the past 50 years go? we certainly said it was to be spent (for the most part) on "defense." maybe it wasn't. maybe it was spent to buy ty beanie babies for all the palestinian and israeli children. but certainly the terrorists see the U.S. giving 1/3 of their total foreign aid to israel, which has a very high economic standard of living, instead of to the millions starving in the muslim and non-muslim areas.

      that's just the official military history. what about the shah that we put into iran? so they replaced him themselves and get mad at the people who put him in.

      and guatemala comes to mind -- where we happened to destroy the last democratic system there (because they were leaning towards supporting the still-alive and healty USSR) and replaced it with a dictator (who supported us)

      and i'd like to hear about these oppressed muslims we're helping.

      the point is -- we've been interferring in the matters of other nations for a LONG time. and a lot of the peoples with the guts to say anything anymore (official political states have trouble saying anything. think of the 73 cut in oil production by OPEC. now the U.S. (in retaliation) has a imposed monopoly on most of the high-tech oil refinery components. so joe-shmoe-oil-refiner has to ship something from the U.S. (which he COULD buy locally -- but it's been made illegal) so he can continue to make money)

      and that sorta leads me into the corporate "terrorism" we've pushed on the world. we may think that it is just "survival of the fittest" in the business world.. but other peoples of other areas don't think that. in a lot of third world countries, business is an issue of honor, not money (to the extent it is here.) it is changing, yes. but many blame that on the over-bearing stance the U.S. has taken to "liberate" the economies of these places. maybe they don't want to be industrialized. maybe they don't want coke. maybe they want yak-butter-tea instead (which i've had -- and didn't care for... but i'm not from the area.)

      anyway -- simply put: we've not been staying out of the worlds business by any means. my examples (which are not the best -- i just woke up and have no interest in researching this) are only a small piece of how the peoples of the world see America.

      i'd say research all the governments we supported in during the cold war. most of them were dictatorial -- but were against the USSR so we supported them. the peoples of those countries are still feeling the pain -- and they are finding America as one of the reasons for it.

      if they have no official military to fight with, then what do they do? send letters?

      i don't support the killing of civilians. but i don't support it when the U.S. does it either (though their case has been more one of destroying the lives of people... though there has been plenty of death in that)

      --

      What comes first, finding a teacher or becoming a student?
  29. fired by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    monetarily. downturn in economy, sorry. it is real.

  30. Spam has tenfold by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
    It may not be related to 9/11...

    ...but in the last 12 months spam to my mailbox has tenfold.

    :-(
    ms

    1. Re:Spam has tenfold by ceejayoz · · Score: 2

      Maybe we could get the f'ers by tying spam to terrorism... ooooooh!

  31. It changed everything ... by Khalidz0r · · Score: 1

    Well, the question should rather be: Did 9/11 keep *anything* as is?

    --
    "What you 'seek' is what you get!"
  32. I'm afraid to speak out. by Moray_Reef · · Score: 1

    So many cry-babies on Slashdot, I support the ACLU and EFF. You don't have to support the same groups I do but please DO SOMETHING!

    (lets take a simple test shall we?)
    When was the last time you called/e-mailed/FAXed your elected representative?
    Did you VOTE?
    Do you support any civil liberties group?

    Your score : 0 - Shut the fuck up. You have no right to bitch. WAKE UP DUMBFUCK!
    Your score : 1 - That's a small start, now lets keep it moving shall we?
    Your score : 2 - Warmer, now lets call our rep again...
    Your score : 3 - GOOD, lets keep it up, I fax my representatives about 2-3 times a week, How about you?

    The following is just a sig. (but still true)

    --
    If you voted for Nader, THIS IS ALL YOUR FAULT!!
    1. Re:I'm afraid to speak out. by Fastball · · Score: 2
      I support the ACLU

      Odd. You support an organization that conscribes lawyers to conduct iconoclasm of religion, an institution or civil right expressly protected by the Constitution. What is your fax number?

    2. Re:I'm afraid to speak out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wow i agree. Many people will complain, but most people won't act. If you hate this country VOTE for your favorite rep. (enter comments about popularity not winning elections) if more people vote, we wont have debacles like 2k.

    3. Re:I'm afraid to speak out. by Moray_Reef · · Score: 1

      You should examine what the ACLU is doing in the area of religion. Your comment would seem to suggest that the ACLUs goal is to distroy religion, that is not the goal of the ACLU. The ACLU is seeking to enforce the SEPARATION of church and state. The separation of church and state is expressly stated in the constitution.

      --
      If you voted for Nader, THIS IS ALL YOUR FAULT!!
    4. Re:I'm afraid to speak out. by Dylan+Zimmerman · · Score: 1

      I will never support the ACLU. They were actually trying to sue my church for putting rules and regulations (prohibiting profanity, overly loud or disrespectful music, inappropriate clothing, etc.) on some land that my church legitimately purchased. Most of the cases involving the ACLU that I have heard about involve similar restrictions to freedom. I just can't believe that this is coming from an organization calling itself the American Civil Liberties Union. From what I have heard and seen, the A should stand for Anti. Nothing against you or anyone who supports the ACLU, but I do not respect that group at all.

      As for how the events of September 11th have affected me, I have noticed an increase in inane security measures. I was flying to New Mexico from DFW and I was forced to check a tiny knife that could not even cut string. I proved this to the security people, but they still would not let me through. The truth is that I do not even know what it is for, it is just part of a personal grooming kit that I take with me on trips. I was stopped at every checkpoint there was both ways. Each time, my bag was swabbed for explosives, and each time, they found nothing. In short, I am extremely sick of unnecessary security and it does not make me feel any safer, in fact, it makes me feel very much less safe.

    5. Re:I'm afraid to speak out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The separation of church and state is expressly stated in the constitution.

      Muhahahahaha

    6. Re:I'm afraid to speak out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good God, I hope you didn't spend much money on those groups or too much time writing/voting - take a look around and you might realize that EVERYTHING YOU'VE SPENT HASN'T CHANGED A FUCKING THING.

      Seems like every sonofabitch in this country (yeah, the good ole uninvited states of amerika) thinks that trading paper is a good way to get things done. spend money. write letters. make money trading stocks. be a middle man between two business that are capable of doing business w/o you. maybe we should all put down our hammers and saws so we can sit on our fat fucking asses and get wealthy from trading paper. that gets alot done. that oughta get this economy rollin. that oughta make change.

    7. Re:I'm afraid to speak out. by Happy+go+Lucky · · Score: 1
      he ACLU is seeking to enforce the SEPARATION of church and state.

      Yep. From a creche in front of the county courthouse, it's just a few inches before they revive Torquemada.

      The separation of church and state is expressly stated in the constitution.

      Where? It's certainly not in the First Amendment.

  33. Offtopic? by Soulfader · · Score: 1
    The question was - How has it affected you? Or even anybody you know?
    And? Do I have to be incarcerated to be affected by these changes? Do you?

    If that's not enough, I have a degree in political science. As such, this has a profound effect on my primary field of study.

    Is that good enough for you?

    1. Re:Offtopic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The point is to identify abuses. All government is a potential abuse of power. Its only a problem when abuses outway the positive intent of the law.

  34. Oh, there's an effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I find that I am using WAY more tinfoil.

  35. No Changes... by tenchiken · · Score: 2

    There have been no changes that signficantly impact anyone one slashdot, unless one has serious ties to Islamists.

    GASP! What is that? How can it be?

    Outside of one alarmist Retuers article, the reality is that for 99.999% of people out there (which leaves approxamitly 2500 people left in america) there has been absolutly zilch change, with the exception of the fact that our airports are not the second most secure (we have a long way to go before we hit the level that is El-Al) and border crossings take longer.

    (And don't give me the argument that Europe's are better. No they are not. I was there, I was scared at how easy it was, and this was a week after Reid decided to prove how lax security was).

    Reality Check... 99.99% of slashdot probably constists of white males/females who are athiest/christian/jewish/hindu/moderate islam, which are viewed to be infidels by certain people. Reminder. THESE GUYS WANT TO KILL US. Plain and Simple. Ignoring the rhetoric, it comes down to that. Frankly, if they catch a guy who has been spending time in Afganistan in the company of the Taliban or Al-Qeda Lock him up for a VLT (Very Long Time).

    If you find someone who is of obvious leanings, has home videos of other peoples kids and Disneyland and plans of the local radation generation, make friggen sure that said individual is not going to cry "Allahu Ackbar" and take a plan into either a) the sea, b) A building, c) a nuclear reactor...

    1. Re:No Changes... by thelexx · · Score: 2

      "THESE GUYS WANT TO KILL US."

      Which is still no excuse to give up the freedoms that many Americans _ALREADY DIED TO PRESERVE_.

      LEXX

      --
      "Gold still represents the ultimate form of payment in the world." - Alan Greenspan, 1999
    2. Re:No Changes... by Wesley+Everest · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Well, as dissident in the U.S., I'd say that things have changed quite a bit. I don't know that I would say that the changes are all a result of Sept 11th, though... Sept 11th just oiled the wheels. The Patriot Act is pretty scary stuff, but my impression is that it just legalized existing police practices. Of course, that means that you have less recourse when your rights are violated, and when the police break the law to stifle dissent, they'll probably go further.

      Am I afraid of police throwing me in jail without access to a lawyer or a trial? A little bit. In any repressive society, you learn to adapt, and you hope you aren't the one singled out for special treatment. You have to be realistic about risks, though. I'm more likely to be killed in a car accident than tortured by police, and I'm more likely to be tortured by police than killed by a terrorist. If you are an active supporter of Bush's perpetual war and are a white christian, then you're probably more likely to die at the hands of a terrorist than the police, but more likely to drown in your bathtub than either.

      But the effects of repression go much further than the direct victims. As long as repression against voting-rights activists in the South was successful, all blacks in the South had suffer the daily minor humilations of being second class citizens, as well as make less money for more work due to discrimination and greater power inbalance at work. The most visible effects of the racist violence during the civil rights movement were the bloody bodies and smouldering buildings, but you can bet that millions of blacks had to suffer inferior schools, longer work hours, less access to health care, etc.

      Currently, the repression we are seeing benefits anyone with power. For example, even if there isn't a strike on the west-coast docks, the dock workers will be forced to accept less at the bargaining table due to Bush's threat to replace dock workers with soldiers during a strike. This sort of thing will also have a chilling effect for anyone group of workers daring to stand up for themselves. And if some workers must accept less pay and benefits, it has a way of filtering out to the rest of society, making us all work longer for less.

      Think back to the days of the Soviet Union after Stalin. There were some high-profile cases of political prisoners, but it wasn't necessary to imprison millions to keep everyone in check. Or China after the massacre at Tiananmen square -- a few thousand were killed and probably a few thousand imprisoned, and that was enough to seriously impact a social movement that could have improved the lives of over a billion people. Sure, 99.999% weren't affected directly by the Chinese repression, but that's more an explanation of why the Chinese repression was successful than a justification for why it was acceptable.

    3. Re:No Changes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Think back to the days of the Soviet Union after Stalin. [...] Or China after the massacre at Tiananmen square --

      You think the US today resembles in any way the Soviet Union or China? If so, we have definite differences in perception.

    4. Re:No Changes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To invoke Godwin's Law, Hilter was also an elected politician.

    5. Re:No Changes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A dissident?

      What does that mean? Are you, perchance, a violent anarchist who is frothing at the bit because you no longer are treated casually when firing Molotov Cocktails into the neighbourhood McDonalds from the anonymity of a mob?

    6. Re:No Changes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you point is ... ?

    7. Re:No Changes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try reading Manufacturing Consent by Noam Chomsky wanker.

    8. Re:No Changes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Chomsky has an ax to grind (and he's been grinding it for decades). Sorry, I've got better uses for my time than reading his agitprop.

    9. Re:No Changes... by Dusabre · · Score: 1

      Note on your history. Millions were still imprisoned after Stalin's rule. Heard of the Gulag system? Wasn't taken apart after his death. Actually they weren't so much imprisoned as sent to die in the Siberian wastes. Exterminated. Think chain gang in a climate so cold that your eyes froze. Without proper clothing. After Stalin.

      Millions are still imprisoned in China in labour camps. Millions.

    10. Re:No Changes... by sql*kitten · · Score: 2

      THESE GUYS WANT TO KILL US. Plain and Simple. Ignoring the rhetoric, it comes down to that.

      No, they don't. What they want is two things: 1) for the US to leave Saudi Arabia and 2) for Islamic countries to return to old-fashioned Islam without Western influences.

      They may kill some Americans (and really, 911 is insignificant compared to what most European cities endured in WW2) but they are doing it in support of their goals, not as an end in itself.

    11. Re:No Changes... by tenchiken · · Score: 2

      Do you honestly believe that? Perhaps Hitler only wanted Alsance-Lorraine back. Reality check, the US Millitary wants nothing more then to be rid of the Prince-Sultan base. They don't need it, causes too many clueless twits like Bin Ladin to use excuses to rally his troops.

      So, let's go to their sites.
      a) Worldwide Sharia... That's right Christians, Lesbians, Gays, Jews, Moderate Islamics, Hindu's now you too can live in a world where You can be beheaded for any variety of personal belief.

      b) Establishment of a Celiphate. Basically these guys want to restart the crusades.

      c) Death to anyone who may stop them. Yep, that's you... If you post to Slashdot, chances are you fall into category A above, and therefore is someone who would resist Sharia. Don't that make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside?

    12. Re:No Changes... by sql*kitten · · Score: 2

      Worldwide Sharia... That's right Christians, Lesbians, Gays, Jews, Moderate Islamics, Hindu's now you too can live in a world where You can be beheaded for any variety of personal belief.

      I don't doubt that there are Islamic fundamentalists who do want this, but it is inaccurate to consider all of them to be part of a homogenous group. All al-Queda want is isolation of the Middle East from Western influence.

      Establishment of a Celiphate. Basically these guys want to restart the crusades.

      Moslems want to restart the crusades? I suggest you go back and reread your mediaeval history.

      Death to anyone who may stop them.

      That's hardly a trait of al-Queda, or Islam in general. Since it's September 11th, perhaps you ought to study what the CIA started on September 11th, 1973 in Chile. I'll get you started: democratically elected president murdered in his home, military dictator (Pinochet) took over the country, thousands imprisoned, tortured and killed, thousands more exiled.

      We have seen the enemy, and he is us.

    13. Re:No Changes... by tenchiken · · Score: 2


      I don't doubt that there are Islamic fundamentalists who do want this, but it is inaccurate to consider all of them to be part of a homogenous group. All al-Queda want is isolation of the Middle East from Western influence.

      Bi Ladin himself has says otherwise. The phrase take back the lands that are muslim, includes France and Spain as well

      Moslems want to restart the crusades? I suggest you go back and reread your mediaeval history.

      Mine's up to date, yours? Remember, they sacked Isreal first.

      That's hardly a trait of al-Queda, or Islam in general.

      Really? Take a look at Lashkar Jihaad, or the groups in Kashmir, or Bin Ladin's repeated accounts that Allah has given him the deaths of 2 million americans. 2,000,000 - 3,000 = big number.

      perhaps you ought to study what the CIA started on September 11th, 1973 in Chile. I'll get you started

      That was the British more then the Americans, and there was a different threat present. Does that justify it? Nope. Pinochet turned out to be (arguably) a bad dude. Does that change anything? Nope. Not a whit. Your argument is a straw man, and it has nothing to do with the larger elements.

      The guys want to kill Americans. Pure and simple. Because we support Isreal and deny them all sorts of things that went out of fashion in Europe 1000 years ago.

    14. Re:No Changes... by Wesley+Everest · · Score: 2
      There are millions of prisoners in the U.S. In fact, a much higher percentage of the U.S. population is in prison than China. But that is a completely separate issue. I was talking about political repression. Most of the people in Chinese prisons are there for non-political crimes.

      My point was that 99.999% (the figure named by the original post) of a population doesn't need to directly experience repression for that repression to have significant effects across the whole population. The percentage of the Chinese population that was killed or imprisoned as part of the political repression that followed the Tiananmen massacre was probably about 0.001%, yet that repression had far-reaching effects for over a billion people.

      This example of China would suggest, then, that if only 0.001% of the U.S. population is directly impacted by the current repression in the U.S., then you cannot simply dismiss it as a minor problem affecting a small number of people.

      This is Democracy and Human Rights 101... If you allow your goverment to violate the rights of a small number of people, the effects are farreaching.

    15. Re:No Changes... by jafac · · Score: 2

      99.99% is 99.99%.
      My pledge says ". . .with liberty and justice for ALL"

      ALL!=99.99%

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
  36. Why would it? by zombiestomper · · Score: 1

    And if it did, the only reason you know is because you're probably behind bars right now for breaking the law.

    C'mon, really. The gov. is not interested in how much pr0n you download or how many .mp3's you traded, or your nasty letter to your IRC honey. The only people affected are people doing shit they shouldn't be doing.

    Besides, haven't we seen that the government agencies are so inept, there's nothing worry about?

    I used to be one of the paranoid types. Aliens, the illuminati, all that shit. I got over it. If you step back and put it into perspective, you realize there's nothing to worry about. You are not that important. j00 are n07 1n t3h M47r1x! They are not after you m4d 1337 h4xx0ring ski11z!

    Go get a date for the next ./ meetup or kiss a girl or something. There are more things to worry about than this...

    (Man, that felt good. Bad karma here i come...)

    1. Re:Why would it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Despite what you say, the FBI is interested in the mp3s you download. I can't find the article right now, but it was mentioned on slashdot not too long ago. The FBI apparently believes that now that terrorism is taken care of (not that i agree) they are going after piracy.

      Aside from that, Dick Cheney's wife, as president of the "Defence of Civilization Fund", published a pamphlet about the sinister lack of patriotism in American colleges, titled Defending Civilization: How Our Universities are Failing America and What Can Be Done About It. This twenty-two page long tirade features a list of quotes of supposedly anti-American sentiment such as "ignorance breeds hate" and "stop the violence, stop the hate." When it becomes un-patriotic to speak out against violence and hate, America will be nothing worth defending.

      CBS's Dan Rather admitted that he gave in to subtle pressures not to ask critical questions of American policy. "There has never been an American war...in which access has been so limited as this one", he said. The American government plays no small role in this, either. In October, the United States purchased the exclusive rights to all satellite images of Afghanistan, barring news agencies from using them. This amounts to a government-imposed information blackout.

      What do they have to hide? We are locking up people with visa violations simply because they are of Arab descent, we are killing civilians in Afghanistan, and we are preparing to start a war with Iraq. The BBC reported on a study by a University of New Hampshire professor which found that more civilians were killed by Americans in Afghanistan than were killed by terrorists on September 11, but the American media has yet to report on this. . We as a nation are doing things that we as human beings should not be proud of. And it is not un-patriotic to say so.

      (read the rest at http://n407er.dnsalias.net/speech.rtf)

      N407ER

  37. Yes.... by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 2

    I am sick of having Joe Idiot Security guard poking his stick or whatever through my gear bag. If the TSA kills my PDA while doing their "search" I want some BUTT! Some may think oh is that all? YES! I paid lots of bucks for my gear and some idiot poking through my bag with a stick and possibly breaking stuff because they think they might find something bad is idiotic. Also, if we are going to do security, then do it the same in every public building. When I went to the Smithsonian, in one museum(American History Museum) I got a stick poked through my bag. In another(Air and Space Mueseum), I had to pretty much go through an airport treatment. Bag in xray and walk through metal detector. Are the Air and Space things more important? Also I am sick of having to remove my laptop from my bag. Does that and other "additional" security make me safer? No it makes me feel paranoid some idiot will drop my laptop on the way to swab it with that thing. Also, I noticed another item has hit the electronic devices ban on airplanes. You can no longer have a GPS device active on a airplane (even though every aircraft probably has one too). Things have changed security wise but has their actually been any security studies done to see if it proves it? I don't think so. At least they won't ask those stupid questions any more (Anyone ask ya to put stuff in your bag, have your bags ever been out of your control....that deal). I mean they were asking those BEFORE 9/11. Let's do something. Let's have the FAA do a study on both PED's and security. Let's see if a GPS, cellphone, radio, laptop actually do cause interferance to the avionics in a typical airliner. Let's see if having your 2 inches of recline during take off and landing makes you safer. Let's see if your tray table being up during take off and landing make you safer too. Let's do something we should have a long time ago...a scientific study before we do policy. It can't be any worse then what we do now.

    --

    Gorkman

    1. Re:Yes.... by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2
      I am sick of having Joe Idiot Security guard poking his stick or whatever through my gear bag. If the TSA kills my PDA while doing their "search" I want some BUTT!
      What do you think the black beeeping dildoes they're waving are for????
    2. Re:Yes.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, the FCC cares more about your cellphone than the FAA does. Something about being able to connect to multiple towers simultaneously. It confuses the system somehow.

      And the business with seatbelts and traytables, etc. is law, not policy. And there's an old adage about FAA laws. 'They're written in blood' which basically means that if the FAA made a law about it, it's because somebody died from it.

    3. Re:Yes.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      airpoanes crash most often during takeoff and landing. the aisles need to be as clear and open as possible to facilitate getting out of your seat, down the aisle and out of the plane as quickly as possible. That's also why they make you stow all your stuff on takeoff and landing... do you want to trip on somebody's laptop on your way out?

      It's ok to complain, but don't rant.

  38. Too much cnn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I watch cnn too much since then :|

  39. Flying by Aldurn · · Score: 1

    I have had to fly once during the past year, and I regretted every minute of it.

    I am reminded of the Communist Trials, the stupidity of which we look back upon now and laugh at. In one airport run, I had to stand and watch both a girl who could barely see over the table on which her items were being rifled through get wanded, as well as my 80-year-old grandmother get "randomly searched" while sitting in her wheelchair. Upon seeing such unwarrented hysteria, I realized the terrorists had won.

    And then there was the time I forgot my tickets with my group when I wanted to wander around the airport, just to see the sights (hey, it was a vacation, right?) Bad idea. Apparently only terrorists want to get past the security checkpoints to go to the gates.

    And then there was the security checkpoint. Fortunately for me, I quickly learned which metal items in my pockets would set them off and which wouldn't. The rest of my party, however, wasn't so fortunate. One of them got a toenail clipper confiscated. Not the nail-file or the nail-clippers, mind you. Just the toenail clipper. Granted, my set got through the checkpoint without a hitch all four times.

    So what am I going to do about all of this? Simple: It's a democratic country, so I'm going to vote against it by not flying whenever possible. I intend to drive to many places, and take a train to others. The upside is that in many cases for local trips, it will actually be more convenient and quicker, because I will not have the checkpoints to deal with, and I won't have to get a rental car.

    It's a shame. When I was young, I very much looked forward to flying. Now I loathe it.

    --
    char sig[120] = "\0"
    1. Re:Flying by tenchiken · · Score: 2


      I am reminded of the Communist Trials, the stupidity of which we look back upon now and laugh at. In one airport run, I had to stand and watch both a girl who could barely see over the table on which her items were being rifled through get wanded, as well as my 80-year-old grandmother get "randomly searched" while sitting in her wheelchair. Upon seeing such unwarrented hysteria, I realized the terrorists had won.

      Yes, but on the other hand, whenever anyone suggests that searching granny who was born in the US in 1932 might not reveal a terrorists, and instead suggests that it might be a good idea to make sure Sulyiman does not have a 10-pack of razors in his bag is immedatly called a racists.

      The problem with Americans is that we assume that absolutly everyone is like us, there are people out there (Aidid, Hussain, et all) who have serious kill the big devil (the united states) and little devil (Isreal) reflexes, and don't mind turning WMD's on their own citizines to make the world a safer place for them.

    2. Re:Flying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I went on a flight around December of last year and managed to bring a butane torch on with no one even noticing. I mean by noticing it went into the pan with all of my other metal items when I went through the metal detectors.

      I made it through at least 5 security check points with it. I had everyone from airline personel to Marines looking it over and no one noticed.

      Call me crazy.. but wouldn't a torch capable of a few thousand degrees of sustained burn be at least the equivalent threat of the file on nail clippers or a box cutter?

  40. traffic by DonkeyJimmy · · Score: 1

    I live in Washington DC, and there are big tanks with army guys holding heavy assault rifels pointed at the roads as you drive by. I actually think this is kind of cool, except everyone goes the stupid speed limit (like they're gonna hop in their tank and give you a ticket)! On most other highways people average closer to 15 over, so it is a big difference. This adds to traffic around rush hour too, but thankfully I don't need to drive on this road most of the time.

    Besides that, and the fact that new years was borring because nobody wanted to go to the mall (place in DC) or to New York City, I haven't felt much of the heat dirctly.

    --
    "Probably the toughest time in anyone's life is when you have to murder a loved one because they're the devil." -Philips
    1. Re:traffic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can add a couple as a fellow DC area resident:

      1. Have you flown out of or into National Airport lately (excuse me, Ronald Regan National Airport)? Ridiculous security concerns...for an airport that wasn't even involved with the events of September 11, 2001. Common sense dictates that a terrorist would simply pick another airport that doesn't have those restrictions, say one of the ones that's all of 5 minutes flight time from National.

      2. My project was drastically cut to help fund the new Office of Homeland Security or whatever it's called. (It sounds too much like "Secret Police" to me...)

      3. I feel nervous when I go out on my balcony and take a look at the Capitol, the Monument, or other landmarks in DC using my binoculars. I'm sure it's paranoia, but I can't help but wonder if someone would get suspicious and report it. I'm just looking for the fun of it and enjoying the view.

      Yes, I feel some changes.

  41. Unemployed by HouseKeeping · · Score: 1

    I've been looking for a job for more than three months now. I am nearly finish my graduate program in Information System. My previous job was for school, but I cannot keep the job because I do not have enough credit hours (I am only finishing my thesis). I don't know if this only happen to me or everybody else. I am not a citizen but have the authorization to work in the US. I also don't know if this affects the chance of getting employed.

    1. Re:Unemployed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope. Not a novel thing at all.

      There's a whole slew of us CS graduates from Harvey Mudd and Pomona that don't have jobs yet, and have been looking since, oh, last October. Meanwhile, I understand that most of the Berkeley CS grads don't have jobs either.

      Basically, we're all screwed. If you're a non-citizen, I suggest you get a job ASAP, doing whatever you possibly can.

    2. Re:Unemployed by Viper596 · · Score: 1

      Even if you are a born citizen (I am a white male planning to join the Marines) it is harder to get a job post 9/11. There are fewer jobs available, and more places want to do background checks.

  42. Re:Post-9/11 Revelation by irishkev · · Score: 1

    I would like to hear more about this. I am a 9/11 researcher who looks at all stories, no matter what. Please feel free to check out my web site and write to me. My PGP key is in the ABOUT section of my site if you want to talk.

    Thanks,
    Kevin

  43. Well, I lost my job. by sapped · · Score: 1, Informative

    But then again, being a foreigner I suppose I shouldn't have expected anything less. However, in reality it has still made me very angry. I have uprooted my entire family to come and make something better for them over in the US and then this comes along and threatens to wipe my future out.

    Now if I was some scumbag then that would be OK, but I just want to put in an honest day's work. And for all you people out there saying that there are a bunch of Americans that want jobs as well please read on. I have seen numerous ads on the jobsites looking for somebody with my skills (ABAP programming) so I apply for these jobs. After a couple of days I follow up. Sometimes I get a reply, sometimes not. If I do get a reply then it is always the same. "We don't employ H1's." Now, some of these same ads have been running for more than 8 weeks. So, they have still not managed to find an American to fit the bill, yet I don't get asked to interview. All this is a direct result of 9/11 as I had no problem getting a job prior to that. People are stupidly paranoid of foreigners all of a sudden.

    This makes me sad in a way because I grew up in a country filled with terrorism and the one thing I learnt was this:
    The minute you change your lifestyle due to fear then they have already succeeded.

    These terrorists don't need to drop a single bomb on the US to further their goals. The media and the government are doing a sterling job of terrifying their citizens all on their own.

    End of rant. What can I say? I am frustrated as hell that there are jobs out there and I simply cannot get one of them due to people's fear.

    By the way, if somebody does feel like employing a foreign ABAP programmer, then please send me an email. Mod me as you wish.

    1. Re:Well, I lost my job. by NextGen · · Score: 1

      Not that I am an expert on H1 visas, but I believe that a company needs to spend a bunch of money and go through a governmental approval process (long) to hire anyone that is in the US on an H1? I apologize for my ignorance, but I believe I'm correct, so don't blame your current unemployment on 9/11. And aside from the above, remember that the economy was in the toilet before then too...

    2. Re:Well, I lost my job. by tot · · Score: 1
      The purpose of terrorism is to terrorize, as Lenin said. They succeeded in that sense.

      I guess that in the U.S. the same amount (~3000) people die every month in car accidents.

    3. Re:Well, I lost my job. by handsomepete · · Score: 2
      Taken from this site:

      Financial: Hiring a Foreign MBA will not impose any significant cost to the organization, other than a few hundred dollars down the road, when the H1-B visa needs to be processed. Relocation costs should only be provided from their school residence, not their home country.

      Having said this, you also have to keep in mind that hiring a Foreign MBA student will not provide any saving to the organization. I.e. it is illegal to pay them less than what you usually pay an equivalent candidate, only because he is not a US citizen. You might save, however, some taxes (like social security).
      Also suffering from ignorance, I don't know if the same info applies to a regular H1 (or if it's even really relevant), but thought it was interesting nonetheless.

      Why the hell is the grandparent post modded as flamebait?
    4. Re:Well, I lost my job. by sapped · · Score: 1

      I currently have an H1 and my visa holder is an American company. Therefore from a tax, legal and financial point of view it is a simple corp-to-corp hire. This is the same process used by thousands of Americans on a daily basis.

      I am not denying that the economy was down, but as I pointed out in my original post - there are jobs out there right now that I could fill. They have not been able to find Americans to fill those positions for 8-9 weeks. My frustration came about because these people wouldn't give me a chance to interview even if I fulfilled all their requirements and nobody else currently did.

    5. Re:Well, I lost my job. by sapped · · Score: 1

      Yes, the same applies. They are not allowed (legally) to pay you less just because you are an H1. (I put in the disclaimer because there are always scumbags out there that will try anything. And I am talking about people on both sides of the equation here.)

      Also you don't save any taxes by employing an H1. I get taxed the same as any other W2 in the country.

      I am also dumbfounded as to the Flamebait mod status.

    6. Re:Well, I lost my job. by Happy+go+Lucky · · Score: 1
      I guess that in the U.S. the same amount (~3000) people die every month in car accidents.

      Worse. About 50K/year. And people wonder why us traffic cops do our thing. And the closest we get to support is MADD, who complained on me because I stopped a drunk driver, established that he was drunk, wrote him the summons for DUI, revoked his license, and had his brother pick him up instead of booking him into jail. That last step means I'm derelict in my duties and soft on DUI, apparently.

      With friends like that, who needs an enema?

  44. It Sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is a balancing act that must be done. Air travel sucks so bad now I would rather drive. I would feel better with less airport security and airline cockpit doors that can't be busted in.

    How it affected me? My wife and son flew to see
    grandparents this summer, both were tagged with search at every possible point tickets. So three times in the airport they were pulled aside, questioned, frisked, stuff gone through. Not only that they sperated my wife and son to do this.

    My son was 15 months old at the time.

    Yeah, stop that killer baby you friggin jerks.
    As a result our next vacation will be via car. A 16 hour drive.

  45. I don't know by teslatug · · Score: 1

    That's part of the problem...guess not in a major way yet

  46. Mod Parent Up! by SnatMandu · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    +1 Funny

    1. Re:Mod Parent Up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is the true tradity of Sept. 11. We didn't use it as a perfecly good excuse to rid the world of its sandniggers.

  47. few people who lost jobs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



    The FEW people that lost jobs? What planet are you on?

  48. pre-opened mail mystery and other problems... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I help run an 'underground' events group in San Francisco. We do adventures kinda like the suicide club did in the seventies. Urban games, theme parties, and other adventures. It's non-commercial, non-media driven and just exists for fun and because it can.

    We publish a semi-monthly newsletter where the upcoming events are announced. It's grown to a few pages now, as is more of a Zine with event announcements within.

    We've gotten into having 'theme' newsletters lately. The last two month's themes have been a little 'subversive' if complete jokes; one was a farce on communist propaganda, the other a fake FBI file.

    Every single one was pre-opened by someone other than the recipient. They arrived with the seal broken. Now, I know that they have striking and subversive covers (that are obvious jokes when looked at closely) but why would they all arrive pre-opened? We mail out to about a hundred people, and everyone I talk to says that it's arrived pre-opened.

    So who's opening them? And why? I'm not paranoid; we are a completely harmless group that breaks no laws. Why would someone be opening zines that have crazy covers? And opening them all?

  49. I'll bite the bullet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let me take few things off my chest (and remain anonymous - you never know who reads /.)

    As a person who lives in the middle east and see's whats going on in the USA, I can't help but laugh/cry from the situation in USA..

    Israeli goverment has been telling to the US officials about the terror activity in U.S - starting from Hammas terrorism activity, all the way to Al-Quaida warning which was sent from the Mossad to the CIA, which -as known- didn't really turned any red lights there..

    The American goverment spends trillions of dollars in security, recording terrorists phone, etc - yet they didn't even look for translating people until the 9/11 incidents!

    Everyone in ths U.S today complains about security checks. Well, allow me to tell you that the checking that you're going through there are joke, at best! try to fly with El-Al and see what security means!

    Looking at the legal decisions that the U.S goverment decided post 9/11 shows that the U.S goverment (yes, Bush goverment) is in Panic and doing EVERYTHING wrong! It's quite amusing to read how officials are asking money because they affraid that Al-Quaida will blow bridges and other facilities - through the Net! of course - they didn't find any proof of that, but that doesn't means they don't want some big (overpriced) funding...

    Looking at the situation as it now - Bush wants to go to a war in Iraq. Does he have any proof that Sadam Hussein have any chemical weapons? nope, but that doesn't mean shit to him! he wants war and he wants it now. To the public the goverment tells that this is going to be "piece of cake" with the latest high tech technology - well I'll be damn! look how many of those "smart" bombs were missing targets! over 42% of them missed!

    Of course - lets not forget Microsoft with their latest PR spinning - `if we reveal security secrets - Al Quaida will use it to kill/burn/explode lots of facilities!` - I'm shocked! how much people can be stupid there?

    Oren

  50. Changed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, everyone still seems to hate the United States, so I guess nothing's changed.

  51. Try being a private pilot these days by mooneyguy · · Score: 5, Informative

    You think internet interests have been hit hard by post 9/11 legislation, trying being a private pilot these days. Despite the fact that this heinous act was conducted with big planes, its the little ones (like the Mooney I own) that are the first ones to be singled out when it comes time to hand down more restrictive measures. Three days after the attacks, the commercial airliners were back in the air. We had to wait a month, and then we were so awash in new and constantly changing regulations that it was impossible to keep up. Imagine taking off for a two hour flight and having the rules change while you're airborn. It was not unusual for a flight to be legal when you took off and illegal by the time it was over. The onslaught of new rules has been so bad that the FAA will run out of 4-digit numbers with which to label them. Yes, we are rapidly approaching federal notam (notice to airman) number 9999, at which point they will have to start numbering them at 0 again.

    Remember when they announced they were restricting general aviation flights over nuclear power plants? You know what the official notice from the FAA said? The notice said we were forbidden from flying within 5 miles of a power plant, but then gave us nothing better than a vague description of where those plants were located! So we were told we had to remain clear (and if we didn't we would be intercepted by fighters and possibly shot down) but not told the locations we had to remain clear OF: just city names and vague directions, like "15 miles northwest of Anytown, IL". Even the pilot briefers we called on the phone--the very FAA representatives whose purpose in life is to tell pilots about notams--didn't understand the notices. Depending on who and when you would call you would get a different story about what was legal and what wasn't. And the ATC folks were just as confused. The tower at your departing airport would say your flight is okay, but the one at your destination would declare you in violation of some temporary flight restriction.

    Many aviation related business went bankrupt and many more are teetering on the edge as a result of this. The airlines are bad off as we all know, but the small airports are in worse shape. And we are constantly under a cloud of threatened onerous increases in security for our airports: in most cases they are security measures that make no sense at all. Imagine owning property but being subject to a security check before you were allowed to go out to it.

    Lots of folks just gave up flying, some temporarily and some permanently. I'm happy to sacrifice for my country, but the sacrifice should have some value. Most of what I've seen in the way of GA restrictions has been meaningless and senseless. And it's not really the restrictions themselves that bother me, but way in which they have been handled.

    --
    Mooney Guy N4074H
    1. Re:Try being a private pilot these days by oliphaunt · · Score: 2
      Imagine owning property but being subject to a security check before you were allowed to go out to it.


      That's coming too. Just hang on a bit, and the FBI will catch up with the MPAA for sure.

      Your problem is these concepts of "rights," "ownership," and "property." Who are you to decide what you own, or what rights you have? That's a job that you had better leave to the government.
      --




      Humpty Dumpty was pushed.
    2. Re:Try being a private pilot these days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      As a fellow private pilot it's my opinion that you are distorting the facts. If you fly under IFR, nothing has changed.

      On the other hand, VFR is a different matter. It's true that you have to avoid, nuclear power plants and it's also true that FAA either doesn't know or or is unable to tell you where the nuclear plants are located but if you can't spot the cooling tower of a nuclear power plant from 5 miles away, I don't want you in the same airpace with me.

      I would submit that general aviation has boomed since 911. Given the choice between flying in a commercial airliner with lots of strangers or flying in a private or chartered aircraft where you know all the passengers and the pilot, which choice would you take?

    3. Re:Try being a private pilot these days by rufusdufus · · Score: 2

      I completely disagree. Most General Aviation pilots are VFR only. The vast majority of IFR flights are for commercial purposes. Your point about flying a "chartered" aircraft is backwards--the chilling effect is on private pilots, not commercial pilots. As you say, IFR (which are mainly commercial) flights havent changed, but VFR has. The outrageous part about the whole thing is that the terrorists used commercial jumbo jets that were flying IFR!

    4. Re:Try being a private pilot these days by mooneyguy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If you fly under IFR, nothing has changed


      Try landing at one of the four airports in the DC area.

      It is true that IFR was not as adversely affected, but there was still a significant impact. It was about a week before they even allowed IFR flight for part 91, as I recall. IFR flight without the option of VFR is much more restrictive, especially if you frequent uncontrolled airports and even moreso airports without approaches. Maintaining or, even worse, regaining instrument currency was difficult, too.

      Even when departing IFR there was a period of time when I could not drive my car on to the ramp. I had to go to the FBO, prove to them who I was, then have them take me out to my plane in one of their vehicles. Then after landing I had to call them to reverse the process. And owner maintenance during that time? Forget it! Even as recently as two months ago when my partner and I were working on the engine late at night we got questioned by the local authorities. I'm actually glad to see that, but it is another indicator that things have really changed.

      Things are mostly okay these days, but we do still live under the constant threat of increased restrictions (witness all the hoopla over the part 91 restrictions for 9/11/02) and increased security with little to no warning. Not to mention the press regularly publishing reports about how "dangerous" we are, and senators saying that GA is a gaping security risk.

      if you can't spot the cooling tower of a nuclear power plant from 5 miles away, I don't want you in the same airpace with me.


      Ha ha! Fortunately I can (for the most part). But we still had to pad the distance to about 10 miles, in case some official somewhere decided that the center of the circle was somewhere other than the cooling tower.

      I would submit that general aviation has boomed since 911.

      Parts of it have, yes. Especially chartered jet operations. But the part of the industry that deals with our small planes is still suffering greatly, IME. Ive talked with maintenance shops, paint shops, and interior shops. All report that business is still down but slowly improving.

      --
      Mooney Guy N4074H
    5. Re:Try being a private pilot these days by achurch · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm not a pilot myself--far from it--but one of my most thrilling experiences in an airplane was when I rode [airline censored to protect the innocent] once; I expressed interest in "how the thing works" (kids, don't try this at home) and the pilots actually let me into the cockpit! I got to look out the front window, look at the instrument panels, chat with the pilots . . . it was great. I actually thought about taking flying lessons for a while.

      Sigh.

    6. Re:Try being a private pilot these days by GCH · · Score: 1

      For instance, here is the latest that pilots have to worry about as reported by AOPA (Aircraft Owners & Pilots Association). O.K., do not be alarmed, but be alert that there is an F-16 who has pulled up along side you and is telling you to follow him, lest he blow you to oblivion, or, worse yet, you have anti-aircraft weapons firing at your Cessna 172:

      ==> ATTENTION PILOTS ==

      TERRORIST THREAT ASSESSMENT RAISED TO 'HIGH' RISK;
      TSA EXPLAINS TO AOPA NEED FOR INCREASED VIGILANCE

      AOPA is sending you this bulletin to tell you how today's elevated
      terrorist threat assessment is affecting general aviation aircraft
      operations. In a special phone conversation late this afternoon with
      Admiral James M. Loy--director of the Transportation Security
      Administration (TSA)--and his top deputies, AOPA President Phil Boyer
      learned that pilots are being asked to exercise extreme vigilance and
      cooperation as an alternative to new security procedures and airspace
      restrictions. The call was in response to this afternoon's announcement
      by U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft and Office of Homeland Security
      chief Tom Ridge that the federal government had raised the terrorist
      alert level for the first time to code orange, meaning a "high" danger
      of attack. That level requires government agencies to increase their
      security efforts.

      "Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta advised the transportation
      community, 'do not be alarmed, but be alert,'" said Boyer. Because
      transportation modes are known to be favorite terrorist targets, pilots
      must be vigilant. Pilots should expect increased local law enforcement
      surveillance at general aviation airports during this time of
      heightened vigilance. Pilots are asked to watch for anything unusual
      or suspicious at the airport. Report any such activity to local law
      enforcement. Secure your aircraft before walking away from it.

      Because of the heightened state of alert, incursions into restricted
      airspace can be expected to bring rapid and perhaps harsh response by
      the authorities. TSA emphasized that there is an "enormous seriousness"
      to the temporary flight restrictions (TFRs) and pilots must be careful
      to strictly adhere to all ATC procedures. For the first time,
      Washington, D.C., has been ringed with live antiaircraft weapons.

      Pilots are reminded of the TFRs surrounding tomorrow's 9/11 anniversary
      ceremonies in Washington, D.C., New York City, and Pennsylvania. In the
      Washington, D.C., area, Potomac and College Park airports will be
      totally closed during the time of the ceremonies. However, AOPA staff
      has learned that this restriction may be extended through Thursday.
      The TSA is also revoking the waivers from Notam 3353 that prohibits GA
      operations within 3 miles and 3,000 feet of sporting events (stadiums)
      and open-air assemblies. This effectively eliminates banner-towing
      operations at these sites.

      While the greatest current threat appears to be to U.S. embassies,
      military bases, and other interests overseas, intelligence officials
      also fear that low-level al Qaeda operatives might attempt small-scale
      attacks in the United States. Based on information from a suspected al
      Qaeda operative, and corroborated using other intelligence assets, the
      government believes U.S. assets in Southeast Asia are especially at
      risk. However, because the information may be incomplete, and because
      communications among terrorists a year ago followed a similar pattern
      and also indicated overseas targets, President Bush decided to raise
      the threat level assessment at home as well.

    7. Re:Try being a private pilot these days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      At the risk of crying 'me too!' ....

      I'm a VFR pilot and my flying has been GREATLY affected. I got my license about 1 month before september 11th. My parents and grandparents were flying into town on sept. 29th specifically to go flying with me for their first time. However, I lived in Atlanta at the time and all VFR flights were grounded for like a month. So my family canceled the trip since we couldn't go up. Honestly, I was surprised that I still had an FBO to go back to when the ban was lifted. Alot of FBO's just folded. As expensive as aviation is, it's even more expensive when the planes aren't flying. W/O the student/rental income, alot of plane owners couldn't hack it.

      Most of my flying was to Chattanooga to visit my girlfriends parents. Unfortunately, the field we flew into was right next to a Nuclear Power Plant. So even when we could fly again, we still couldn't go to the one place that we really wanted to go.

      And guess which sect of aviation is the smallest threat to the general public? That's right. Light aircraft. What happened to that bonehead that flew the cessna that he 'stole' (yeah right) and flew into a building in Miami? He was the only casualty, the building had a few broken windows and the plane was dissintegrated. Who needs more proof that our planes aren't threatening? Yet, it seems every week, there's a new temporary flight restriction around an entire city, or over nukes, or over open air events, or whatever (despite the fact that it's been proven that small private planes can't do a damn thing to nukes). Why is it that VFR GA has changed SOOOOOOO much but commercial aviation has changed so little. If you're going to be paranoid, at least be paranoid about the relevant stuff.

    8. Re:Try being a private pilot these days by jafac · · Score: 2

      The outrageous part about the whole thing is that the terrorists used commercial jumbo jets that were flying IFR-

      - - -
      no. the outrageous part about the whole thing is that the little guy is getting squeezed by government on behalf of the big guy. Did you get a multi billion dollar bailout from the government? So when all the little carriers go out of business - no more competition for the big airlines anymore. (not that there was any serious competition to begin with).

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
  52. How its affected me by soapvox · · Score: 1

    I fly every week and when it first happened the lines at SFO were insane, now I just find that the flights are less frequent but the lines are much quicker now that SFO has become more efficient with the searches. I don't think that the skies are much safer but then again I don't think that the terrorist are going to try that again, they would try something different. I also have been affected because as a pacifist I am ostrisized even more so that pre 9/11 and am scared sh!tless how many people just sit buy and watch thier freedoms taken away, daily on slashdot if you post anything even slightly anti war or anti bush you are sure to be told you are stupid when in fact I just don't see a purpose in letting the terrorist win and letting Ashcroft take away my freedoms.

  53. revived enforcement of old policies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not post-9/11 stuff, but more an enforcement of rules that had been ignored.

    My school has a large research grant from the Army (not DARPA, the Army, to help make it clear)

    Laws/policies/whatever restricting foreign nationals from working on the project were on the books before 9/11, but were never enforced. When I say never, I mean never. Just like PA's law against singing in the shower.

    They are now. In about March or so we got a visit form the State Dept advising us of the penalties for allowing foreigners on the project. Result: Everyone on the project is a US citizen or has filed proper paperwork with the INS.

    We lost 4 people (3 students, one prof) out of the 10 right away, though one has returned. She was Palestinean, and her paperwork has since been approved, putting her back onto the project. The other 3 were Chinese, Indian, and German. Yes, they kicked citizens of major US allies off the project.

    The major fear, as I've been told, is the students taking the knowledge they learn from the project back home with them. Those remaining on the project are not to speak of details outside the lab, though we have no security clearance of any kind or have signed any NDAs.

    Oh, and the State Dept has not returned to visit us. Also, that knowledge they were trying to keep is gonna reach foreigners anyway. We have a paper publication comming up, in an internationally published academic journal.

    1. Re:revived enforcement of old policies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i missed some details. The reason I made the DARPA distiction is because I'm also involved with a DARPA-funded project. DARPA has no such restrictions. For an example, NameSys Corporation. They're the authors of ReiserFS, and are being funded for continuing development of security features. They're location? Russia.

    2. Re:revived enforcement of old policies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've worked on DARPA funded projects in the corporate world where a no foreign rule was enforced, and ones for which it wasn't.

      It's not a matter of who funds it. The Army also funds research that can be done by anyone. It's a matter of the SUBJECT of the research, if it falls under certain guidelines or not.

      I'm sure there is a preserve-jobs-for-voting-people element in there occasionally, especially in bad economic times, but in my experience 99 percent of it is related to ITAR regulations and the like.

  54. Don't really notice. by LinuxWhore · · Score: 1

    I went to the airport several times this year. They checked my shoes for bombs :-) Other than that, it's been pretty normal.

    --

    I am MuchTall
  55. reactions by byrd77 · · Score: 1

    I re-installed PGP and generated a new key...

    --
    - Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero.
  56. How have things changed? by objekt404 · · Score: 1

    dot.commed twice in one year. Hows that for a start?

    --
    "Good, bad, I'm the guy with the gun."
  57. "Golly, I have nothing to hide!" by Trespass · · Score: 1

    Now you don't have the option.

  58. It hasn't affected people by Kphrak · · Score: 2

    This is almost a flame, but I'd say that from the comments I've seen so far, NO ONE has been really affected. The liberal/civil liberties/privacy types say they've been affected, but if you read further down their comments, they'll all say the same thing: "I worry about our government more than I did before". Not "I got jailed for being a member of an Al-Qaida spin-off cell", and not even "my phone is tapped 24/7 because I read Slashdot and use Linux". In short, those American citizens who are saying they are affected by the laws are "comfortably concerned citizens". Although I'm sure some unscrupulous government droid will use these laws to an evil end, no one seems to have been seriously affected yet.

    Of course, a paranoid way of looking at things might be that the reason no one has said anything is that the people affected are either trying to keep a low profile or already are in a top-secret federal prison somewhere....

    --

    There's no sig like this sig anywhere near this sig, so this must be the sig.
    1. Re:It hasn't affected people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      do you know why no one appears to be afftected on
      slashdot ? because we are predominatly WHITE and
      middle to upper class.
      this isnt going to affect us yet!

    2. Re:It hasn't affected people by geekoid · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Its called being proavtive. speak out when you can, because if you wait, it might be too late.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:It hasn't affected people by Craigj0 · · Score: 1

      Firstly if "I got jailed for being a member of an Al-Qaida spin-off cell" do you think that I would have access to a machine to post on slashdot in a top security prison or not?

      Secondly if laws are abused too early then there will be an uprising against it. But if it is part of our way of life for a few years then slowly more encroaching laws are introduced and the lod ones start becomming abused.

    4. Re:It hasn't affected people by ceejayoz · · Score: 2

      There's a pretty fine line between proactive and unreasonable paranoia.

    5. Re:It hasn't affected people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First they came for the Communists,
      and I didn't speak up,
      because I wasn't a Communist.
      Then they came for the Jews,
      and I didn't speak up,
      because I wasn't a Jew.
      Then they came for the Catholics,
      and I didn't speak up,
      because I was a Protestant.
      Then they came for me,
      and by that time there was no one
      left to speak up for me.

      by Rev. Martin Niemoller, 1945

    6. Re:It hasn't affected people by GMontag · · Score: 1

      Amen! I have to agree, but approach from a different angle.

      My, mostly distant, observations of law enforcement is that misapplication of laws/rules is the norm. Finally they have something valid to focus on.

      Example was a police officer in Florida that was told by 3 different judges that case law had modified a statute about people driving with license plate frames on their cars and it was no longer a violation unless the numbers of the tag were obscured.

      This officer continued to misapply the statute until (and perhaps after) he pulled over a high ranking officer of a Dade County police force. The suspicion was drug running, the real cause for suspicion was the driver was black (the arresting officer lied about the driver being obscured by tinted windows) driving a nice SUV with Dade County tags. The initial charge was obscured license plate that was perfectly readable in the video tape. I am sure during the time that this idiot was harassing another cop (btw, I have no love for the profession either) the REAL CRIMINALS were driving right by.

      Anyway, after all that wordyness, my point is that in the past the police were only looking for money making infractions and were going beyond petty in their efforts that amounted to nothing but taking your money and resulted in no increase in public safety.

      Finally, much of this has subsided and the police will actually *ghasp* leave the speed traps to look for a kidnapped child, invistigate suspicious acting people and skip the ones that are not doing anything wrong. Effectively, they seem to be doing the opposite of the FL example above and look for the real criminals.

      I just hopes it lasts a while longer.

  59. I can't get drunk at Half Time anymore by Uttles · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's a huge issue at Clemson University. There, tailgating for football games is a way of life. Up until 9-11, most people would go to the game, then go back to their tailgate spot during half-time (who wants to watch a band?). We'd drink and eat more, then go back to the game. Well, Clemson outlawed pass-outs (funny name, considering all this drinking), which means you can no longer leave the stadium and return, unless of course you buy another ticket.

    This isn't all that important to the quality of life, but it's a good example of an institution making a profit oriented rule and hiding it under the false label of increased security.

    --

    ~ now you know
    1. Re:I can't get drunk at Half Time anymore by MicroBerto · · Score: 2
      I go to Ohio State, and we have an enormous football and tailgating culture there as well. This weekend's game is going to be absolutely crazy.

      But anyway, just bring a flask. I haven't gotten searched for one yet, hopefully you won't. Either that, or just get so hammered before the game that you're good for a few hours. That's been working for me too.

      On a sidenote, if anybody's watching College Gameday on ESPN at 10:30am EST, look out for the drunken bastard in a #32 jersey wearing facepaint that looks like The Ultimate Warrior's (in Scarlet and Gray, of course) -- That's me! The game starts at 3:37pm, that's a LONG time to tailgate. I'm so pumped!

      --
      Berto
  60. actually.. they were very thorough...... by Mobster75 · · Score: 0

    Recently, I connected through Munich on a flight from Rome to the US and the German security was top-notch and much pickier than any US security I went through since 9/11..

    They had the men and women go into separate security lines, made me take off my sandals for X-raying, and ran a wand metal-detector over every inch of my body, including my privates...

    I remember them getting all snippy with the guy behind me who had a tweezer in his carry-on.

    How's that? :)

    1. Re:actually.. they were very thorough...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My mother had her tweezers taken away from her at a security point in a central U.S. airport. I think it's pretty varied between airlines/airports how tight security actually is. *shrug*

    2. Re:actually.. they were very thorough...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Detroit is very lax in their security setup.

      It's just like pre-9/11 nowadays, as far as waits, and ease of getting through. You now have to have a piece of paper that claims you have a ticket on a flight.

      I went to Atlantic City last week, and somehow my tickets were bought for the Saturday night flight, instead of the Friday night. Crossed the border, the border guard didn't notice. Went through security at the airport, they didn't notice. Finally got to the gate, and they said, "your flight is tomorrow, not today"

      So basically a piece of paper with the right(or even wrong) info saying you have a ticket, gets you into the gate area.

  61. Nothing has changed ... by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 2, Troll

    Not sure who the orginal author is as it was sent around at work...

    As the anniversary of 9-11 approaches, Americans and ditto-heads alike are converging
    to reflect upon the tragedy and its consequences. So let's review the state of the nation:

    Bin Laden is still at large
    The anthrax killer is also still at large
    Halliburton and Carlyle are still making money from war
    Saudi Arabia is still an evil influence
    Ashcroft is still shredding the constitution
    Bush the lesser is still an idiot
    The Clintons are still being slandered
    Gore is still being demonized
    The economy is still going south
    The religious right are still insane
    Cancer and AIDS patients are still being criminalized
    Corporate criminals are still getting off
    Health insurance is still grossly expensive
    Drug companies are still raping the elderly and disabled
    Star Wars is still a Bad Idea
    Mother Nature is still NOT HAPPY
    Right wing shills still claim to be patriots
    Mass media is still supine

    1. Re:Nothing has changed ... by dada21 · · Score: 2

      *clap clap*

      Now vote libertarian and lets see a lot of your list disappear...

    2. Re:Nothing has changed ... by mfago · · Score: 1
      Drug companies are still raping the elderly and disabled


      You are sorely mistaken.


      The Drug companies are raping everyone.


      Unfortunately, voting Libertarian will not do much good -- they will not get elected. Not unless we get real campaign finance reform anyhow.

    3. Re:Nothing has changed ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Clintons are not being slandered, the truth is being revealed. How could you ever vote for someone like that?

      How could you trust someone with the most powerful military in the world when he ran to Canada like a coward and can't even control his genitals?

    4. Re:Nothing has changed ... by lugonn · · Score: 1
      The coward on cowards...how funny. Where's my ClueBat(tm).

      If he couldn't control his ding-ding, it would've been Divine Brown under his desk and not Lewinsky.

    5. Re:Nothing has changed ... by dynamo · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, voting Libertarian will not do much good -- they will not get elected.

      Fuck you.

      If you insist on only voting for candidates from the list of recently popular parties, YOU are causing the vicious cycle to repeat, and if you would rather see someone from another party get elected, but instead vote for someone you don't think would do as good a job... you really don't deserve the right to vote.

      People who value their right to vote, vote for the person they think is best for the job. Period.

      Start thinking or stop voting! The sooner people get some principles and refuse to vote for anyone who doesn't deserve their vote, even if they are "likely to win", the sooner we will have a real political system in this country.

    6. Re:Nothing has changed ... by kevin+lyda · · Score: 2

      what an excellent and acurate list. if you live in america, please run for office.

      --
      US Citizen living abroad? Register to vote!
    7. Re: Nothing has changed ... by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1


      > How could you trust someone with the most powerful military in the world when he ran to Canada like a coward

      And where did our current War Hero In Chief run to?

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    8. Re: Nothing has changed ... by RatBastard · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      He didn't say George W "Huked on fonix werkt four me!" Bush was any better, did he?

      Clinton deserves all the abuse he gets. As for the idiots that elected his wife, well, I pity them (not so much that I don't openly laugh in their faces).

      --
      Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
    9. Re:Nothing has changed ... by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 2

      ...except for those that require one to admit it is possible for a corporation to do something wrong. That admission isn't allowed by Libertarian dogma.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    10. Re:Nothing has changed ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The anthrax killer is also still at large

      What do you mean "at large"? That the FEDs know who he is but wont press charges because he happens to be white American and a jew?

    11. Re:Nothing has changed ... by guttentag · · Score: 2
      Saudi Arabia is still an evil influence
      Influence is an understatement. Saudi Arabia funds Big Terror.
      Ashcroft is still shredding the constitution
      Technically, no. He paid Andersen to take care of the shredding. He got a great bulk deal on the Constitution and the notes of his meetings with corporate execs.
      Bush the lesser is still an idiot
      It gets worse. He's an idiot who's found his father's nuclear-missile-launching suitcase.
      The Clintons are still being slandered
      That's because Hillary's prancing around the Senate calling for the abolishment of the Electoral College. Being the target of slander is one of the perks of being a public official.
      Gore is still being demonized
      By who? The last time I heard anything about Gore, he had an opinion piece in the NYTimes demonizing Bush.
      The economy is still going south
      At this rate, we'll come out on the other side and start heading North soon... no point turning back now.
      The religious right are still insane
      No, they're officially American mainstream now. It's the people who have a problem with certain words in the pledge who are officially categorized as insane. I liked it better the old way, though.
      Drug companies are still raping the elderly and disabled
      They're not so discriminating. They rape all taxpayers who pay for government-subsidized drugs.
      Star Wars is still a Bad Idea
      No, it's now a quintet of Bad Ideas looking for a sixth member.
      Mother Nature is still NOT HAPPY
      She may be a crotchety biddy, but at least she's not as angry at us as she was at Pompeii.
      Mass media is still supine
      It's not lying on its back, it's just bending over to show us the new boxer shorts it bought at Target, complete with the Target logo on the seat.
    12. Re:Nothing has changed ... by kaybee · · Score: 1
      That is ridiculous. I am a definite libertarian and here is the list of things I distrust/hate (in order):
      1. The government
      2. Dishonest companies (big and small)
      3. People who try to force their way of life on others
      4. People who are hypocrites (most people when it comes to political topics)
      5. Most big companies (they are usually uncaring, tough to deal with, and inefficient)

      I like honest people and good companies... that's about it. The important thing, however, is that the only entry in that list that can force anything on me is the government. People can only force their way of life on me through the government (such as drug laws, sodomy laws, other "bible belt" laws, etc). Some big companies can force themselves on me using the government (government induced monopolies such as utility companies).

      I don't trust the government, people, or corporations. But, if the government has very little power, then none of these groups can force things on me like they can today.

      I hate big corporations as much as the next Slashdotter... but think about this -- rank the companies that you hate the most and then rank them by their amount of goverment regulation/support... the lists will usually be very similar.

      Companies that suck that are usually highly regulated... such as airlines, utilities, etc. Others are supported by the government (such as Microsoft and others that get too much copyright protection from the government). I can't control others and I can't control companies (and I shouldn't, as they should be free to do what they want to). But I can (supposedly) control the government and limit how much power over my life it grants to itself and others.

    13. Re:Nothing has changed ... by kaybee · · Score: 1

      Thank you!

      When you vote for the lesser of two evils, you are supporting that party. Sure, if you voted for the Harry Browne the last election he didn't win... but the other parties notice these votes that they have lost. If the Libertarians keep getting more and more votes, the parties will have to try to make those voters happy to get those votes. When the parties move closer to what you want, then you vote for them... until then, keep voting Libertarian.

    14. Re:Nothing has changed ... by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2

      Who's the fucking asshole who moderated this as troll???

    15. Re:Nothing has changed ... by kaybee · · Score: 1

      Remember -- only the government (and criminals) can force you to do something against your will. The governments most important job is to prosecute those criminals... that's about it.

    16. Re:Nothing has changed ... by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 2

      > Who's the fucking @$$hole who moderated this as troll???

      Well, I wouldn't of put it in those words, but yeah, that's what I was kind of wondering. Guess some people are afraid to face the truth.

    17. Re: Nothing has changed ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He at least spent some time in the military.

      I really wanted McCain, anybody that spent several years in the Hanoi Hilton and survived has my respect. I didn't agree with everything he stood for, but I respect the strength it took to withstand the treatment. Hey, maybe he would nuke Vietnam and put that traitor Jane Fonda in jail for the rest of her miserable existance.

      I don't think that Slick Bill would have lasted a week there with out spilling his guts and making any statement they wanted.

      George W isn't the most impressive guy around, but he wasn't a Democrat. I will never vote for one of those bleeding heart pukes.

      Whoa, way off topic.

    18. Re:Nothing has changed ... by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 2
      rank the companies that you hate the most and then rank them by their amount of goverment regulation/support... the lists will usually be very similar.
      A correlation between A and B is not necassarily a cause-effect relationship, and even if it is, it doesn't tell you which is the cause and which is the effect. In this case, it's just as likely that it's the other way around from what you are implying. I don't think it's that government influence causes the companies to become corrupt. It's that the companies that are already corrupt are more likely to try to influence the government in their favor than ones that aren't.

      And your position with regards to Microsoft is not in agreement with the rest of your party. (yes, *party*. Note I used big-L when I spelled "Libertarian". That was on purpose.)

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

  62. Great article by fluxrad · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I just thought I'd mention this one since it was a great article.

    There was a letter to the editor in this quarter's issue of "2600."

    In it, this guy was talking about how he was pulled off a plane just before it was about to leave the gate because a flight attendant saw him reading an article in 2600 about vulnerabilities in "Passport." She claimed he was reading a terrorist pamphlet.

    The story of course ends with this guy being rescreened after talking to a few spooks and being let back on the plane. Of course, he said his flight was something like 2 hours late at this point.

    Screw the new laws, I'm more worried about the new public attitudes that are letting this kind of shit go down without so much as a second thought.

    --
    "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -David Hume
    1. Re:Great article by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 2
      Screw the new laws, I'm more worried about the new public attitudes that are letting this kind of shit go down without so much as a second thought.

      This is indeed a big concern which people seem to be barely even aware of.

      I was down at the post office the other day, and an old man was trying to get his mail re-directed because he was moving in with his son's family. The guy at the desk wanted several pieces of photo I.D., but the old guy had stopped driving years ago because of his age, and had no driver's license. This was holding up the line.

      At one point, the ancient man said in a quivering old-man's voice, "But I swear to god and hope to die, I am who I say I am!" and the young feller behind the desk actually chuckled at him with mild contempt and said, "Sir, in this day and age, that doesn't carry any weight at all. I need two pieces of photo I.D., or I can't help you."

      The worst part was that everybody in the line up, excluding me, were actually nodding their heads in approval.

      Society is being programmed to accept its own willing imprisonment. The bombings on 9-11 didn't fuck us. The COINTELPRO influenced media coverage fucked us. People are eternally foolish and niave. Fuck 'em. I'm pulling out a lawn chair to watch the end of humanity as we know it. The clock is counting. Less than ten years to go!


      -Fantastic Lad

    2. Re:Great article by geekee · · Score: 1

      Yeah. Let's just go back to pre-9/11 security measurs and see how long before someone crashes a plane into the empire state building just because some guy was a little inconvenienced.

      --
      Vote for Pedro
  63. Airplanes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It has affected me greatly.
    First off, I have an account, but I'm posting as an AC because I don't feel like having some gov't dork knock at my door tonight.
    I am a martial arts expert, specifically with knives, swords, and sticks. I have always carried a knife on the plane with me, just in case something like 9/11 happened. And guess what, it did happen. Had I been on the plane, I may have not been able to take all four terrorists out, but I would have taken out at least one or two, and greatly changed the odds of us all getting out alive.
    Now, I am no longer allowed to carry a knife on the plane, leaving me completely defenseless. From my training, I would not want to take an armed person out unarmed. Realistically, that's almost suicide.
    Security never makes us more safe. In fact, it makes us less safe. Considering most people are "good guys," when you disarm the good guys, you just make it easier for the bad guys to win.
    Nice job, America. Land of the free my ass.

    1. Re:Airplanes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gee, I know someone who's an expert marksman. I guess he should be allowed to carry multiple handguns on all flights. Yup, that would definitely improve everyone's safety!

  64. First of all by dada21 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    First of all, legislation after 9/11 has affected everyone here the same way that ALL legislation has affected us: by expanding government. The only way to pay for an expanded government is by raising taxes (at some level, either income taxes, payroll taxes, tariffs, sales taxes, or other government added fees).

    This means less of MY money is available to spend on what I want to spend it on. Government steals from me to give to their friends (whether its defense contractors, or just the typical pork barrel recipients).

    I read EVERY bill which passes through my Congressional Rep's hands (they're all visible on the web) and I have yet to see any bill yet that really "protects" us.

    Now, my tax dollars are going to be used to help out Dubya's oil buddies when we go to war against Iraq, a country which has shown no provocation against me personally, neither through threats nor transgressions.

    This is the biggest loss I think we all face. The loss of the right to use our hard earned dollars in ways WE INDIVIDUALLY want to. I could care less what my fellow Americans want to do with their money, but when they steal from me for their assinine programs, that's when I start getting angry.

    Maybe soon I'll be saying "Costa Rica, here I come!"

    1. Re:First of all by Uttles · · Score: 2

      Neither through threats or transgressions?

      There is evidence Iraq funded the Al Quaieda network

      There is evidence Saddam is researching intercontinental missiles

      Saddam, this week, publicly threatened the US if any more sanctions were added

      Every other day Iraqi's fire upon US airplanes patrolling the no-fly zones

      I Don't have the evidence to back this up, but I know it's true, and we will all see when this is all over with.

      --

      ~ now you know
    2. Re:First of all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's hilarious listening to a fucking liberal blather about taxation.

      What's a shame is the millions of dollars spent on social security schemes and general doles. What's a shame is the fact that government taxes people who work hard and earn money unfairly compared to those who are just along for a free ride.

    3. Re:First of all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't have evidence, but you *know* its true?? How exactly is that? Do you have ESP? Or, maybe its just that you are naieve enough to believe *everything* our government tells you...

      Ok, ok... trust Dubya... after all, he works hard to put food on his family.

      and... not every "Q" has to have a "U" after it, y'know. Al Quaieda?? Never heard of them... perhaps you read about them in your immense readings and study on the subject of Ice Cream or something?

    4. Re:First of all by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2
      I Don't have the evidence to back this up, but I know it's true, and we will all see when this is all over with.
      Well, 'till then, just shut the fuck up. You'll make the americans look just a tiny little bit smarter.
    5. Re:First of all by benjamindees · · Score: 1

      um, he's a Liber-tarian. he's as much against that as you are. try reading this and getting back to us.

      --
      "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
    6. Re:First of all by Kerry+1123 · · Score: 1

      Neither through threats or transgressions.
      There is evidence of a lot of things out there, but I guess it just sounds more 'patriotic' to only follow the weak leads these days. Myself, I prefer a more discriminating attitude towards the facts and fantasies..

      For example:

      Every other day Iraqi's fire upon US airplanes patrolling the no-fly zones
      Ok. This is something that seems (at first face) to be kin to the truth.. Iraqi AA batteries have (at least once in the past couple of years) made the paper for taking shots at US jets. They haven't done a great job of hitting the vehicles, but they've made a visible objection of foreign authority over their sovereign airspace. It'd be a stronger argument if it weren't for the fact that (whether or not they have the tech) this AA fire has been most effective only in the 'visible objection' realm. Assuming it happens more regularly than it is reported in US mass media (because otherwise this is a non-point), and it _isn't_ downing patrolling jets (because we'd certainly hear about that in this day and age), the fact that it continues implies a different significance than 'we will threaten you'-- it implies 'we refuse to submit to you' (your authority over our airspace).
      That's a pretty important act to a country attempting to maintain itself under blockade. It's important from a domestic as well as a diplomatic perspective for a military regime's image, and in that respect is similar in a lot of ways to running up a national flag.

      Hitting other points,

      There is evidence Iraq funded the Al Quaieda network
      Ignoring the 'I haven't seen it' counterclaim which comes to mind, and the questions of 'how' and 'when'.. especially keeping in mind the supposed blockade of Iraq, I instead look to the bigger points which lie parallel to this statement..
      The second (or third, depending on how you run the vote) biggest demon that got painted by the USA in this matter has been the Taliban. The Taliban was so villainous (sayeth the media) that beyond any issues of human rights, it openly fostered 'terrorist networks'-- notably Al Qaeda. So villainous that the United States was forced to stage air assaults on a foreign power and entertain shades of kingmaking with a revolution in progress half a world away.
      So villainous that the United States was one of two countries (As far as I can recall (2000-2001 winter)) to have officially recognized it's sovereignty. So villainous that going into 2001, the US government paid Afghanistan for the heroin and opium which theydidn't produce (according to the figures submitted by the interested partyin terms of reduction of exportation). So villainous that it's reign was supported, up until last fall, by the notorious USA, who during the cold war (by and large) invented the heroin trade as a weapon against Soviet incursion and worked to train many of those who became this year's sensation.
      So what sort of support could Iraq have mustered to make our own disappear? Ignoring entirely issues of the support to 'terror' by other countries, what sort of wetnurse could Iraq have been over the past decade to the 'child' of the US and USSR's cold war.

      I can't really comment on the 'This Week..' statement, as I'm unable to find any direct statements of threat referenced in the NY Times or in CNN's archives. Perhaps Uttles is referring to the statements from the Iraqi VP urging

      "all the Arab masses" to "confront the material and human interests of the aggressors wherever they are found."
      -Reuters 9/10/02, cited from New York Times archived article
      in response to the threat of the US moving a quarter million troops or more in war.

      Wrapping up with the statement

      There is evidence Saddam is researching intercontinental missiles
      I'll go out on shaky ground and suggest that were there hard evidence of an ICBM program available, the National debate would be running a little differently. I don't have citations as to the unanimity (or lack there-of) in opinion held by UN Weapons Inspectors, so pitch that point if you will;(if anyone has a link to dissenting opinion, please post a followup, I know that I've seen one out there but I don't have the link) however, I suggest that the following quotation is probably closer to the current hard evidence on whether or not Iraq has nuclear warheads to use in ICBMs:
      Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) says the CIA has "absolutely no evidence" that Iraq possesses or will soon possess nuclear weapons.
      http://www.moveon.org/nowar/

      In closing, threats aren't enough, and transgressions aren't enough.. Even to quote Kissinger (hardly a dove)

      "The notion of justified pre- emption runs counter to modern international law, which sanctions the use of force in self-defense only against actual -- not potential -- threats."
      (same as previous)
      We need more than a 'bad feeling' to be able to claim any sort of justifiable action.
      we will all see when this is all over with.
      I suppose we will. Here's hoping for the best
    7. Re:First of all by sql*kitten · · Score: 2

      There is evidence Iraq funded the Al Quaieda network

      Newsflash: every SUV-driving American has probably funded the al-Queda network. The most patriotic thing any American can do is to leave the car at home and walk. But you funnel billions of dollars a year to the Middle East and think that a flag bumper sticker makes you a patriot.

      There is evidence Saddam is researching intercontinental missiles

      Really? Last I heard the US was accusing North Korea of selling components to Iraq. You know, North Korea, part of the "axis of evil"? It has an active WMD programme, but no "regime change" seems to be needed there. So we can easily conclude that the missile argument is a red herring.

      Saddam, this week, publicly threatened the US if any more sanctions were added

      No, if the US attacked him.

      Every other day Iraqi's fire upon US airplanes patrolling the no-fly zones

      Why the hell not? It's their country!

      I Don't have the evidence to back this up, but I know it's true

      Yeah, like Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.

  65. Eyeball to Eyeball with the Feds by 0x0d0a · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now, which is more difficult to bare? The inconvenience of the search, or another 9/11 style attack?

    Definitely the 9/11 style attack. I constantly live in fear that terrorists will smuggle a Boeing 757 (fully loaded with jet fuel) into the US from Canada in their car trunk. They'll then go to a public library, and after checking out books like "How to Blow Up Big Buildings with Commercial Airliners", they'll rent out a fleet of crop-sprayers over the Internet, using PGP. They'll tow the 757 to an airstrip using this fleet of crop-sprayers (conserving the 757's fuel for a really big explosion). They'll then suspiciously mill around the plane for a while in plain view of the neighbors with signs up saying "Die America" and "Kablooie Empire State Building". After a while, they'll take off and ram into the Empire State building.

    Fortunately, the federal government has forseen this chain of events, and taken prompt action to stop the terrorists at any point.

    (My apologies: I couldn't manage to somehow work in a number of federal stupidities like the uncomfortably KGB-like and extremely expensive Office of Homeland Security and the stupid regs that made an aircraft attendant make my father break the apparently deadly file off his nail clippers in his toiletries kit.)

    1. Re:Eyeball to Eyeball with the Feds by reallocate · · Score: 2

      Too bad about your dad and his nail clippers. Guess both of you missed the notices banning them from airplanes. Practices like this have been common in other countries for years. They had their reasons. Now we have ours.

      There are more people willing to kill you just for being born where you born than you can imagine. Even spoiled brats like you.

      --
      -- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
    2. Re:Eyeball to Eyeball with the Feds by Wakko+Warner · · Score: 3, Funny

      Too bad about your dad and his nail clippers. Guess both of you missed the notices banning them from airplanes. Practices like this have been common in other countries for years. They had their reasons. Now we have ours.

      Show me how to kill a man with nail clippers, and I'll try it on you just to see if you're right.

      - A.P.

      --
      "Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
    3. Re:Eyeball to Eyeball with the Feds by chimpo13 · · Score: 1


      Oh yeah, my favorite is they're banning transformers on planes. I hear The Man is worried about my Deciptacons taking over a 747.

      Let the Beast Wars begin!

    4. Re:Eyeball to Eyeball with the Feds by Dalcius · · Score: 1

      There are more people willing to kill you just for being born where you born than you can imagine

      Amazing. So, if there are all these terrorists on every corner, why haven't I heard about anyone blowing themselves up in a theatre in the US? It's not like it's difficult to make some TNT and walk into a movie theatre.

      --
      ~Dalcius
      Rome wasn't burnt in a day.
    5. Re:Eyeball to Eyeball with the Feds by RobinH · · Score: 2

      Actually, Northwest still has signs posted which say that nail files are allowed, and I have STILL had them confiscated twice. Not only that, but you can buy them after the security check in the terminal! I think that the shops just have a deal with the security guys.

      --
      "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
    6. Re:Eyeball to Eyeball with the Feds by true_majik · · Score: 1
      Too bad about your dad and his nail clippers. Guess both of you missed the notices banning them from airplanes.

      I was at the Oakland International airport just last month. I walked into the very first store _after_ passing through the security check point for some souvenirs. The first thing I saw was a rack full of nail clippers, razors, and other items I thought were not allowed. So, I'm a little confused. =T

    7. Re:Eyeball to Eyeball with the Feds by brunes69 · · Score: 2

      You realize I can kill someone with a belt buckle alot easier than nail clippers by jabbing the sharp point of it into their jugular. For that matter, alot of women i know could do the same with their fingernails. These spot checks are retarded, they dont prevent anyone willing to go the mile to take down a plane All they do is inconvience everyone.

    8. Re:Eyeball to Eyeball with the Feds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they'll rent out a fleet of crop-sprayers over the Internet, using PGP

      AAHH! PGP!!! they're spraying us with PRETTY GOOD PRIVACY!!! aaahhh!!!

    9. Re:Eyeball to Eyeball with the Feds by machine+of+god · · Score: 1
      They'll then suspiciously mill around the plane for a while in plain view of the neighbors with signs up saying "Die America" and "Kablooie Empire State Building". After a while, they'll take off and ram into the Empire State building.

      While shooting their their guns in the air. (Maybe I watch too much tv. CNN I mean.) On an even furthur unrelated note, I wonder how many parties/terrorist plots are ruined by falling bullets. I bet it's a lot.

    10. Re:Eyeball to Eyeball with the Feds by reallocate · · Score: 2

      It's the file on the clippers that's at issue. With a few minutes effort, you can turn itinto a nice little blade.

      Agree that the random checks are inconvenient. And that sophisticated and suicidal terrorists may not be caught. But if it deters even one not-so-sophisticated terrorist, I'm OK with it.

      Since 9/11, in U.S. airports, I've been patted down, asked to remove my shoes and belt; had my carry-on thoroughly searched. All that, and more, also happened years before in flights to, from and within other countries. In some countries, you couldn't get into a shopping mall or other public venue without having being patted down, opening anything you were carrying, and being scanned by a portable metal dectector. All done in direct response to acts of terror by someone who wasn't checked or scanned.

      Now, the threat is here, too. Damn inconvenient, but so is being murdered.

      --
      -- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
    11. Re:Eyeball to Eyeball with the Feds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      One of the basic underpinnings of a working society is that it is easy to kill someone. Yes, re-read that -- a certain amount of trust has to be put into other people for a society to work. Your neighbor could easily kill you and your whole family every moening of every day. You need to pat him down and confiscate his nail clippers to?

    12. Re:Eyeball to Eyeball with the Feds by reallocate · · Score: 2

      Irrelevant. My neighbor's house isn't an airport occupied by hundreds of thousands of strangers every year.

      --
      -- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
    13. Re:Eyeball to Eyeball with the Feds by GigsVT · · Score: 2

      With a few minutes effort, you can turn itinto a nice little blade.

      Oh yeah, sharpening a nail file into a blade with the whetstone you happened to carry with you won't attract any attention. God, get real. Have you ever put an egde onto a completely dull piece of metal before? Even with a grinder it takes several minutes to get anything resembling a sharp instrument.

      High strength composites would allow a person to carry a blade onto a plane without being detected at all through a metal detector, and the only way it would be found is a strip search.

      You may be willing to sell my freedom for your false sense of security, but I sure as hell am not willing to give it up. I would rather risk my life for it. People like you are an insult to all the people who died protecting this country.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    14. Re:Eyeball to Eyeball with the Feds by danamania · · Score: 2

      On an even furthur unrelated note, I wonder how many parties/terrorist plots are ruined by falling bullets. I bet it's a lot.

      If it happens in the US from time to time (the link mentions 2 injuries in one year in one county) I'd guess that yes, it comes up from time to time. Wouldn't you feel silly...

      a grrl & her server

    15. Re:Eyeball to Eyeball with the Feds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      El Al (the Israeli national carrier) has had to deal with the hijack problem for many more years, and is considerably more sophisticated in its approaches. I remember reading an interview with a Mossad representative, who was rather bemused by the confiscation of nail clippers and knitting needles: he knew of ways to take over a plane using a credit card with a sharpened edge. This is why El Al uses reinforced doors and armed guards. The US airport precautions, on the other hand, are designed to make people reassured (by their visibility and intrusiveness), but not to be effective (since the latter would require spending serious money, which the airlines don't have).

    16. Re:Eyeball to Eyeball with the Feds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Irrelevant. My neighbor's house isn't an airport occupied by hundreds of thousands of strangers every year.

      Every major highway is occupied by hundreds of thousands of strangers every year. Maybe we should have checkpoints every few miles?
    17. Re:Eyeball to Eyeball with the Feds by Rainey · · Score: 1

      Irrelevant. My neighbor's house isn't an airport occupied by hundreds of thousands of strangers every year.


      That may be so but the street the house is located on may be walked upon by the same hundreds of thousands of strangers. There aren't random searches for nail files for passers-by.

      Rainey

      --
      Rainey That's the person not the weather condition!
    18. Re:Eyeball to Eyeball with the Feds by alatesystems · · Score: 1

      Transformers!
      Terrorists in Disguise.

    19. Re:Eyeball to Eyeball with the Feds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      While shooting their their guns in the air. (Maybe I watch too much tv. CNN I mean.)

      I love how they keep showing that one shot of Saddam firing a gun. ohhh, he's a bad bad man. Booo. Hisss. Our media is truly despicable and I pity the fools that don't realise it.

    20. Re:Eyeball to Eyeball with the Feds by lobsterGun · · Score: 1

      You can kill with just about anything. It's a question of applying the proper force to the prope area.

      G. Gordon Liddy made a similar statement on the Dick Cavet show. Cavet scoffed at him until Liddy described how he could kill him with a soda straw. Then Cavet shut up.

    21. Re:Eyeball to Eyeball with the Feds by lobsterGun · · Score: 1

      some day I will learn to use the preview button right....

      continuing...
      But I see your point. Restrictions on nail clippers are just plain stupid. If there were to remove all dangerous items from the plane, the people on boar would have to be naked and sedated.

    22. Re:Eyeball to Eyeball with the Feds by Wakko+Warner · · Score: 2

      If there were to remove all dangerous items from the plane, the people on boar would have to be naked and sedated.

      That actually sounds enjoyable.

      "Welcome to TWA flight 420: Strap me in, tie me down, and roll me a bone."

      - A.P.

      --
      "Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
    23. Re:Eyeball to Eyeball with the Feds by jafac · · Score: 2

      If all I had on me were a pair of nail clippers, and if I had to kill somebody, I'd use my bare hands. Same goes for ANY pocket knife with a blade less than 2"

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    24. Re:Eyeball to Eyeball with the Feds by unitron · · Score: 2
      "Maybe we should have checkpoints every few miles?"

      What do you think highway patrolmen (and women) are?

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

  66. Surprising...or maybe not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are a great many POTENTIAL effects that have not come to pass for me personally. This is not surprising.

    What surprised me, though, is that I was able to come up with many examples of how Microsoft's business practices specifically and significantly impacted my life in a negative way -- many more examples than I could produce for the impact of the "War On Terrorism" (during daily life).

    Perhaps that's why so many people complain about Microsoft's business practices -- they actually have a significant and measurable impact on our lives.

    (anticipating an off-topic mod, and a deserved one, but I >was surprised to realize it)

  67. Things have changed in airline IT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I've had to undergo a federal background check, been fingerprinted at work, got the "whiz quiz", the whole nine yards. And I'm a blue-eyed Minnesotan by birth, doing IT for a small regional airline (small turbo-prop planes only). I would imagine IT in bigger airlines have gone through even more security and background checking. (My HR gal actually kidded me about my younger years when she finished my background check)

  68. Effects? by YDdraig · · Score: 1

    I'm in the UK and can't say it's really affected my day to day life. The extra security precautions at airports I've heard about don't really suprise me. In fact the last time I was over in the US (before Sept11) I was more suprised by the total lack of any serious security on internal flights. (Well that and the 'Are you or have you ever been involved in terrorism' tick-box on the visa form - do they really catch any incredibly stupid terrorists that way?) I do however have new awe for the ability of certain segments of the American population to turn anything into a marketing opportunity.

    1. Re:Effects? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm in the UK too. I'd have to agree that in the narrow sense it hasn't affected my day-to-day life (except for the effect on the jobs market, which is of some importance to me at the moment). However, did anyone else notice that Bill that was rammed through Parliament recently, and which seemed to contain the following provisions among others:


      • Non British citizens may be detained indefinitely without trial
      • British citizenship may be withdrawn (I think also without trial).

      Note also that this was introduced by a Government that was, at the same time, releasing known terrorists (in Northern Ireland) from prison. This disproves their assertion that the new legislation has to do with a general "war on terrorism".

  69. Obvious - You Are A Potential Enemy Combatant..... by isotope23 · · Score: 1

    But now thanks to the All-American Patriot Act, we can monitor you and other potential thought criminals and no longer care if you whine.

    This Message Brought to you by the
    Office of Homeland Security,

    "Making Today a Better Place Tomorrow!"

    --
    Service guarantees Citizenship! Questions Guarantee GITMO.... Amerika Uber Alles!
  70. Legislation? by jedie · · Score: 0
    Who gives a hoot about legislation when 9/11 affected the society we live in?
    Try being a foreigner (actually I was born in .be, but that doesn't seem to matter...) in a country where people are more and more eager to think in ways of right-extremists. Post-9/11 society has become more paranoia and xenophobic than ever: every Muslim is associated with Taliban and Terrorism (the new buzzword)

    You can make laws to prevent (racial) discrimination but what good are they when the people you live among are becoming anti-muslim? You can't force people to like eachother and you sure as hell can't force them to be more intelligent, that's my concern...

    I want to feel at home in this country, *my* country (I was born here damn you!) When that happens, I'll start concerning myself about the privacy part.

    --
    "The majority is always sane, Louis." -- Nessus
    http://slashdot.jp
  71. How has it affected me? Two words: by J'raxis · · Score: 1

    I'm leaving.

    1. Re:How has it affected me? Two words: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get the fuck out already then.

    2. Re:How has it affected me? Two words: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's people like you that make America great. If only more people like you were in those towers a year ago...

  72. They've seized so much power! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The current administration has seized so much power that jack-booted thugs knock down doors in the middle of the night and - at gunpoint - carry away a crying eight-year-old in a move so brutish it's condemned by Fidel Castro.

    Things sure have gotten bad....

    1. Re:They've seized so much power! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The current administration has seized so much power that jack-booted thugs knock down doors in the middle of the night and - at gunpoint - carry away a crying eight-year-old in a move so brutish it's condemned by Fidel Castro.

      uhh... moron... that was Janet Reno, under Bill Clinton's administration.

  73. Life unchanged by Trinition · · Score: 2

    Sure, I'm agitated by the short-sighted legislation sucking away our rights, our myopic foreign policies, go-it-yourself tactics as a nation, etc... But, you know what? My actual life is unchanged. No one I knew died in the terrorist attacks. The lesser freedoms haven't had an inkling of impact on what I do. I don't feel any more safe (the security changes are pointless). I don't feel any less safe either, though. I don't even feel more patriotic. It's just the same. Maybe I'm lucky?

    BRB, John Ashcroft is at my door with a one-way ticket to Camp X-Ray...

    1. Re:Life unchanged by jafac · · Score: 2

      BRB, John Ashcroft is at my door with a one-way ticket to Camp X-Ray...

      - - -
      Actually, I'm waiting until November or so before I start speaking out, I want the hurricane season to wind down, and I hear Cuba's weather's really nice around Christmas time.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
  74. Waiting for Citizen's Corp in my neighborhood by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Two arab families have just moved into my neighborhood. Hell, they have got to be terrorists.. As soon as the local citizens corp opens a branch in my neighborhood, I will be reporting them.

  75. Not sure if this is due to legislation. by helixblue · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The Triangle Mac Users Group meetings are held at the EPA building here in Durham. ~50(?) Mac geeks toting around laptops talking in a small conference room with a projector. No big deal.

    Now, in order to get into the visitors area of EPA building where the "theatre" is, we have to fill out visitor cards with our name, address, phone number, etc. Then we have to fill out a check-in sheet with the guard (with our name, address, phone number, etc).. This isn't too bad, but a bit unusual for 50 people having to fill in to talk about their hobby.

    The clincher is we've got a 3rd peice of paperwork to fill out now: Our laptop information. Brand, Model, Serial Number, Name, Address, Phone number, etc. Of course, no one has their serial numbers memorized, so it's time to bust out the laptop bags.

    I can somewhat understand since it's in a "government" building - but this is a bit overboard for a hobbyist group meeting. It's worse than going to the airport - picture 50 geeks in line to fill out 3 peices of paperwork, and only 1 of them brought a pen!

    Enough ranting now I guess.. I'm gonna have to recommend we meet in McDonalds next time or something.

    1. Re:Not sure if this is due to legislation. by reallocate · · Score: 2

      That sounds pretty much like SOP in many other gov't installations before 9/11. Visitors wouldn't get in unless met and accompanied at all times by someone working in the building, and hardware was checked and tracked coming and going.

      They want to make sure that anyone who enters has a legitimate reason to be there, that everyone who enters actually leaves, and that every piece of hardware that goes in with someone goes out with them.

      It really isn't a matter of someone thinking a Mac users group is likely to harbor terrorists. They could pose a threat in other ways. E.g. real terrorists could kidnap and threaten a member's family unless he or she carried their laptop into the building. That's not as farfetched as it may seem; the technique has been used by terrorists in Northern Ireland.

      --
      -- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
    2. Re:Not sure if this is due to legislation. by DDX_2002 · · Score: 1

      Well, there's also the potential to find an open network port, jack in the laptop, leave it hidden there and suddenly you have a machine on their network. Nice if they can track it back to you. Not that a hacker would use their own name/SN.

      --
      MHO. YMMV. Any resemblance between this post and real persons, or reality in general, was accidental.
    3. Re:Not sure if this is due to legislation. by reallocate · · Score: 2

      True, but the worry is about a bomb in a laptop, not about someone breaking into an unclassified network.

      --
      -- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
    4. Re:Not sure if this is due to legislation. by mrmag00 · · Score: 1

      But when the terrorist (or threatened US citizen) is placed with the sheet of paper where he has to write down the model number of the laptop, he surely will fumble.

      Think about it. What stops me from lieing? What stops me from replacing one of the removable floppy drives with a small explosive that has the same front cover as a floppy drive? Or replacing the harddrive? The laptop will still start up.

      Its pointless. At local military bases, they require to look under your hood of your car if you want to drive in. Understandable, but they look for maybe 5 seconds max. Unless you've replaced your entire engine with a bomb, they wouldn't notice a thing. Its useless security checks that take peoples time but would do absolutely nothing for a person determined to get in.

      And the 9/11 hijackers were simply brilliant. They took a hole in the system and (almost) flawlessly exploited it. You would have never thought that sombody would REALLY run an airplane into a building in order to blow it up, but it happened.

    5. Re:Not sure if this is due to legislation. by randmairs · · Score: 1

      As one of the people who is responsible for Gov't laptops, the policy you sight helps me. I'm the one who fills out the reports/e-mails, etc. when a piece of equipment walks off. The 3rd piece of paperwork just says that you walked into the building with YOUR laptop and if stopped on the way out you have a piece of paper that says that machine is YOURS. Otherwise, IF stopped, you're going to have a nice long conversation with security until you can PROVE that it is your laptop. Get my drift? Same thing if you can't prove that I gave you permission to drive my car when you are pulled over by the cops. Can you say suspicion of "Grand Theft Auto"? How would they know? Really. By the way how did you get to reserve and use a government facility for a "non-governmental" user's group meeting? I was turned down when trying to get a Linux meeting schedule there. Inquiring minds want to know....

    6. Re:Not sure if this is due to legislation. by reallocate · · Score: 2

      Nothing stops you from lieing, but no real security regime is going to take your word for anything, anyway. If the threat at the EPA in the Triangle is sufficient, they'll likely start x-raying hardware or banning it altogther.

      The 5-second checks at your local base are intended to be a deterrent, not a foolproof net. It gives the guards enough time to match you and your vehicle to any current warnings. It also allows them, I'd suspect, to get a photo as you drive through.

      Not every terrorist is bent on suicide, They're just as likely to plant a bomb in someone else's car. I've lived in places where people died because someone did just that and where, at the local embassy's recommendation, I checked under the hood and under the car with a mirror everytime I started my car.

      --
      -- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
  76. Not much.... by helix400 · · Score: 1
    The only change I've noticed are articles on news sites proclaiming:

    "Freedom of expression being oppressed! War on Terrorism to blame!"

    My life is great. I haven't noticed a bit of difference. Nobody I've talked to has ever complained about any freedom of speech problems. I completely forget that its an issue until I visit yahoo.com only to see its one of the for "major" news stories of the day.

    I seems 9/11 has only changed journalist's fears.

  77. Reason seems to have stopped in the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    In The Netherlands, we 'feel' the direct threat of the US: your congress has signed an act that they preserve the right to *invade* the netherlands in the event any American will be brought before the new international court of justice over here in the Hague. A bit laughable and a side show, but it exemplifies the attitude of Bush et al, unleashed by 9/11: insulting the world in every way they can. Silly.

    When do the american people regain their ability to think for themselves? Bin Laden is still having a field day.

    1. Re:Reason seems to have stopped in the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you are claiming the right to try americans, not for things they did *in the Netherlands*, but for things they did anywhere in the world, often at the behest of European "allies."

      Next time Dutch soldiers are partying while Muslims are slaughtered in the next Szebritza or your countries tanks get stolen by 2-bit european dictators for use in killing more minorities, don't ask us for help. Because we're not willing to sacrifice one or two soldiers to some kangaroo court so you fags can pat yourselves on the back about how advanced you are.

      Hey, have the Germans presured your country into taking away all your pistols yet ? Hopefully the EU will soon do that. To make it easier when we liberate your damn country for the 3d time in a hundred years.

    2. Re:Reason seems to have stopped in the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [Yadda yadda yadda]

      Are you defending the right of stupidity, eh? ('You have been stupid bin the past, so may we.')

      You forget that 77 countries have already signed for the international court of justice. The rate of which has been increased by the attitude of the American government.

      Now, go and stick some pins in your Bin Laden Voodoo Doll.

    3. Re:Reason seems to have stopped in the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So please explain why exactly we should honor the authority of the "international court of justice".

    4. Re:Reason seems to have stopped in the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You forget that 77 countries have already signed for the international court of justice. The rate of which has been increased by the attitude of the American government.

      Good. Now you know why we're not going along with it. And a big "Fuck You" to all of the anti-American countries that signed on just for that reason. It just shows what their priorities are, and why we want nothing to do with that illegitimate court.

    5. Re:Reason seems to have stopped in the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Simple: it's a first attempt to get just at that: international justice. It's only meant against war crimes. It's far from the perfect solution ofcourse, but, it's a start. And guess what: you don't *have* to honor it, just by not signing it. Which the US never did.
      Fair enough, but that's not the point I'm
      getting at.

      On top of that, came that stupid law passed by the US congress, and their efforts to sign agreements with separate countries not to hand American citizens over to the ICOJ. This only serves as an example of the signals the US is consistently broadcasting to the outside world since the start of the Bush presidency: that the rest of the world doesn't really matter.

      Whoa! That is a perfect way to keep your friends and allies in the world. Not.

    6. Re:Reason seems to have stopped in the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [ yadda yadda yadda again ]

      Guess what, your government hasn't, by not signing it. Which I wasn't objecting against.

      I suggest you go to bed early, you have a long day of mourning ahead. Wrapped in an american flag and crying like a palestinian widow, I guess.

    7. Re:Reason seems to have stopped in the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the US were holding you baselessly, wouldn't you want your government to come in and rescue you?

    8. Re:Reason seems to have stopped in the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For someone with so much apparent hate for the US, you sure let our media influence you a lot. Hint: Nobody here really gives a damn about 9/11(tm) anymore. Life goes on, so why should we care?

    9. Re:Reason seems to have stopped in the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For someone with so much apparent hate for the US

      Hate? Me? Never. Only some irritation because of the replies I got. On my original posting.

    10. Re:Reason seems to have stopped in the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Huhu, very knee-jerk. Was the US planning to commit any war crimes then?

      War crimes: think Yugoslavia, think Rwanda, thin Iraq.

    11. Re:Reason seems to have stopped in the US by benjamindees · · Score: 1
      ha! i was going to reply to the parent of this, but this is hilarious!

      i'll just say that we'll keep our despot from trying your citizens in monkey-court if you promise to do the same.

      --
      "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
    12. Re:Reason seems to have stopped in the US by Kerry+1123 · · Score: 1

      Hate to touch the flame bait, but

      Hint: Nobody here really gives a damn about 9/11(tm) anymore. Life goes on, so why should we care?
      Ok. So you don't care. I can even sympathize. But might I ask if you've been living around Washington DC/Northern VA in the past year? Heard the war-drums still thumping away? That's the thing about living in a big country.. it's hard to make statements about 'Nobody over here' or 'Everybody' and be taken seriously.
      It's true that there's always a lot of 'big news' going down, and one risks getting numbed. Nonetheless, the 'why should we care' often turns out to have the answer 'so that it's less likely to happen again'.
  78. What Civil Lib Groups? by DAldredge · · Score: 1

    I would love to but most/all of them are selective in which rights they support. A

    While I had a job I gave several hundred dollars to the EFF and I planed to give about $500.00 to in October but that money went to 9/11.

  79. Perceptions Have Changed by __aadhrk6380 · · Score: 1

    Nothing in my day to day routine has changed. I get up, go to work, come home, whatever. But my perceptions have changed, just like most people in the States. I am more aware of external criticism, of U.S. bashing, of the hundreds of billions of dollars we send abroad in aid to other countries, and our soldiers that serve (and die) as peace keepers.

    I am also aware that these two things don't add up. People don't want the US to be the worlds policeman, but they bitch when we aren't (or not where they want us). People make remarks like "The US created the Al Qaeda because of their policies" while their countries are sucking at the US teat.

    Then, after 9/11, when the US tries to find a way to reign in public infrastructures that are being used against it to murder our citizens, I hear international outrage. I hear about those poor International citizens in the Al Qaeda army being held in Guantanamo Bay not having trials yet. They are not being treated according to US principles. No chit, they aren't US citizens! They are combatants from a foreign Army.

    9/11 wasn't a tragedy, it was an atrocity. It was murder on a grand scale. When I hear people take the tone of ::shrug:: So what, worse has happened :: I wonder if worse has happened to them. Has worse happened in their country? Or perhaps their country has been one of those that perpetrated worse things in the past. Either way.

    I will keep a close eye on personal freedoms guaranteed by the constitution, and complain out loud when I think they cross the line. Hey, the US Government is simply trying to defend the lives of it's citizens, which is what its responsibility.

    I don't feel that the US should act as a maverick, nor do I think they will. Tomorrow (September 11, 2002) will be a day where I remember 3,000 souls murdered in a senseless act of cowardice that not a single one of them personally asked for. When I weigh, at this point in an on-going process of evaluation, my personal freedoms of today versus a year ago, I would say that I am comfortable with where I am at.

    No, post 9/11 actions and policies haven't affected my daily routine. But my eyes sure have been opened.

    1. Re:Perceptions Have Changed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uhh...actually, we spend about $10 billion a year in non-military foreign aid. About 30% of this goes to Israel. This is 0.5% of the budget. You read that right zero-point-five percent, as in one-half of one percent. Now, you seem like a nice person, but I just want to make sure you have your facts straight.

    2. Re:Perceptions Have Changed by __aadhrk6380 · · Score: 1

      I gracefully accept the correction of an anonymous coward. The sentiment of my original post remains.

    3. Re:Perceptions Have Changed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Has worse happened in their country?

      yes, World War II

  80. USA Patriot Act by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Here's an example of how law enforcement is using the USA Patriot Act: A few months ago, the FBI obtained my significant other's name, address and bank information from his ISP then specifically instructed the ISP not to inform him, in violation of its own privacy policy. This would not have been possible before the USA Patriot Act. This information led to a search of our apartment and the seizing of our computers (which have not been returned even though it is two months past the return date specificed in the warrant). Why? Well, the investigation has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism, cyber or otherwise. The USA Patriot Act was invoked because the MPAA filed a complaint with the FBI for alleged copyright violations.

    I'm SO glad this law is being used for its intended purposes. People who have no problems giving up their civil liberties in the name of "homeland security" are sadly mistaken if they think law enforcement has either the ability or desire to restrain themselves from misusing/abusing their new powers.

  81. You know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Every sack I bought came straight from America. I've put lots of people through college.

  82. Foreign power? by TKinias · · Score: 1

    From the article:

    The U.S.A. Patriot Act let the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI...) monitor e-mail traffic of people suspected of contacts with a foreign power,...

    Foreign power? What's that supposed to mean? If in the course of my research in European history, I e-mail someone at the Bibliothèque nationale in Paris (certainly an agent of a foreign power -- the French Republic!), I am a criminal? When will people wake up and realize that human civilization doesn't end at the U.S. borders . . .

    God forbid that I studied mediaeval Islam and wanted to correspond with experts on the Abbasid Caliphate in Baghdad!

    --
    In principio creauit Linus Linucem.
  83. i don't fly, i encrypt, and i'm moving by aminorex · · Score: 2

    i don't fly anymore, because i will not cooperate
    with the systematic destruction of constitutionally
    protected human rights.

    i also encrypt almost all of my email now, since
    it is much more likely to be snooped.

    finally, i'm planning on leaving the country at
    the end of the year.

    --
    -I like my women like I like my tea: green-
  84. It's affected me quite a bit, and I'm pissed. by Wakko+Warner · · Score: 5, Funny

    I can no longer mail anthrax. This has effectively killed off one of my favorite pranks.

    - A.P.

    --
    "Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
    1. Re:It's affected me quite a bit, and I'm pissed. by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2
      Do you have one of the shittiest sigs on slashdot?
      Hey, Wakko, how do you like my new .sig???
    2. Re:It's affected me quite a bit, and I'm pissed. by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      I can no longer mail anthrax. This has effectively killed off one of my favorite pranks."

      Hah! That was good =)

      Not only that, but I made his worst sigs page finally!! You should notify ppl when you do that!

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    3. Re:It's affected me quite a bit, and I'm pissed. by Trespass · · Score: 1

      Their last album sucked, anyhow.

  85. In New Zealand by hengist · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Before the events of September 12 (as it was here, we're 16 hours ahead of the USA), there was absolutely no security on domestic flights. No x-ray, metal detectors, nothing. There's never been a highjacking here, so we didn't think we needed any. Now, all of the major centres have security checking. The airport security is administered by the government, as well, not private companies.

    In May, I travelled to Honolulu for a conference. I flew directly from Auckland to Honolulu. At Auckland, on the way out, I had to go through two sets of metal detectors and x-rays, as well as a search of my carry-on luggage (although that may have been because I was carrying a plastic poster roll). When I flew from Honolulu back to Auckland, there was just a single metal detector and a single x-ray, and no-one searched my poster roll, which I was still carrying. In short, the security for international flights in New Zealand was much better than in Hawaii.

    1. Re:In New Zealand by Derring · · Score: 1
      I just visited friends and family back in the US. The kindly old gentleman at the Auckland airport kept apologising while taking apart and searching my check-in luggage. He said the FAA insisted on them searching however so many passengers on flights to the US. And he admitted that he thought it was pretty useless.

      Once I got to the US however, it was a different story. Apparently, all mall security guards have been promoted to airport security. These guys loved every minute of it and never bothered apologising. Especially memorable was the guy security wanding the little 3 year old girl for about a full minute. This is one of the worst parts of the whole panic - giving ordinary shmucks significant, yet arbitrary power over law-abiding citizens. And I still heard the stories like my mom getting on to a plane with a long, sharp penknife in her handbag that she forgot about.

      In comparison, I took a train from San Diego to LA - and it was blissful. I got there late with only 5 minutes until departure. It took me 30 seconds to buy my $18 ticket, and 4.5 minutes to wait for the train. Nothing else was involved. And to top it off, there was a power outlet at every seat, so I got 2 hours of quality coding done during the ride.

      But anyway, even when NZ is forced to do the same thing that the US does, they do it in a human and reasonable way - as opposed to being dickheads about it.

    2. Re:In New Zealand by Forkenhoppen · · Score: 2, Funny

      In short, the security for international flights in New Zealand was much better than in Hawaii.

      Oh c'mon... who'd bomb Hawaii!?!

      ; )

    3. Re:In New Zealand by HillBilly · · Score: 1

      Last decemeber I went to Mexico city(via L.A) from Sydney.

      Leaving Sydney: Go thru immigration, then X-ray and bag search. Before I could get near the Gate Lounge I had my bag searched again and x-rayed.

      On the way home from L.A to Sydney. Line up for hours at check in. Ask help to get thru secruity or I would miss my flight, since that line was out the door. ( The soldiers were amusing. They were so bored and about to fall asleep they looked like they would shoot us all for something to do.) Once I got thru secruity. I ran to my gate and on to the plane. It was 10:30pm. and the plan left at 10:30. Got to my seat, but not without some death stares. Then they annouce that the flight will be delayed an hour because some people missed their flights(stuck in security no doubt) and their bags will have to be removed. Still got in Sydney on time tho.

      --
      "Go into the hall of mirrors and have a bloody hard look at yourself" - HG Nelson
    4. Re:In New Zealand by kinko · · Score: 2

      Same here. It is because it is required by the US FAA of flights from other countries arriving on American soil. (Going through 2 sets of x-rays - one into the international departure area, and a separate one into United Airlines check-in bit). The difference between arriving at LA airport and back in Auckland was that in Auckland there were no part-time soldiers wandering around with itchy fingers on the trigger of M-16s...

    5. Re:In New Zealand by hengist · · Score: 1

      That makes sense - because no one would ever high jack a plane that took off from an American aiport, would they?

    6. Re:In New Zealand by Anonymous+Custard · · Score: 1

      In May, I travelled to Honolulu for a conference. I flew directly from Auckland to Honolulu. At Auckland, on the way out, I had to go through two sets of metal detectors and x-rays, as well as a search of my carry-on luggage (although that may have been because I was carrying a plastic poster roll). When I flew from Honolulu back to Auckland, there was just a single metal detector and a single x-ray...

      I think a plane flying away from the US Hawaii to New Zealand), is not as threatening as a plane flying into JFK in New York. Especially flights from Hawaii, which barely have any fuel left when they reach the California coast.

    7. Re:In New Zealand by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 2


      Having to go through 2 x-rays instead of 1 doesn't necessarily mean the security is better. If the first screening does what it's supposed to, the second is redundant; if the first doesn't, there's no guarantee the second would either.

  86. The Effects on the Other Side by Ehsan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    For an Arab in the Middle East, some aspects of the internet have become frustrating. My credit card no longer receives the smooth transaction process pre-9/11. Half of all the purchases I tried to make through paypal, 2checkout, amazon, and several other vendors have been cancelled due to a "high fraud risk" because my credit card is from Saudi Arabia.

    Last month, I tried e-mailing a friend who goes by the name of Jamal Bin-Laden (not related at all to the terrorists, he's not even Saudi Arabian). He replied not to MY e-mail but to a forwarded e-mail from my Bahraini ISP. Apparently they blocked the e-mail because of his name, read the contents, and when they saw I was only asking him to bring back some tiny M&M's from London (I'm addicted!) they forwarded it to him without even bothering to cover their tracks. There goes online privacy for you.

    And on a related note, I had to cancel my post-grad plans to study in New York after all my Arab friends there came back. Let's just say people weren't very nice to them.

    While this might have nothing to do with American legislation, it's somewhat ironic to see how 9/11 effected everyone negatively, Americans & Terr^H^H^H^HArabs alike.

    May the victims of 9/11, the starved to death children of Iraq, and online rights all rest in peace.

    1. Re:The Effects on the Other Side by brunes69 · · Score: 2

      RE your study plans, if you were wanting to study in a Northa American school fo rthe cultural change, or even to get something you couldnt in Saudi Arabia, may I reccomend coming to my homeland, Canada. Many many MANY Arabs both go to and are professors at my University (UNB), and I suspect it is simmilar in most other areas of my country.

    2. Re:The Effects on the Other Side by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm from New York. Come back.

    3. Re:The Effects on the Other Side by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And on a related note, I had to cancel my post-grad plans to study in New York after all my Arab friends there came back. Let's just say people weren't very nice to them.

      I wish to apologize for the actions of some of my dumber fellow Americans. We're not all like that. A lot of us also do not support the actions of our government and our (un)elected leaders. Many of us are trying to peacefully undo the damage done in our names, but it's not an easy task; the other side doesn't fight fair, and they usually have a lot more money and lawyers that we do. Please don't let a few assholes scare you off. All of the good things that America can (and should) represent are worth fighting for. I hope you and your friends will return to the US. Our strength is in our diversity.

      jonny "forgot my password" x

    4. Re:The Effects on the Other Side by wytcld · · Score: 3, Troll
      I was right with you until you said, "May the victims of 9/11, the starved to death children of Iraq, and online rights all rest in peace." Man, it's clear you think the US has starved children to death in Iraq. If you can believe that, you are the enemy. As you should be well aware, the UN has allowed Iraq to sell all the oil it wants in exchange for food. The Iraqui government has instead chosen to starve some of its own people to make a propaganda point. And there you are repeating it like a nitwit.

      Let's get this right. People who consent to live under tyrany deserve both the tyrany and their own distruction if that tyrany threatens the world. I know this one cuts both ways - we've got to get the tyranical tendencies of our Attorney General and Vice President under control. But so far we're still running a democracy, and forgive us if we get a bit pissed off when idiots like you side with the Iraqui propaganda machine. You do not deserve an American education or any other favors from us while you embrace that sort of - not just idiocy, but a moral stance as bad as Hitler's. You take care of Saddam and the foul swine promoting Wahabbi-ism out of Saudi Arabia, and we'll get back to our naturally angelic natures. Otherwise, Allah have mercy on you.

      --
      "with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
    5. Re:The Effects on the Other Side by CaptainCarrot · · Score: 1

      Well thank God somebody said it!

      --
      And the brethren went away edified.
    6. Re:The Effects on the Other Side by LS · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Your statement is the same braindead rhetoric I've heard repeatedly in response to those against Iraqi sanctions.

      In saying that the people of Iraq want to live in the conditions they do, and that you would do something differently if you were there, says to me that you are either an extraordinary activist/freedom fighter/Arnold Schwarzenegger/death wish type hero, or a fucking liar.

      If you believe that FIVE THOUSAND CHILDREN UNDER THE AGE OF FIVE deserve to die EACH MONTH because of a couple of thicked headed assholes in Iraq AND America, then you are a thick headed asshole. Have some compasion. Nitwit.

      LS

      --
      There is a fine line between being a cultivated citizen and being someone else's crop. - A. J. Patrick Liszkie
    7. Re:The Effects on the Other Side by LS · · Score: 2

      And what's this "you" vs. "us" shit? In this free country, taxpayers are entitled to their American education and "favors" (?) regardless if they have a "moral stance as bad as Hitler's". It's the Wahabbi that take away your rights if they don't like your opinion, not a democracy with a supposed right to free speech.

      --
      There is a fine line between being a cultivated citizen and being someone else's crop. - A. J. Patrick Liszkie
    8. Re:The Effects on the Other Side by jgalun · · Score: 1
      Well, the question is, what are the alternatives. As I see it, these are the options:

      Continue the sanctions regime because it prevents Hussein from getting WMDs. It also leads to 5,000 deaths a month, not because it doesn't allow in enough money (conditions in the regions of Iraq where Hussein does not have control have actually improved greatly under the sanctions regime, and you can read that in an article The Nation had about a year ago, as well as many other sources) but because Hussein uses it in such a way as to get political capital instead of feeding his people.

      Drop the sanctions, and allow Hussein to get WMDs.

      Remove Hussein from power with an invasion, and then end the sanctions because you trust the next government more than you trust Hussein.

      So, which option do you support?

    9. Re:The Effects on the Other Side by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't care what that guy does, but YOU can go back to your own dirty country, you stupid italian shitrag. "Eh look at me i'm tough because i'm italian!". Hahahahahaha. I bet you're some scrawny little guy who follows the large italian gorillas around so people think you're with them.

    10. Re:The Effects on the Other Side by Ehsan · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry my comment sparked off your wrath, but I assure you I do not think the US starved the children of Iraq. This might come as a surprise to you, but the majority of the Arab world is actually AGAINST Saddam Hussein's regime. You really have to see the daily images of infants dying to understand how we feel.

      No, the US did not starve children to death, but the US could help those children by removing sanctions which have negligible effect on Saddam Hussein. And if Saddam Hussein wanted to he could feed every single person in Iraq for 1000 years... It's like two children fighting over a doll, at the end it just gets torn in half.

      Trust me I'm not blaming anyone, and nor are the majority of Arabs blaming the US. We're just sorry for the doll.

    11. Re:The Effects on the Other Side by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Man, it's clear you think the US has starved children to death in Iraq. If you can believe that, you are the enemy.

      Someone simply calls for compassion for victims on the other side of the planet, and you look for his agenda and try to guess which "side" he's on?! You're the sicko.

      Sometimes compassion is simply compassion.

    12. Re:The Effects on the Other Side by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you for that perspective. I don't entirely sympathize with you. But I do appreciate hearing a decidedly un-American opinion in these times where those willing to express one are not treated with much respect.

      Sincerely, thank you. (From a non-American living just slightly north of my overdramatic American neighbours.)

    13. Re:The Effects on the Other Side by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "but the US could help those children by removing sanctions which have negligible effect on Saddam Hussein. "

      Sanctions, schmanctions. There's another option,
      that begins with Iraq becoming self-sufficient.

      They survived in the pre-industrial era, why not today? They can have a military, and manage enough civilization to have a dictatorship government. They can feed themselves.

    14. Re:The Effects on the Other Side by DeVilla · · Score: 1

      It is pretty sad to see the blatant privacy violation, but I think it's but pretty well suspected the federal agents of some form or another were monitoring all communications anyhow. (Was it echelon?) I won't pretend to understand how credit card companies word to claim I've ever liked them.

      As far as New Yorkers being unpleasant to Arabs, I've heard a number of arguments justifying minorities hating the majorities and even Arabs hating the US/West/etc. It may be unpleasant, but the New Yorkers I think have as much of a reason to be irrational and emotional. The event that took place last year qualifies as more than mere vandalism after all. They (and all Americans) have a reason to feel they've been attacked.

      For that matter, I know someone (who's identity I won't disclose since I'm expressing and unpopular view) who works in a factory with a number of legal Arabic aliens. When news came in a year ago that the Towers were attacked and came down killing up to 10K people (the initial estimate) these coworkers started cheering, dancing, singing praises God/Allah, etc. Frankly, such a grotesque display of blood lust and hatred is liable to trigger more of the same. It actually sounds like it was traumatic for some of the people who had to watch this display.

      Why are American's the only ones faulted for this? I've heard of several like displays in the US. I have not heard of any condemnation of it. Only justifications.

      Americans could try to be as nice and as introspective as possible, but that won't change the fact that they would still be facing enemies are are not as nice or introspective. Enemies who would use these qualities as a weapon to further attack America. That is frustrating to say the least.

      Vigorous condemnations of Americans are loud and many. It would seem that few or none who offer such ridicule are condemning the acts that took place a year ago with anywhere near the same vigor or persistence. It tarnishes the appearance of any altruistic, humanitarian motives behind the criticism.

      I am sorry when people take out their anger on those who don't deserve it and when innocent people are hurt in wars of ideology, but I am also sick to death of idea that Americans are the only ones guilty of these sins and sick of the double standard it represents. Yes, understanding is a two way street, but there aren't many people traveling in either direction.

      Dan

    15. Re:The Effects on the Other Side by greenrd · · Score: 3, Insightful
      . And if Saddam Hussein wanted to he could feed every single person in Iraq for 1000 years... It's like two children fighting over a doll, at the end it just gets torn in half.

      I don't want to come off as bashing you, because clearly your heart is in the right place - but I believe you are incorrect on that point. Iraq's internal food production is not sufficient to meet the needs of the population (and I suspect sanctions on machine parts may have something to do with this). Hence the oil-for-food agreement - if there were no need for imports there would be no oil-for-food programme - you can bet your life on that.

      And poor nutrition is - of course - by far not Iraq's only pressing problem. They have few working ambulances. They have a shortage of basic medical equipment and materials like aneasthetics, as I expect you know.

      Why then do the US and Britain repeatedly state that the sanctions do not ban the import of food and medicines? In the strictest sense they are not lying - but they are employing one of the cruellest deceptions imaginable. Medicine is not banned under the sanctions de jure, but de facto - in other words, the United Nations has refused applications to import medicines and medical equipment - sometimes citing "dual use" considerations.

      The point is that Saddam Hussein - evil though he undoubtedly is - could not legally meet these needs even if he wanted to. The United Nations committee on Iraq sanctions - dominated by the US - has consistently denied applications for exemptions to the trade sanctions, which must be individually applied for, and which, even if successful, may take weeks to be granted.

      I would like to see how an American would feel if the US - an undoubtedly dangerous nuclear state - had basic medical items sanctioned by the United Nations under "dual use" considerations. A foundational moral principle - that if an action is right for the US to do it must be right for any other state to do in equivalent circumstances - seem to be disregarded by many US "hawks". And of course "hawks" is a very relative term, since even most "doves" in the US congress will slavishly toe the Washingtonian line in the big picture (The honorable Barbara Lee excepted.)

      Much more information on the sanctions is available, for example, here.

    16. Re:The Effects on the Other Side by Gannoc · · Score: 2
      I tried e-mailing a friend who goes by the name of Jamal Bin-Laden...I was only asking him to bring back some tiny M&M's from London...I had to cancel my post-grad plans to study in New York after all my Arab friends there came back.


      Hey, in all fairness:

      Bin-Laden:

      When you return from your journey, bring many of the "tiny green M&Ms" on your plane flight back. I am aborting my "post-graduation" plans in New York. Repeat: I am aborting my "post-graduation" plans in New York.

      Good luck.

      -Ehsan #4232875)

    17. Re:The Effects on the Other Side by jafac · · Score: 2

      Hey, as long as you're over there, do the entire world a favor; find one of those militant extremist mullahs who are spouting all the anti-us and anti-semitic hatred, and smack him upside the head good and hard for being the cause of the events which have ultimately made all of our lives more difficult and less pleasant.

      Oh yeah, and remind him that Allah says: Thou Shalt Not Kill.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    18. Re:The Effects on the Other Side by jafac · · Score: 2

      Why then do the US and Britain repeatedly state that the sanctions do not ban the import of food and medicines? In the strictest sense they are not lying - but they are employing one of the cruellest deceptions imaginable. Medicine is not banned under the sanctions de jure, but de facto - in other words, the United Nations has refused applications to import medicines and medical equipment - sometimes citing "dual use" considerations.

      - - -
      That's just a bunch of bullcrap. Hussein could end the sanctions any time he wants by complying with the UN resolutions. He consistently obstructed and threatened the inspectors at every turn.

      Whether the US has WMD is not the issue. The US does not attack other nations unless the US or one of it's allies is attacked. (in modern history, has the US attacked unprovoked, one of it's neighbors, executed civillians and plundered and looted their posessions, and occupied it's territory? Talk about war for oil! Hussein started war for oil!) The US does not declare that a certain country with a high population of Jews needs to be destroyed, and it's population all killed. The US does not deploy poison gas on it's own people. The US does not consistently violate every single UN resolution concerning it, including no-fly zones and weapons inspections. The US did not deliberately set fire to thousands of oil wells causing the greatest ecological disaster in human history. The US does not give $25,000 as an incentive to families of suicide bombers. The US did not send intelligence agents to meet with 9/11 hijackers. The US does not send civilians to shelter in military command posts it knows will be bombed. The US does not station large troop concentrations in residential neighborhoods. The US does not hide military equipment amongst archeological sites in hopes the enemy will bomb them which would be a propaganda coup.

      Face it - you can not defend Hussein rationally. I'm not for a unilateral US invasion. I'm very much against it. But there's just no justification for Hussein's actions, and the suffering of his people is 100% Hussein's fault.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    19. Re:The Effects on the Other Side by greenrd · · Score: 2
      Hussein could end the sanctions any time he wants by complying with the UN resolutions.

      You're a fool. The US has stated over and over they want "regime change", nothing less. Yes, they are contradictory about it - but this is the real message. UN resolutions are an excuse.

      The US does not attack other nations unless the US or one of it's allies is attacked.

      That's a steaming pile of bullshit. You are thoroughly ignorant of post-WWII history.

      in modern history, has the US attacked unprovoked,

      Yes.

      executed civillians

      Yes.

      and occupied it's territory?

      In Yugoslavia they forced an "agreement" on Milosevic which they knew he would not sign by asking him to countenance a total NATO occupation.

      The US does not deploy poison gas on it's own people.

      Um, I think you should know, he was our ally then. We didn't condemn him - in fact, we supplied the materials he used to make those chemical weapons. This was in the news recently - did you miss it?

      The US does not consistently violate every single UN resolution concerning it

      Not every one, no. It merely vetoes every single UN resolution it or Israel doesn't like.

      including no-fly zones and weapons inspections.

      The US has refused weapons inspections from the United Nations, and interfered with its internal politics to get the internationally-respected head of their Chemical Weapons disarmament programme fired.

      The US did not deliberately set fire to thousands of oil wells causing the greatest ecological disaster in human history.

      True - but it did deploy Agent Orange in Vietnam.

      The US does not give $25,000 as an incentive to families of suicide bombers.

      Ha! The US has given far more than $25,000 to terrorist states and terrorist paramilitaries.

      The US did not send intelligence agents to meet with 9/11 hijackers.

      A CIA intelligence agent met Osama fucking Bin Laden in hospital shortly before 9/11.

      The US does not send civilians to shelter in military command posts it knows will be bombed.

      No, but it does bomb the Red Cross in Afghanistan - twice.

      Face it - you can not defend Hussein rationally.

      I'm not trying to defend him. He's an evil man. But placing the blame on him for sanctions is simply incorrect and ignores the US's culpability.

  87. Maybe Slashdot will post about that *on* Sept 11? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This story is good material for Sept 10, and what you're talking about is good material for Sept 11.

  88. How about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    how did the terrible events of 9/11 effect you?

  89. where is THE PENTAGON? by joe_bruin · · Score: 2

    now, let me preface by saying that i'm not usually prone to nutty conspiracy theories and such.

    having said that: how come the pentagon (y'know, the *other* 9/11 target) has not been so much as mentioned in any mainstream news media since, oh, about a year ago? i can't even remember how many people had been killed there.
    don't you find that a bit strange?

    someone tell me i'm insane (and then tell me why).

    1. Re:where is THE PENTAGON? by RatBastard · · Score: 2

      You're not insane. The thing is that The Pentagon didn't collapse (it would take a huge explosion to do that!). The Pentagon was not as photogenic a target as the WTC towers. About 200 or so people were killed there and a relatively small part of the building was destroyed. The WTC towers, on the other hand, present a much more dramatic, and therefore create higher ratings, image. Ever notice that there was almost no coverage at all of the plane that hit the cornfield?

      It's all a matter of showing off hwat get's people to watch.

      I don't know if you are old enough to remember when the Challanger exploded, but the way the news agencies handled it was very similar. At first it was "The Brave Challanger Seven" and within days it degernated into "The Brave, Virginal, Pure as Snow Christa McCallough (sp?) And The Six Paid NASA Goons". Very disgusting and repugnent. Why did they do this? Ratings. It's all about the ratings.

      There is no grand conspiracy behind it. Just short-term greed.

      --
      Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
    2. Re:where is THE PENTAGON? by PaganRitual · · Score: 1

      for the same reason that a bomb at the WTC would have never got this much coverage, especially if it hadnt have collapsed the towers. there is nothing special to show ppl on tv over and over and over and over again ... its all about ratings, and what ppl want to see on the teevee. ... and because it was such a long and extended 'attack' ... (two planes about 20 mins apart, and then the buildings paused for effect before collapsing, giving half the NY fire department time to fill the building) ... then we get to hear every man and his dog's "september 11 story" ... on the way to work this morning i saw that the normal morning show called 'today' - which has a cooking article each morning - was interviewing a NY chef for his "september 11 story", which went something like all the other ppl who werent either in the building, or knew someone in the building at the time : "well, i went to work, and heard an explosion, and then we saw some stuff on tv, i thought it was a bomb, then we saw the second plane"

    3. Re:where is THE PENTAGON? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      thats cos it was a truck bomb not a plane

    4. Re:where is THE PENTAGON? by Observer2001 · · Score: 1

      >how come the pentagon (y'know, the *other* 9/11 target) has not been so much as mentioned in any mainstream news media since, oh, about a year ago?

      Gee, I don't share your perception at all. For example, there was a piece on Reuters this morning about fears at the Pentagon that it will be struck again. There was a piece in today's Washington Post about one of the Pentagon victims who's still in the hospital. There was a piece this morning on NPR about how the Pentagon was rebuilt in a year. And that's just today (and I only checked three sources).

    5. Re:where is THE PENTAGON? by mac586 · · Score: 1

      Here, let me refresh your memory. 184 lives were lost, including children on a field trip from a local elementary school in DC.

      AMERICAN AIRLINES FLIGHT 77
      Paul W. Ambrose Yeneneh Betru Mary Jane (MJ) Booth Bernard Curtis Brown Charles F. Burlingame Suzanne M. Calley William E. Caswell David M. Charlebois Sara M. Clark Asia S. Cottom James Daniel Debeuneure Rodney Dickens Eddie A. Dillard Charles A. Droz Barbara G. Edwards Charles S. Falkenberg Dana Falkenberg Zoe Falkenberg James Joseph Ferguson Darlene E. Flagg Wilson F. Flagg Richard P. Gabriel Ian J. Gray Stanley R. Hall Michele M. Heidenberger Bryan C. Jack Steven D. Jacoby Ann C. Judge Chandler R. Keller Yvonne E. Kennedy Norma Cruz Khan Karen Ann Kincaid Dong Chul Lee Jennifer Lewis Kenneth E. Lewis Renee A. May Dora Marie Menchaca Christopher C. Newton Barbara K. Olson Ruben S. Ornedo Robert Penninger Robert R. Ploger Zandra F. Ploger Lisa J. Raines Todd H. Reuben John P. Sammartino Diane M. Simmons George W. Simmons Mari-Rae Sopper Robert Speisman Norma Lang Steuerle Hilda E. Taylor Leonard E. Taylor Sandra D. Teague Leslie A. Whittington John D. Yamnicky Vicki C. Yancey Shuyin Yang Yuguang Zheng

      THE PENTAGON
      Craig Amundson Melissa Rose Barnes Max J. Beilke Kris Romeo Bishundat Carrie R. Blagburn Canfield D. Boone Diana Borrero de Padro Donna Bowen Allen P. Boyle Christopher Lee Burford Daniel Martin Caballero Jose Orlando Calderon-Olmedo Angelene C. Carter Sharon A. Carver John J. Chada Rosa Maria (Rosemary) Chapa Julian T. Cooper Eric A. Cranford Ada M. Davis Gerald Francis DeConto Jerry Don Dickerson Johnnie Doctor Robert Edward Dolan William Howard Donovan Patrick Dunn Edward Thomas Earhart Robert Randolph Elseth Jamie Lynn Fallon Amelia V. Fields Gerald P. Fisher Matthew Michael Flocco Sandra N. Foster Lawrence Daniel Getzfred Cortez Ghee Brenda C. Gibson Ron F. Golinski Diane M. Hale-McKinzy Carolyn B. Halmon Sheila M. S. Hein Ronald John Hemenway Wallace Cole Hogan Jimmie Ira Holley Angela M. Houtz Brady K. Howell Peggie M. Hurt Stephen Neil Hyland Robert J. Hymel Lacey B. Ivory Dennis M. Johnson Judith L. Jones Brenda Kegler Michael Scott Lamana David W. Laychak Samantha L. Lightbourn-Allen Stephen V. Long James T. Lynch Terence M. Lynch Nehamon Lyons Shelley A. Marshall Teresa M. Martin Ada L. Mason-Acker Dean E. Mattson Timothy J. Maude Robert J. Maxwell Molly L. McKenzie Patricia E. (Patti) Mickley Ronald D. Milam Gerard (Jerry) P. Moran Odessa V. Morris Brian Anthony Moss Teddington H. Moy Patrick Jude Murphy Khang Ngoc Nguyen Michael Allen Noeth Chin Sun Pak Jonas Martin Panik Clifford L. Patterson Darin Howard Pontell Scott Powell Jack D. Punches Joseph John Pycior Deborah A. Ramsaur Rhonda Sue Rasmussen Marsha Dianah Ratchford Martha M. Reszke Cecelia E. Richard Edward V. Rowenhorst Judy Rowlett Robert E. Russell William R. Ruth Charles E. Sabin Marjorie C. Salamone David M. Scales Robert Allan Schlegel Janice M. Scott Michael L. Selves Marian H. Serva Dan Frederic Shanower Antionette M. Sherman Donald D. Simmons Cheryle D. Sincock Gregg Harold Smallwood Gary F. Smith Patricia J. Statz Edna L. Stephens Larry L. Strickland Kip P. Taylor Sandra C. Taylor Karl W. Teepe Tamara C. Thurman Otis Vincent Tolbert Willie Q. Troy Ronald James Vauk Karen J. Wagner Meta L. Waller Maudlyn A. White Sandra L. White Ernest M. Willcher David Lucian Williams Dwayne Williams Marvin R. Woods Kevin Wayne Yokum Donald McArthur Young Edmond G. Young Lisa L. Young

    6. Re:where is THE PENTAGON? by mac586 · · Score: 1

      The Smithsonian has a web site to capture 9/11 images, emails, etc. You can browse pictures taken by everyday people...

      Here is one from the top of the WaterGate complex showing the Pentagon on fire from across the Potomac river.

    7. Re:where is THE PENTAGON? by jgalun · · Score: 1

      One of the reasons the Pentagon isn't mentioned is because of what is horrendous about 9/11 - the attack on civilians. Intentional attacks on civilians - attacks designed to perpetrate murder on civilians - is shocking to most people. Attacks on armed forces personnel is basically considered fair game in international law.

      I am shocked when someone flies a plane into the WTC, because that is purposely targetting innocent civilians. I was not shocked or angered when a boat full of explosives was rammed into the USS Cole, because that was a legitimate military target.

      It's the same reason why some people think the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was horrible, but don't mind the US attacks on Japanese army bases. Army bases are legitimate to attack, civilians are not.

  90. Wrong date! by Keighvin · · Score: 1

    Now the editors are posting on the wrong date! 9/11 is *TOMORROW*, guys! How can it be 'post 9/11' when it's only '9/10' ? Sheesh!

    And for anybody using non-US syntax, that would be November 9th, which REALLY hasn't happened yet. Get it straight!

    --
    Any spoon would be too big.
  91. Re: /. too! by Ehsan · · Score: 1


    And it just took me 30 minutes to post this because it kept saying "you can't post to this page" which the FAQ explains as: "You're reading Slashdot from behind a web proxy that allows connections from any host. This functionality has been abused. Therefore, comments are not allowed to be posted from this address until the proxy is better secured."

    It might have nothing to do with my proxy being in an Arab country, but it was working fine the last time I tried to post here (before 9/11).

    See what I mean?

  92. Only Change: Gov't More Open Now by DaytonCIM · · Score: 1

    "because of the perceived loss in privacy and online rights as a result of post-9/11 legislation."

    First, it is not "perceived" it is real. Second, the only change (IMHO) in the last year is that the government is less covert in their limitation of our freedoms and that the average citizen accepts it in the name of "security." (See this
    story)

  93. 9/11? by curmi · · Score: 1

    What happened on the 9th November?

    Or do you mean the 11th September?

    1. Re:9/11? by LordEq · · Score: 1

      Or do you mean the 11th September?

      Whose 11th September? My eleventh September was in 1990. Not a very memorable month, as far as personal events in my own life go -- I recall absolutely nothing about it.

      Or perhaps you mean the 11th September after some particular event? The ascension of the current Japanese emperor, maybe? The eleventh September of the Heisei era was in 1999. On a personal note, that September sucked mightily.

      ...

      Oh, you meant September 11th, a particular day. I'm surprised you don't remember that one. On that day in 2001, a group of terrorists decided to fuck with the US. They paid dearly for it, they're still paying for it, and they will continue to pay for it until none of them are left to pay any more.

  94. ALERT: FUCKTARD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    um, look at all the comments, and look how many people agree with you. You sound like you're wussy, but no one is attacking you (except for me now :)




    I also have been affected because as a pacifist I am ostrisized even more so that pre 9/11 and am scared sh!tless how many people just sit buy and watch thier freedoms taken away, daily on slashdot if you post anything even slightly anti war or anti bush you are sure to be told you are stupid when in fact I just don't see a purpose in letting the terrorist win and letting Ashcroft take away my freedoms.


    why do you care? its the freaking internet. Why do you care what others think? get some balls man.

  95. It has cost me a bunch of cash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have a small company that performs computer sales and service. A lot of my business WAS on Kennedy Space Center. Security regulations made it nearly impossible to get on site. I could not respond so I am basically out of the business there. It really sucks, don't expect me to ever spend a cent in Arab/Musilm owned businesses. I know that is a very inflammatory statement, but when there are Arabs living in the US that are supporting the terrorists I feel compelled to "vote with my $$".

    1. Re:It has cost me a bunch of cash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you fucking Jew Yorkers pony up the $10 Million that you turned down from the Saudi prince, which presumably will be replaced by Federal handouts (i.e., my taxes), then you can open your fucking pie-hole.

  96. Stopped Flying by RGRistroph · · Score: 2

    I hope every airline (except for maybe SouthWest) goes bankrupt, and then we can start the airline industry all over.

  97. Yes and yes damnit. by sporty · · Score: 2

    I am a mulatto west indian-american. I kinda look Middle Eastern or Pakistanian. I have been stopped everytime. Apparently I fit a profile on how my tickets were bought also, online.

    One question. Why the fuck is everyone feeling fine 'cause spot checking is instituted in this non random fashion that I always get checked? I mean what the fuck. Now it's no longer driving while black but flying while brown? CHECKING THE SAME PEOPLE OVER AND OVER ISN'T SECURE!!! And it makes people feel like shit.

    Thank you Bush, thank you America, for making your own citizens feel unwelcome. jackasses..

    --

    -
    ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only

    1. Re:Yes and yes damnit. by (H)elix1 · · Score: 2

      Oh, not so.... I'm a bit of a road warrior myself, and there is nothing quite like them trying to tell some 90 year old grandma why they want to emtpy her bag.

      Turns out they nail middle age white boys too. I think the key is to be in a rush - about to miss a connecting flight helps. I went to a client site, had my normal work laptop and a demo box. Used the same battery pack, but I left half the cord at home. 'can you turn that on?' Nope. Aw crap... I missed the bloody flight.

      For what its worth, the madness seems to be US (and our beer buddies up north). The rest of the world had solders with rifles at the airports for as long as I've been flying.

    2. Re:Yes and yes damnit. by sporty · · Score: 2

      I've just been scarred by too many checks where it is me and a few other "indian" looking other folks.

      --

      -
      ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only

  98. A rant by Reverend+Raven · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Typical Slashdot. Anti-American statements, more about how Bush and company are evil, yadda yadda. This s a perfect illustration of what's wrong with this country. The politically/intellectual elite DO NOT represent the vast majority of Americans, by which I call "Middle America". That's why the leftist media's attempt to portray Bush as a moron didn't stick, the average man doesn't see anything wrong with another average guy running the show.

    "Our rights are being stepped on" Like how? Specifically, not "They Government has the option to hold you indefinitely without a lawyer"..those are hypotheticals that come into play very goddamn rarely in the real world. Has any Slashdotter been held because of some tripe they posted, or a shirt they've worn or an organization they've supported? I doubt that.

    This country will do whatever it takes to ensure that another September 11th doesn't happen, and as someone who has a profound love for his country, I see nothing wrong with that. It's so easy to forget that THREE THOUSAND AMERICANS died last year...that's several times the amount of dead at Pearl Harbor..and unlike December 7th 1941, these were civilians. People who had sinned no worse than to go to work paid with their lives...and I see nothing wrong with our Government trying to protect us from that ever happening again.

    But on the other hand, this kind of thing is expected from the Slashdot audience. Most of us are young adults (less than 35's young, kids), myself included. So of course there's going to be the liberal touchy-feely element at hand, it's something that has to be worked out..and will be, once most of us get older (me? I'm special ;).

    Just keep in mind that these precautions, while an inconvenience, is part of what's keeping LA, Chicago, NYC, Miami, Atlanta, etc from being turned into vapor by a suitcase nuke (or some other horrible, horrible possibility). And if you complain about your bags getting checked or some little kid being searched or whatever..bear in mind that if an American city is wiped from the face of the Earth....it'll be a lot worse than it is now...for us (a little), but way more so for the rest of the world.

    So yeah...to sum up all this ranting...anything that'll help prevent another September 11th/save American lives I'm all for. And I'm suprised most of you arn't, but not really.

    --

    --Reverend Raven
    Desperate days demand dire deeds.
    1. Re:A rant by greymond · · Score: 1

      "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
      - Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.

    2. Re:A rant by Yunzil · · Score: 2

      "They Government has the option to hold you indefinitely without a lawyer"..those are hypotheticals that come into play very goddamn rarely in the real world.

      Doesn't matter. If it happens once (and it has), that's too much

      anything that'll help prevent another September 11th/save American lives I'm all for.

      So then you'd be in favor of killing ever Muslim in the world? You'd be in favor of abolishing air travel? You'd be in favor of turning the US into a police state so the government can watch every move you make? You'd be in favor of building a huge wall around the US so that no one gets in or out?

      Just asking.

  99. the real question... by Jerf · · Score: 2

    ... is whether we see a post from "Wakko Warner" ever again...

    1. Re:the real question... by dnight · · Score: 2

      And that is the scariest question of all.

      ---
      Smile, happiness is mandatory.

      Didn't George W.'s daddy say don't worry, be happy?

  100. Have we lost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here's a editorial that my Fiancée has sent into the Seattle Times. It reiterates some of the earlier posts, but certainly is worth the read:

    On this anniversary of September 11th, I am deeply saddened by fact that so many lives were lost and that the perpetrators have won. How could a mighty nation based on democracy have so demonstrably allowed our attackers to attain their goals without a clear victory? Osama Bin Laden and his followers wished us to live in fear and we do. They wanted jihad and we hate and suspect and attack fellow Americans and others around the world. They hated our freedom of religion, free speech and way of life. Our government has delivered the last to them. According to the Monday Seattle Times we have lost the following rights:

    Freedom of association
    Freedom of information
    Freedom of speech
    Right to legal representation
    Freedom from unreasonable searches
    Right to a speedy trial and public trial
    Right to liberty

    Ironically, the loss of these rights is called the US Patriot Act. Does everyone understand this? Your most basic freedoms are gone, not by the enemy but by our own. These are the rights that make me proud to be an American and if our government has to take them away in order to win, it is not a victory and, indeed, has not been. If we are to honor September 11th as heroes who died for what our country stands for, then we have to stand up for what they believed in. So, I'm going to honor those who died and their families today by standing up for my life, liberty, and freedom from persecution regardless of my race, sex or religion in the face of enemies abroad or at home. That's the America I'm proud of and I hope others are too. Please look around, people, please see how your fear and hatred are being used to unravel what we've fought throughout our country's history for.

    -- Anonymous due to conficts of interest with her place of employment

  101. Well I'm afraid to fly... by evilpaul13 · · Score: 1

    Since I'm not some upstanding citizen like a ex-Congressman, or a Medal of Honor awardee, or a mother with child, or some other "commendable" member of society I don't want to wait 6 hours to get on a plane and be selected for a cavity search because my zipper is setting off the metal detector.

    Oh wait, all those "commendable" people were harrassed too...maybe I don't want to fly because the "security measures" are worse now than before 9/11/01. But I do feel safer knowing that someone else is being bored reading my email too.

  102. And laugh? by Reverend+Raven · · Score: 0

    "I am reminded of the Communist Trials, the stupidity of which we look back upon now and laugh at"

    Stupidity? Uh, you must not know about history..but from the 1920s until the 50s this country was infused with Communists and Communism. Alger Hiss ring a bell? How about Roosevelt and Truman's very leftist leanings and their perception of Communism and America? What McCarthy did (and he didn't start it, the House UnAmericans Activities Committee was around waay before him), he was doing a valuable service to this country. Even now, there are forces at work both in this country and in our Federal Government (Congress especially) that are actively undermining American security and interests, working to undo the freedoms and peace that we enjoy, and spit in the face of the hard work, values and respect for man and country that made this nation great. And for the most part, those people are allied under one banner...the Democratic National Party.

    We don't look back and laugh at McCarthy's crusade as something dreamed up by a delusional Congressman from Wisconsin...we see it as a man who loved his country and was wanting to defend it from an outside force that was (and still is) attempting to destroy the basic freedoms that we enjoy. So please sir, don't speak of an decent American like Rep. Joseph McCarthy in such a harsh tone without proof. Atleast not on my watch.

    --

    --Reverend Raven
    Desperate days demand dire deeds.
    1. Re:And laugh? by chill · · Score: 3, Insightful

      McCarthy, et al.

      I believe the quote I'm looking for is "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions."

      While Sen. McCarthy had good intentions -- protecting America from the Communists -- stomping on the Constitutional Rights of Citizens in the process is not an acceptable method.

      One does not toss aside the Constitution simply because it gets in your way.

      Yes, Communism was a real and dangerous threat. So, in his way, was Sen. McCarthy and the House UnAmericans Activities Committee. They both violated the rights that they fought so hard to protect.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    2. Re:And laugh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow. You amaze me. For having the guts to say what you said, with such certainty. I don't agree with a word you just said, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.(who said that? Voltaire?) Personally, I think you're a crackpot. Personally, you think I am. Deal with it, and get over it. At least I am willing to allow you to say such crap, whereas you'd love to see me silenced. and you think YOUR VIEWS preserve freedom?

    3. Re:And laugh? by Reverend+Raven · · Score: 1

      And how did the good Senator (not Congressman as I so erroniously reported earlier) stomp on the Constitution? Violation of the First Admendment? They had the right to freely express themselves, which they did openly. However, when that expression presents a clear and present danger to the continued prosperity of the United States as both the body politic and the people, actions such as McCarthy's were totally justified.

      --

      --Reverend Raven
      Desperate days demand dire deeds.
    4. Re:And laugh? by chill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually, not all of them did openly. Several refused to answer the pertinent question "Are you now, or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?"

      Still, anyone labeled a "Communist" was blacklisted. Pressure was exerted on filmmakers, studios and others and those so labeled frequently never worked again. Careers were destroyed, not on proof of criminal activity, but on expression of political belief. Political speech was supressed and persecuted.

      I'm not talking "the advocation of the violent overthrow of the Government and Constitution", but expressions of sympathy or even simple ambivalence.

      "...when that expression presents a clear and present danger to the continued prosperity of the United States as both the body politic and the people, actions such as McCarthy's were totally justified."

      Where in the Constitution does it say that? Until Congress declares War -- which didn't happen then and hasn't now -- or you are a convicted felon, the rights of Citizens are not set aside for convenience.

      The Government of the United States is stronger than that. Unlike China, the U.S.S.R. and others, we tolerate dissent and are not threatened by it.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    5. Re:And laugh? by Badanov · · Score: 1

      As I said in earlier posts. No one lost anything except maybe a career. And during that time this country was, as we found out, infiltrated by communist spies from the USSR. That was a real threat, not a 1st amendment problem, a high crime. I think the response to communist infiltration and indoctrination in US institutions was relatively mild, a few people lost their careers. They became a simple nameless worker, the way they wanted things to be. I am sorry. I don't see the problem here. You advocate a system which could take away your boss' stuff, you suffer the consequences, as those folks in the '50s did and should have I don't see the HUAC as being a bad thing then, and now ti could even help define where this nation should be in protecting its own interests.

      --
      Dawn of the Dead
    6. Re: And laugh? by chill · · Score: 2

      My argument is that the Constitution is there to *protect* the right to free, unrestricted political speech.

      Not just speech that you agree with -- unpopular speech. Popular speech doesn't, by definition, need protection.

      SPYING is and was a punishable crime, as are several other activities people were charged with during the 50s. Expressing political views contrary to the views of the majority, or of the government is NOT. It is a protected right of our citizenry.

      I'm not sure where you get that advocacy bit. All I'm advocating is Free Speech, specifically free POLITICAL speech -- what this country is founded on. If people then commit criminal and/or violent acts then they deserve the punishment they get.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
  103. Voted for Nader... by RatBastard · · Score: 2

    Funny how my measly and tossed away vote for Nader kept Al Gore out of office. Funny to think in a stae with three whole E.C. votes that has always voted about 80% Republican that I'm at fault because Jeb Bush and the Supreme Court gave the election to GW.

    Pull your head out of your ass, pal.

    I voted for the candidate that I actually liked an drespected. Not for the lesser of two evils. I suggest you do the same, or just shut the fuck up, yourself.

    --
    Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
    1. Re:Voted for Nader... by Abraxis · · Score: 1

      The problem here is the winner-take-all voting system in which essentially your vote doesn't count if you don't vote for a "winner". The U.S. needs to change to something like an instant runoff system in which a voter doesn't have to choose between voting their heart vs. picking the lesser of two evils.

  104. Unarmed air defenses???? by Kindaian · · Score: 1

    I wander why on the hell the US administration think unarmed fighter crafts and AA bateries are usefull at all?

    They must think that they can spook a terror attack with some cardboard missiles...

    Ha! the diferences between perceived security and true security... well... they have it there...

    Never heard of thrustworty computing?

    ROFL...

    P.S.- The trust of american people in the administrations, be them central of state amazes me... but alas... i'm a european ;)

  105. Whoopty fucking do. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    So you could save them. whoopty fucking do. if they let everyone take knives on the planes, what do you think would happen then?


    i'm glad that you are arrogent enough to only care about your own well being. I know you would take the knive on to save others, but still that point is irrellivent. Letting everyone take knives on board brings us back to square one of 9/10/01.

    1. Re:Whoopty fucking do. by Mobster75 · · Score: 0

      [sarcasm]
      They could let everybody take knives and what not on planes, but then just strap everyone into their seats and sedate them for the duration of the flight. :)
      [/sarcasm]

  106. Patriot a Serious Problems for Libraries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    I think anyone who does any kind of computer work for a library has had to deal with the PATRIOT Act in one way or another. I have been told that at my institution that librarians have had to comply with warrants to hand over patron records. Meanwhile, in the case of patron customizable services, there's a real big policy debate going on. Ashcroft thinks we should just spread our cheeks over at the library and cough up user data on demand with or without a warrant. Meanwhile, many at my library believe that a patron's privacy is sacrosanct. So, they're asking developers to find a way to match a user with their selections while keeping their identities in the database hidden. This last bit is how the aftermath of 911 is affecting my life.

  107. What's Changed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The country is glossing over many many things in the favor of "terrorism". In fact, the next time I am caught speeding, I wouldn't be surprised if they deemed it a terrorist act... when in reality, the act of driving is going to support BOTH sides of the war on terrorism (texans buy the oil from saudis). Stoopid.

    No one is commenting on the problems faced by New York; the whole city is now a utopia because no one wants to step on any toes. No one's talking about where all the Red Cross money went or the fact that comm services on that day were not working correctly.

    We have bombed the shit out of a third-world country. Sure those people may enjoy having music and dancing and the barbershop, but I bet there's a pipeline going up riiight now as well.

    Anyone criticizing the government is labeled as anti-patriotic, when in reality, there is nothing more patriot than dissent... the government is the anti-patriot, with Herr Ashcroft chopping apart liberties like a bull in a China shop.

    We are going to start another war so Bush's homeboys can profit and he can try and stay in office. Look at the timing! It's almost sick... Public support for a war wavers, boom! dogs gassed on CNN. Sept. 11 comes ups, oh hey! we just found allllll these tapes about the bombers. Oh my god. How convenient! Right as the election season begins, we got Tony Blair in our pocket, becuase his eceonomy sucks too, telling his country we must fight the tyrant! Bush tells the UN that Sadam is laughing at them. What the fuck?! We support him! A little program called Oil for Food... let me tell you, people are still starving over there... It's just a nice way to get cheap oil out.

    What has changed? All those people chillin in Cuba with NO CHARGES... my god, Ashcroft has gone made with power and Tom Ridge is his little homeland defense puppet. The same thing could happen to any of us... detained for national security. That is the biggest crock of shit... detained to keep republicans in power.

    What else has changed? Texas has become the center of the Universe.

    What else has NOT changed? Florida is still a puppet of the republican party... what has changed? No one cares now.

    What else has changed? I feel scared to write this because I could disappear for it.

    What has not changed? "You can fool all of the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time."

    The dinosaurs that have infested the political machine are dying slowly. They are struggling... and no one cares. Do you have any respect for the president? I don't. I have more respect for the mayors of cities and police officers... they are at least in touch with the community. The president has become a tyrant...

    But that's okay. We haven't had a revolution in a while... combine the political scene with the MPAA, RIAA, timber and all the other industries asking for political protection and you can see one thing... they're dying.

    Ghandi said:
    "First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win."

    We (the People) will win. We have been ignored. We have been laughed at. Now they are fighting us... once they run out of gas, we will win.

    There may have been some changes and we may be scared, but the dinosaurs are dying and that is one thing that hasn't changed.

    I am not a coward... I just forgot my login info.

  108. I'm taking your advice... by mekkab · · Score: 2

    The car is the way to go. Another recommendation: Books on tape. I got a CD of William Gibson reading "Neuromancer"- it never gets old. The miles just fly by even when you are only going 65...

    Now if only I can find a way to drive the wife and I to Ireland next summer...

    oh and P.S.- I work in the air traffic control industry.

    --
    In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
  109. Good Question... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's changed for me? I put a flag in my car on September 12, 2001. I was born and raised in the US and have been outside the country only a few days in my life. I love my freedoms, and the opportunity I have to be prosperous here. My father is Filipino, Mexican and Spanish. My mother is white. I inherited my father's features, so much so that you can't tell I have any Caucasian in me at all. I do not practice a religion. Oh yeah, back to the flag thing. I put that flag in my window so crazed, white 'patriots' that mistake me for being Middle Eastern are less likely to attack me.

    What's changed for me? Although I was raised by a white mother and white stepfather from 5 years old, I have become more afraid of white people.

    I have strong opinions and I (was) willing to voice them. With Operation TIPS and the various other increases in surveillance, I don't do that any more. I am afraid to go to a protest. I am a paid member of the ACLU, but only my girlfriend and myself know this.

    I worry about how my personal information is used. I worry about what information my ISP keeps on me. I worry about what my credit card statements and grocery shopping card say about me.

    What's changed for me? I am more afraid and less trusting of the government and of other people than ever before.

  110. Math professors are now terrorists by GrEp · · Score: 2

    I haven't heard the latest, but the last I heard one of the Math professors here at Iowa State was not allowed back into the country thanks to Mr. Ashcroft.

    Dr. Maria Axenovich went to Germany this summer to visit her husband's parents. She and her husband took seperate flights back. He (a German physisist) was let back into the country. She (a Russian graph theorist) was refused entry. Apparently she had been flagged as a security threat because she had done some consulting for a few biologists on campus on how to organize their data. Thus, foriegn Math professors who colaberate with Biologists are now bio-terrorists. If they visit the in-laws they are not allowed back into the country.

    Her lawyer asked to see the law stating that she had done anything wrong. Apparently it is secret, and they don't publish it. Sounds like the same b.s. that happened to Erdos during the cold war. Hopefully they get everything straightened out, and Congress starts prosecuting Ashcroft for abuse of power.

    --

    bash-2.04$
    bash-2.04$yes "Don't you hate dialup connections?"| write USERNAME
  111. crawling into a box now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm just going to crawl into a box now, and then 50 years later, when we're "safe from terrorism" and our countries biggest problem is our president cigar fucking some intern, i'll be happy again =) Ignorance is fricking bliss. I'll take the blue pill any day. Not that i dont respect the red pill people (i dont know if i got them backwards, but you get the idea)

    1. Re:crawling into a box now by Reverend+Raven · · Score: 1

      Impeachment wasn't about sex. Impeachment was about lying under oath about sex. Ignorance is something alright...

      --

      --Reverend Raven
      Desperate days demand dire deeds.
  112. Mostly no difference... by sterno · · Score: 2

    I've traveled by plane a few times and fortunately I'm not particularly attractive so the security guards haven't felt a need to select me for a random groping. So, though the baggage scanning is noticebly more thorough, no big difference there.

    As for my personal life outside of airports, I haven't been effected at all to my knowledge. Of course, for all i know the FBI has been gathering evidence on me, and I'll be held as an illegal combatant.

    Oh wait, that won't happen to me. I'm white...

    I think most of the reason people are okay with the idiocy our government has unleashed post 9/11 is that they assume that none of it will effect them personally and so it doesn't matter. The fact of the matter is that most immigrant communities are more loyal to this country than those of us who were native born. Why? Because they appreciate the difference that little things like a constitution, due process and opportunities make because they didn't grow up with those guarantees.

    --
    This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
  113. So they haven't been abused....yet. by sindarin2001 · · Score: 1

    I don't think that the problem is that they are being abused yet nessesarilly, but rather that these laws have the ability to be abused. Laws that can be abused shouldn't be created for that reason alone...they can be abused. So they haven't been abused yet, does that mean we should just stop caring, or should we constantly be vigilant (hm...hope this doesn't sound vigilante) for when it is being abused.

  114. MONEY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I should have started a chairty fundraiser and given 10% to the red cross and kept the rest for myself. :)

  115. Terrorists checks are just a placebo by MongooseCN · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I went through airline security recently and it is a joke. And absolute joke. I've concluded that it's just a placebo to make most ignorant people feel better. Why? Well here are a few things.

    When I was bringing my bag on the airline, I was checked 3 times. Getting onto every flight and my connecting flights. Somehow I triggered a "possible terrorist" flag and had people hand check my luggage. Maybe it was my scruffy beard?

    Anyways when they checked my carry on luggage they ran it through an Xray. They made me take my trekking poles out to see what they were (they are poles for hiking). They didn't care about the pot that showed up as a big grey cylinder in the middle of my pack.

    For my carry on luggage I had a camera lens in a 1Liter drink cooler. It was in there because it's soft to keep it from getting damaged. They never opened it up. I can think of all kinds of stuff to put in there... They never once checked the carry on bag itself. Couldn't something be hidden in the liner of the bag?

    Coming back I had to have my checkon bag checked again, but this airport didn't have any xray machines. They had to hand check everything. I gave the guy my bag, he opened it up and saw a backpack filled with stuff. He asked me "Is this all hiking gear?". I said yes and he just zipped it up and put it on the belt to go into the plane. Luckily that backpack has 75liters of gear in it and not explosives. I was thinking on the whole flight back:

    "Sir is this all camping gear in this backpack?"

    "No it's approximately 75Liters of C4."

    "Hmmm let me check my manual here... explosives, dynamite, C4. Sorry sir but you can't bring C4 on the plane. You must be an Al Queda terrorist?"

    "Why yes I am, I guess you caught me. Take me in."

    If a terrorist wants to bring something on the plane, it's going to get on the plane. The people who setup these security checkpoints are either:
    A. Ignorant.
    B. Setting up a Placebo
    C. Making a boost in their political career.
    D. All of the above.

    You choose.

    1. Re:Terrorists checks are just a placebo by GooseKirk · · Score: 2

      Exactly. Comedian Doug Stanhope has a great routine about this. He got a friend who owns a porn shop to give him a bag chock full of the most appalling adult novelties known to man - DVDs, dildos, vibrators, butt plugs (with a little chocolate smearing for good measure), life-sized human fist, you name it - and he used that as his carry-on bag. Ideally, some nimrod security agent would pull it all out on the table and there'd be a little object lesson in privacy vs. security for all the old people, children and families travelling with Doug.

      Of course, when he finally did get searched, the security guard took one look inside his bag and immediately snapped it closed and sent Doug on his way. Oh, yeah, these security checks are making us more safe. Note to terrorists: hide your plastic knives in a bag mixed with adult novelties, and skate on through security, who'd rather spend their time digging through old ladies' purses for nail files and sewing needles.

      Anyway, Stanhope's a mad genius, and you should see his site. Check out the prank letters with his gorgeous neighbor Leann, and the story where he has her truck painted purple - funny, funny stuff.

    2. Re:Terrorists checks are just a placebo by MrEd · · Score: 2
      Couldn't agree with you more. Another case in point: My dad was coming back from the states, and was forced to throw away his nailclippers that he had in his backpack because they had a pointy folding nailfile. I can see the justification for that.

      But get this: They didn't even look at the gin bottle half-filled with clear liquid that he had in his pack. Could have been acid, could have been nitroglycerin, could have been anything! Plus, all you have to do is smash the bottle and you have a much better weapon than any piddly swiss army knife.




      It's just like the border checks. As the joke goes: What's the best way to smuggle a nuclear bomb into the USA?


      The answer, of course: In the back of a rusty pickup truck, hidden inside a bale of marijuana.

      --

      Wah!

    3. Re:Terrorists checks are just a placebo by t_allardyce · · Score: 1

      I'm assuming that you don't look foreign. If you looked like an Arab then you would certainly have had a more thorough search. People are racist, 1 week after sept.11th Arab people were being kicked off planes because someone didn't like the look of them. I find it appalling that people can claim to be fair and un-biased, but when put in a position of possible danger react with complete prejudice. I agree, security is a complete joke; you can get on a plane with a gun and a bomb if you are an average looking Joe. I think the next terrorists will get by, by completely blending in as an average family going on a ski-trip. :)

      --
      This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
    4. Re:Terrorists checks are just a placebo by mgblst · · Score: 2

      Come on, surely you must feel safer without all those pen-knives and sharp scissors on board!

    5. Re:Terrorists checks are just a placebo by HillBilly · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The best part after all the checks and searches is eating your inflight meal with metal knives and forks provided by the airline.

      Although I did get plastic cuttlery on one airline, even they could do a fair amount of damage.

      --
      "Go into the hall of mirrors and have a bloody hard look at yourself" - HG Nelson
    6. Re:Terrorists checks are just a placebo by MonkeyMagic · · Score: 3, Funny

      They didn't care about the pot that showed up as a big grey cylinder in the middle of my pack.

      You're lucky you didn't get the full rubber glove treatment with a big cylinder of pot in your bag.

    7. Re:Terrorists checks are just a placebo by andrewski · · Score: 1

      Anyways when they checked my carry on luggage they ran it through an Xray. They made me take my trekking poles out to see what they were (they are poles for hiking). They didn't care about the pot that showed up as a big grey cylinder in the middle of my pack.

      Dude, you're lucky they didn't take your pot!

    8. Re:Terrorists checks are just a placebo by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 2

      There are two ways politicians react to events such as 9-11:

      1) Politicians in charge will "do something". They have to do something, the public will not expect, nor stand for government to sit still in the face of such an event. So what do they do? You can hope that they'll start working on measures to prevent such events and bring the perpetrators to justice, but this takes time. In the meantime, they have to act so they pass a few bollocksy measures to reassure the public. A placebo if you will.

      2) Every politician will jump on the bandwagon of public outcry and use it as a platform to launch any and all of their crackpot ideas, laws and proposals.

      It doesn't take a disaster like 9-11 either. Look for this behaviour in politicians whenever an issue comes up that generates a public outcry. Here in the Netherlands we have seen the exact same effect on various occasions, most recently with the shooting of mr. Fortuyn who was running for parliament in the May elections.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    9. Re:Terrorists checks are just a placebo by zCyl · · Score: 2

      Although I did get plastic cuttlery on one airline, even they could do a fair amount of damage

      Have you ever actually tried to injur someone with a plastic spoon? Short of firing it out of a cannon, it's quite difficult.

  116. My experience by Mythias · · Score: 1
    My life has been affected in a very negative way due to the 9/11 legislations (I believe) because it caused my younger brother to be shipped off to Egypt for some "peace keeping" mission with the National Guard, when I suspect they are just trying to stockpile troops in problem areas so that they can quickly jump in and strike anything that they need to.

    Its not a very good use of my brother's time or energy to sit in a bunker in the desert watching for "disturbances" or whatnot, when he could be here Guarding our country (which is the purpose of the National Guard I am guessing.)

  117. Loss of Aloha. by Vehrdiet · · Score: 1

    Here in Hawai'i we have, maybe I should say had, a tradition of waiting in the airport with loved ones. Giving them leis and other send offs. Surrounding the one who is about to leave with with all the people they know. We even would wait at the terminal for their arrival to welcome them home. After 9/11 that all changed. We're not allowed to wait with them in the terminal. The best we can do is drop them off right outside the security gates and watch them walk off into the distance. It makes the scene terribly depressing. I know this seems minor. However, this is a change in our lifestyle. Our current president asked his country not to fear and to "keep on doing what you normally would do in your daily lives". Well, this was one of those things.

  118. Try getting a Drivers License by jvbunte · · Score: 1

    I recently moved from Michigan to Indiana and instead of presenting my previous state drivers license + 1 piece of other id (ss card) to transfer my license to a new state, now I have to provide 1. Birth Certificate (note, the STATE REGISTERED birth cert, not the hospital birth cert (previously, it didn't matter)), 2. Social Security Card (Mandatory), 3. Two pieces of ID proving place of residence (phonebill, electricity bill), 4. My previous Drivers License, 5. Two OTHER pieces of misc ID (passport, more proof of residence, whatever...) http://www.in.gov/bmv/driverlicense/idreq.html All in all, I can purchase semi-automatic weapons and their conversion kits to full automatic with less ID than it takes to transfer a state drivers license. And if you have ever been to the License Bureau in Indiana, the three day waiting period to get the guns is shorter than waiting in line at the BMV.

    --
    I think we'd all enjoy a nice cold beverage. -David Letterman
  119. Ignorance by quasilogic · · Score: 1

    For me 9/11 has caused me to become more aware of what is happening in the rest of the world. More importantly how our government is involved in what is happening abroad and who is informing me about this. I think today there are many americans educating themselves with such matters. We are learning that things are not as simple as we thought, Conflict resolution in the middle east is not something that can happen just because clinton wanted good PR. Hopefully 9/11 will remove the vale of apathy that obscured our decision making and in the least, leave no room for regret.

  120. Re: /. too! by Salsaman · · Score: 1

    Now I think you're just being paranoid ;-)

  121. Re:Obvious - You Are A Potential Enemy Combatant.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    We are actually thinking of printing on the next newsletter something like 'pre-opened by the U.S. Government for your protection' or 'U.S. Government open here' on the stickers we use to hold the 'zines shut just as a joke.

  122. Re:Prepare for War! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    just to let all of you know, i can read his mind, and he means radical islamics (or else he's as good as jerry falwell, since america caused 9/11, we all know that :)

  123. Too much news coverage by rattler14 · · Score: 1

    I realize that september 11th was a truly horrible event that negatively affected just about every aspect of life as we know it. Things like the weakening of the economy, the continued increase of ineffective security measures that take away our fundamental rights, the never ending fear of other attacks, etc.

    But is anyone else sick of the daily updates that we are flooded with EVERY single day? I think the breaking point for me was last years super bowl, where they had a 30 minute pre-game special where celebrities and star athletes read off the declaration of independance, along with very other post 9/11 "get the country all patriotic again" messages and what not. I was very much changed by the events of 9/11 at first. But the more I get bombarded with news from every paper, every news channel, and even just conversations with people, the more i try to block myself from all of it. For me, it is essentially like spam mail. Even though i like the mail i get, weeding through all the shit makes the whole experience suck. In terms of 9/11, my patriotic feelings and pride for my country surely waned once i started realizing that the news stations and papers just re-hashed everything as much as possible, just to grab eyeballs. TV channels have been fighting for the past 2 months, trying to beat each other to the punch for the 1 year anniversary specials, by broadcasting them well ahead of that date.

    I will remember 9/11 forever in my head, but my pride in my country in getting over such a horrible tragedy will be somewhat jaded by the medias attempt to milk it for all it's worth.

    --
    my last sig was too controversial... now, a new and improved useless sig!
  124. Postal Mail one of the biggest changes for me. by Mustang+Matt · · Score: 2

    I used to send back "stuff" in the credit card companies pre-paid return envelopes...

    You know, left over pizza, cinnamon rolls, dead batteries, etc.

    I cut it out after 9/11.

    I haven't flown in a few years, so I don't know how much flying has changed.

    --
    The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
  125. Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt by doorbot.com · · Score: 2

    When people are scared, they make stupid decisions. How many people sat down after 9/11 and thought, "Gee, I guess this kind of thing was bound to happen sometime, and nothing we could have done would have stopped it."

    Not many, I assure you.

    The rest of the bozos just cowered in their homes (in view of the TV of course), and asked their respective governmental leaders to save them from the foreigners. Of course, does it matter that the US is a country of foreigners? No. Who cares about the melting pot anymore, someone knocked down a building!

    I have yet to be convinced that any of the "patriotic" legislation of the past year has done the good it promised. As long as people continue to live in fear, we will continue to have laws that reflect this.

    "If you trade freedom for security, you have neither"

    How true, how true.

    1. Re:Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt by jgalun · · Score: 1

      The rest of the bozos just cowered in their homes (in view of the TV of course), and asked their respective governmental leaders to save them from the foreigners. Of course, does it matter that the US is a country of foreigners? No. Who cares about the melting pot anymore, someone knocked down a building!

      Politics are a funny thing. The left spent a lot of energy over the past three decades or so knocking down the concept of the melting pot with the ideas of affirmative action and multiculturalism. People were encouraged to think of themselves as part of a group with its own culture, instead of being an individual who becomes part of the larger American culture. I'm not saying the Democrats did this for bad reasons, just that the weakening of the melting pot was one of the repercussions of those ideas and policies. Meanwhile, the Republicans were opposed to this, and defended the melting pot idea.

      Now, 9/11 happens, and the left complains that groups are being singled out and treated as if they were distinct from the rest of the US, and the right forgets about the melting pot to single out groups.

      Hypocrisy is everywhere, and no one is pure. :)

  126. Re:Prepare for War! by PaganRitual · · Score: 1

    can we please lock up the christians too? ... and while we are at it, anyone of any religious denomination ... then we might finally have some peace ... sure, there might not be many people left, but at least those left wont be trying to kill each other because we believe our own version of an ancient myth to be the truth. FFS, wake up.

    (and turn your headlights off too, it just makes it harder to tell if you are braking or not)

  127. Read this and let me know if I can get in trouble! by Mustang+Matt · · Score: 2

    One thing I've done (that I'm kind of scared I've crossed the line) is put bad stuff on my address lines 2 and 3 for my domains.

    For instance, on my main domain address line 2 and 3 are something like:

    WARNING: DO NOT DELIVER
    THIS MAIL MAY CONTAIN A DEADLY VIRUS

    So now when register.com sends me fraudulent letters trying to trick me into switching my domains to them, this is theoretically printed on the envelopes.

    I'm wondering who would take the fall if someone threw a stink over this? Me for putting it on my address or them for sending the mail?

    --
    The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
  128. need more time for Slashdot by medcalf · · Score: 2

    It's increased the amount of time I spend reading Slashdot every day as the stories mount.

    --
    -- Two men say they're Jesus. One of them must be wrong. - Dire Straits
  129. Most Affected = Cannot Write About It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The most chilling observation is that the people most affected by post-attack legislation and administrative action cannot write about it. And maybe we don't know about some of them.

    Put another, perhaps more effective, way: Has anyone you know gone missing lately?

  130. Disturbing self-censorship by KILNA · · Score: 2

    When googling for the word "Palestinian" I came across a text ad which read:

    Rebuild Palestinian Homes
    You can oppose the Occupation
    by helping us to rebuild homes
    www.rebuildinghomes.org

    My reaction was to click... and then instantly to reconsider. The phrase "oppose the occupation" was slightly charged, and related to a cause that those in power in the US seems to have a strong opinion about. What if there were a carnivore-like system between me and the link? What would my government assume about me? This all happened in an instant, but the fact of the matter is these thoughts should never have to enter my mind. Upon looking at my instant of hesitation, I knew that we're starting down a slippery slope.

    --
    Error: PANTS NOT FOUND. Press <F1> to continue.
    1. Re:Disturbing self-censorship by jgalun · · Score: 1

      Apparently paranoia has been the #1 creation of 9/11. The right is excessively paranoid about the clash of civilizations and the Muslim world (I've seen this personally), and the left is excessively paranoid about the government.

      The government is not going to send you away for helping to rebuild Palestinian homes. For the record, Bush just signed a bill sending an additional $50 million in aid to the Palestinians to help with humanitarian considerations.

      On the other hand, the government is going to investigate organizations that claim to be giving humanitarian aid but which are in fact sending money to Islamic terrorists. But there is a line there - it's stupid to get paranoid about this.

    2. Re:Disturbing self-censorship by KILNA · · Score: 2

      That's exactly my point. It is quite stupid. I don't honestly think that the government would have an interest in persecuting me. But doesn't it show that there is a degree of liberty being stripped if an otherwise rational person would start questioning such a simple action as clicking on a link? What if the link said "Bomb the evil Americans now!" or "Click here if you are Osama Bin-Laden" or "Find out how to make a dirty bomb". There's the slippery slope, where do you draw the line? Is it out of the question that government-installed machines may be monitoring my ISP, looking for things like that?

      My right to fulfill my curiousity stops when it causes harm to my fellow man. Recent laws and government actions indicate the intent to broaden the legal definition of harm to encompass things I might *consider* doing, or things that I merely find *interesting*. This concerns me greatly, and I think it's a reasonable concern. My hesitation before clicking the link wasn't paranoia, so much as a sudden realization that I have a little less freedom than I did before this whole mess.

      --
      Error: PANTS NOT FOUND. Press <F1> to continue.
  131. Also... by Mustang+Matt · · Score: 2

    Read my comment here and let me know if I can get in trouble:

    Other comment

    --
    The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
    1. Re:Also... by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      If you have to ask, then yes you can. Fall in line citizen.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
  132. Amtrak, etc. by Emmettfish · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I've found that it's made life a pain in the ass not necessarily because of the government, but because of companies that react stupidly to the government.

    Case in point.

    I was on an Amtrak train to Washington, DC. I walked down the corridor, down the steps, onto the train. I hung out in my chair, and when I was asked for my ticket, I said, 'I'd like to buy one please.' We were already well on our way, and I'd bought tickets before on the train, not a big deal, there's like a three dollar surcharge or something.

    Nope.

    I was informed that I needed to get off of the train in Wilmington, purchase a ticket, and wait for the NEXT train to come by. This made me kinda late, and extremely irritated.

    I asked why I had to get off of the train.

    I was told that company policy had changed in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, I had to present photo ID, buy a ticket, and get on the train, I'm not allowed on the train without a ticket.

    I was already on the train. It was already moving. It was already about 30 miles out of Philadelphia. Let me make this point very clear. I WAS ALREADY ON THE TRAIN.

    I said to the guy, 'I'm already on the train. It's already moving.' He said I still needed to get off the train at the next stop, buy a ticket, and wait for the next train.

    I looked him square in the face and said, "Let's say I was a suicidal bomber or a terrorist, and I wanted to kill people or blow up the train. I could do it if I wanted to, because I am ALREADY ON THE TRAIN."

    "We don't like to hear things like that, sir."

    Sigh.

    I was already on the train. It was already moving. I sure hope everyone on that train felt safe.

    Emmett

    1. Re:Amtrak, etc. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      This has less to do with 9/11 legislation than it has to do with you being a dickhead. Buy a fucking ticket, you pompous ass.

    2. Re:Amtrak, etc. by cpeterso · · Score: 2, Funny


      You forgot to tell us whether you blew up the train or not at the end of your story!

    3. Re:Amtrak, etc. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      i agree with the first reply to your post. its your fucking responsibility to buy your tickets first rather than wait for them to come around and catch you without your ticket. them closing an eye on your attempted free joy-ride and offering you a way out by allowing you to buy a ticket with a surcharge is a PRIVILEGE. quit whining and abide by the rules like everyone else if not i'll throw you off the moving train next time if you happen to be on the same train as me.

    4. Re:Amtrak, etc. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, in the past (50+ years ago) it was more common to get on the train and purchase your ticket en route - it helped trains stay on time, which is why the policy was first implemented. I usually do this, and yes, on Amtrak, it's a three to eight dollar surcharge, depending on the run and the train you're on. I'm glad to know, though, I'll buy my ticket next time.

    5. Re:Amtrak, etc. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The point is, if they are going to prevent someone from bombing the train, they should make sure that everybody on the train has his ticket BEFORE boarding, not AFTER the train has left the station. If a terrorist is going to bomb the train, do you think he is going to wait until an officer comes and checks his ticket?

      It is not about privilege or right. It is about silly, inconvenient and ultimately ineffective security measures that are popping up everywhere.

    6. Re:Amtrak, etc. by geekee · · Score: 1

      So what if you were already on the train. I'm glad they kicked you off. For all they know, you were a terrorist just waiting for the right opportunity to make your move. Obviously, security was bad in letting you on in the first place. It doesn't mean they shouldn't correct their error.

      --
      Vote for Pedro
  133. How has it affected me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I won't go to airports for any reason, the "security" goons are out of hand. I'm confused as to how more gun control will prevent terrorist attacks... shouldn't we be arming civilians? And the Office of the Defense of der Vaterland has me totally bewildered... the color codes are too stupid to be real. A red flag means we're on to them, and the terrorists should lie low. A green flag means we're not expecting anything, so the terrorists can do whatever the hell they want and they'll surprise us. And where does one go to see the colored flags? How do I know what today's color code is if nobody flies the damned flags? Or is that a secret so the terrorists won't know if we're watching for them or not?

  134. No commercial air until lunatic security goes away by eagl · · Score: 2

    The so-called "security" procedures have put me completely off commercial aviation unless there is absolutely no other option available to make the trip.

    While Al Gore and other prominent political and social figures have been repeatedly pulled aside for multiple searches, 1 inch long nail clippers and 3 inch plastic doll rifles are confiscated, loaded handguns, fake grenades, and lunatics who have been flagged at EVERY airport they've used in the last year get on planes with no problem.

    I fly for a living but I feel more threatened by the knee-jerk reactionary measures put in place than I ever have from enemy fire. No joke.

    Write your congressmen and governor and tell them that the random and senseless harassment at the airports needs to stop. Search EVERYONE, and let people keep their pens, plastic knives, toy doll guns, and nail clippers. NOBODY is going to EVER hijack another plane with a knife, the crew and passengers will guarantee that. So lets stop harassing people and stealing harmless items.

    There are other harassing techniques going on as well. An airline pilot was required to drink from a small flask in his personal baggage before he was allowed to board. As the liquid was alcohol he was transporting home, his choice was to pour out a harmless drink or drink it and cancel the flight... Are we now afraid the pilots will resort to liquid chemicals to hijack their own planes? The madness needs to stop, and only the voices of the passengers to their political leaders will make the difference.

  135. ur bollacks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i've been reading some of the ratins for a lot of these posts, and the moderators are on crack.
    dude. a lot of the stuff people are saying is not funny, it's shockingly true and quite horrid to think about what path the united states is taking.

  136. Damn Washington for Post 9-11... by E-Rock-23 · · Score: 1

    Fuck Dub-ya.

    I'll tell you how it has affected me. Georgie boy down there in the White House made a decision that will haunt his entire presidency. If anyone else catches on, he'll be on the hot seat for showing one thing and doing another.

    A small backstory: Everyone remembers the images of President Bush standing at Ground Zero with that Firefighter, right? Pictures of it are everywhere on the 'Net. And how many Firefighters did we lose that day in New York? Over 300. 300+!!! Statistically, a little over 100 Firefighters die each year in the entire nation. What New York, and what the Firefighting Brotherhood around the world, lost that day is three times the annual national average. On the date that matches their call to action (911, duh), hundreds answered that call for the last time, giving the ultimate sacrifice in order to uphold their primary duty: To Save A Life.

    And Bush? He denies funding to Fire Departments.

    That's right. The very people who lost so many, the people he stood side by side with at Ground Zero in the days following the attacks. He is now denying them funds, be it for department use or to assist the families of those brothers we lost.

    I come from a small volunteer department. We don't have the money that professional departments or alot of other volunteer companies have. Our newest piece of apparatus is over 20 years old. Yet they serve perfectly with minimal problems. In short, we barely get by. We don't have the money to provide our members the proper training we need to do our jobs correctly and safely. We do not have the gear to give to active members, reducing the number of hands available on-scene. We have to fundraise our asses off just to break even.

    There must be literally thousands of other companies, both professional and volunteer, that are in the same boat.

    And Bush denies us funding. Shame on you, Dub-ya. You should be impeached for denying America the resources (their own money, no less) to do what it has to do to keep itself safe, healthy and alive. Bad form.

    I know it isn't "nerd" news, but damnit, this nerd has a duty he is compelled to do, because very few others choose to do. To save the life of someone else, be they family, friend or complete stranger, is the greatest calling in the entire human race.

    And to fuck that up is Un-American, and more importantly, inhuman...

    --
    Blog Prophyts - Right On, Man
    1. Re:Damn Washington for Post 9-11... by frrank+the+crank · · Score: 1

      Yeah Right, My brother administers you lazy fucks, most of the time Pro fire fighters are sittin on their asses, most of em run a side business - did you know they, as a group, have the highest amount of workman's comp fraud in the country? now you do.

      I admire what those men did that day, although THAT is what you get paid for, I admire even more the Military boys and girls for what they do - every been shot at? I have, now thats fuckin scary.

  137. Flights before and after the day by intermodal · · Score: 1

    I flew to my new home (with a stop off to a police department at the destination to pick up my new car) six days before the attack, and I'm just glad i didn't wait another week. I would hate to have missed my appointment to get the car and delay my move... but frankly, the terrorists won. They win more every day as more of these stupid laws get passed. Paste the obligatory franklin or jefferson quote here. You all have it memorized by now i'm sure anyway.

    --
    In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
  138. Visa refused by mindriot · · Score: 2

    A friend of mine's fellow student had applied for and received a scholarship to spend one year at a US University. Because he is of Iran origin (but has lived in Germany all his life) and has a name similar to one of the terrorist's names, his visa application was turned down without discussion. So much for his scholarship.

  139. My pilots licence is collecting dust by rufusdufus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I got my license last july. But since I live near Seattle, I was unable to fly for months because the class B airspace over the area was extended to the ground and required instrument clearance.
    I havent flown as Pilot in Command since.
    I did however cross the country with my brother who is a commercial pilot, and we both got lots of flak by airport security for just being around the planes (our own plane!) by the FAA security guards. It is quite unpleasant to have to explain to every block-headed idiot in a uniform that yes, that is my plane, yes, I am a pilot yada yada yada.
    In order to get a pre-flight briefing, you are required to listen to a statement about suspicious people and terrorism. Its is stupid and inane and a real grind to listen to day in and day out.
    When planning our flights, we have to pay special attention to TFRs (temporary flight restrictions) or we can lose our licenses. There are several in the Seattle area which have never been lifted since Sept 11; visual flight rules cannot fly into these areas. This is a total joke since the terrorists planes were jumbo jets flying instrument rules, and those are still allowed everywhere.

    1. Re:My pilots licence is collecting dust by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2
      This is a total joke since the terrorists planes were jumbo jets flying instrument rules, and those are still allowed everywhere.
      Do you **REALLY** think that the boeings were flown by instrument when they crashed????
    2. Re:My pilots licence is collecting dust by rufusdufus · · Score: 2

      All large jet transport flights are done "Instrument Flight Rules". This is a procedureal term which means the flight is schedule to follow a certain course and followed by air traffic control radar. The limitation in the TFR zones is that the flight must file an IFR flight plan before being cleared to take off and landing. The jets used by the terrorists DID file an IFR flight plan when they took off because that is standard procedure.
      The bottom line is that all the restrictions placed on General Aviation (cessnas, the like) would have done nothing to stop the terrorists on 9/11 had those rules been in place at the time, because jets are exempted from those rules!

  140. YHBT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    HAND

    no caps here.

  141. Typical by Reverend+Raven · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    As of this writing, my original post was moderated to Score 0: Flamebait. Just the open-minded thinking I would expect for Slashdot. Openness to any ideas, as long as they don't conflict with your own. This is the exact same reason I left Everything2. Disagree with me all you want, but I'm only speaking my side of things.

    --

    --Reverend Raven
    Desperate days demand dire deeds.
    1. Re:Typical by handsomepete · · Score: 1

      If you don't mind, I'd like to say that's a terrible reason to leave a public discussion forum. If you have a dissenting opinion, it's all the more important to announce regardless of moderation.

      Not that I necessarily agree with you, I'm just saying that regardless of where you go, no matter how 'open-minded', there will be leanings of some majority one way or the other. Fuck it, people are still reading what you're preaching (assuming at least some people browse at 0/-1 :) ). Don't be so concerned with whether or not people agree with you. If it's truly sound and well reasoned you'll eventually find that like-minded company you appear to be looking for.

    2. Re:Typical by Reverend+Raven · · Score: 1

      I have no problem with not being listened to..but when my thoughts and comments are censored (like they were on Everything2) solely because they didn't grok with the admins..yeah, I'm not going to waste my time providing them with content just to be slapped down for providing factual, documented evidence while others who post little more than flames are elevated to god like status.

      --

      --Reverend Raven
      Desperate days demand dire deeds.
  142. No effect. by 5KVGhost · · Score: 2

    Post-9/11 legislation has not effected me at all.

    For all the sound and fury (as illustrated in that AP article) the current laws are really nothing the US hasn't been through before in other times of war. Any law can be abused or misused by those in power, but we seldom hear about the far more frequent times when they're used to good effect.

    Obviously we have to watch very carefully for abuse or overzealous enforcement, but it's counterproductive and simpleminded to automatically assume that the people who are sworn to protect you are all evil fascist pigs out to lock you up because you post mean things about GWB on Slashdot.

    In other words, I'm not happy that these measures are necessary, but I'd rather trust the FBI with expanded survelliance powers than trust that a madman with a bomb or a live culture of smallpox will play fair and only plot their actions where the FBI is allowed to listen in.

    1. Re:No effect. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      ... I'd rather trust the FBI with expanded survelliance powers than trust that a madman with a bomb or a live culture of smallpox will play fair ...

      You know, the madman with the bomb or smallpox might kill thousands, or even hundreds of thousands, of people. That's small potatos conpared to what a government can do with a powerful police force.

      In the long run, the US government is the greatest threat to the citizens of the US, not because its employees are evil, but because they will follow orders, and not because those orders are likely to suddenly become evil tomorrow, but because power corrupts, and if we give those good people in govenment enough power, they soon will not be good.

      ... I'd rather trust the FBI with expanded survelliance powers ...

      If we are going to give them expanded powers, we must be sure to give ourselves a way to take them back again when (not if) they are abused. I haven't seen any sign of that.

  143. yeah, um... by avery · · Score: 1

    I suppose that I was somewhat concerned with what last September 11th (btw, I HATE the phrase "Nine-Eleven") meant to the country for a while. It affected many people's lives, some companies, and a portion of a very large city, for sure. But, does buildings getting knocked down in a city that I've never even been to REALLY affect me? No. Maybe I'm just callous, but I didn't know anybody that died. I don't watch Dateline or MSNBC or Fox News and "relate" to the people that do. I'm getting really annoyed by the fact that TV and print news is saturated with FUD and constant updates. I don't watch very much news now.

    Also, I don't believe people that say "we will never forget". Does anybody really care about Pearl Harbor anymore? Exactly. Get over it, people. The country isn't getting better because of this renewed "patriotism", it is getting worse. Stop the candlelight vigils and do something meaningful!

  144. How it affected me last time I flew... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Well, last time I went on a plane was in Feb this year, on my way to Japan. There was still a fair bit of anxiety around the airport, and in particular for me when I walked into the waiting lounge to see six Afghani-looking, and in my opinion suspicious-looking men (apologies for my ignorance) waiting for the very same plane.

    Well, that kinda scared me a bit, and so I asked the flight attendant as I got on the plane, and he said he'd look into it. Well, it turned out that the plane was 1/2 hour late taking off because of me, because of some extra "checks" that they did. When the flight attendant came and told me that later in the flight, I was quite disappointed actually. By that stage I had psyched myself up, and had it all planned out what I would do when they pulled out the knives or other weapons.

    Yeah, that one across the aisle two seats infront was going down first! Then the one next to him. Luckily they were all split up on the plane, so by the time the other four got to me, I'd have those two out of the way! And by that time, I figured I'd have the help of the big athletic-looking guy four rows back.... yeah... And that old grey-haired Japanese man on the other side of the cabin, he would suddenly surprise everyone, pulling some cool Kempo-Grand-Master moves on the terrorists! Yeah, and then...

    Well, you can tell why they never attacked. They could tell I had it all planned out too well.

    1. Re:How it affected me last time I flew... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fsck man! You're so freaking retarded. That's the stupidiest crap I've read in a while.

  145. Re:Prepare for War! by macdaddy357 · · Score: 2

    Violence and militancy are no exclusively Muslim. Look at the Christians in Northern Ireland. Nothing divides us into hostile groups of us and them more than religion. All the atrocities in human history have been committed in the name of a god or religion. Religion is poison. Everyone should listen to "Imagine" by John Lennon, and think about what he was trying to say with that song.

    --
    How ya like dat?
  146. National Guard Incompetence by xXIMercutioIXx · · Score: 1

    I crossed the border alot this summer. No more then usual. But this summer was different. After Sept. 11th the border was stocked with armed guards. They were supposed to be trained in searching through things. One of them opened my bag and removed my $300CDN Minidisc player and tried to pull it open. He ripped the face off and put it back into the bag. I was compensated for it, but I think thats just some hurtin practices. On the plus side, I ate a bag of chips and found a $20 dollar bill inside *Score*

  147. Very Little by Microsofts+slave · · Score: 1

    9/11, has it affected my day to day life?, Hmm, I have to think about that but i dont belive so. In fact I think that many governments are overreacting to the scale of this. look at rowanda, thousands of men women and children died each day, but did you see people saying "oh thats soo pre rowanda" no, you dont What you instead see are the americans (I'm canadian) standing around looking shocked simplybecause ONE person blew up their "we are invincible mentality" Why do we dont see in the papers daily pleas for help from all the starving children in africa? I really think that 9/11 has affected me and the other 98% of the world diddly squat.

    --

    Tragek

  148. Saddened... by blankmange · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Saddened only because of the farcical patriotism that has been 'discovered' due to the attacks...

    Saddened because we blatantly refuse to accept any responsibility for the attacks...

    Saddened because we were not nearly as 'patriotic' after the Oklahoma City bombing - one of own did that, right??

    Saddened because our civil rights are being thrown away for a thin veil of 'security' when anyone can tell you that you are not any safer today that you were a year ago.... It is just as easy today to buy weapons of mass destruction, hijack a plane, buy forged documents, illegally enter the country... nothing has changed except for your lack of freedom..

    --
    ...we are from the government - we are here to help...
    1. Re:Saddened... by BCoates · · Score: 2

      Saddened because we blatantly refuse to accept any responsibility for the attacks...

      What do you mean 'we', white man? Perhaps there's something you need to get off your chest?

      --
      Benjamin Coates

    2. Re:Saddened... by blankmange · · Score: 2
      "We' as in the good old U S of A... training and financially supporting bin Laden and his cronies during the Soviet invasion, then abandoning them after the Sov's pulled out...

      Nothing I need to get off of my chest...

      --
      ...we are from the government - we are here to help...
    3. Re:Saddened... by BCoates · · Score: 2

      I suppose with my 20/20 hindsight we should have shot them while we had the chance.

      --
      Benjamin Coates

    4. Re:Saddened... by blankmange · · Score: 2

      or at least be a bit more proactive prior to handing out training/$$$ to terrorist groups, whether they are working for us or not....

      --
      ...we are from the government - we are here to help...
    5. Re:Saddened... by jgalun · · Score: 1

      Saddened because we blatantly refuse to accept any responsibility for the attacks...

      I accept that US government policies may have angered people across the world. That does not mean that I have to accept responsibility for the attacks, either personally or as an American. Just because Bin Laden does not like our army bases in Saudi Arabia does not mean that America was responsible for the attacks. Bin Laden was responsible.

      It would be one thing if we had declared war on Al Qaeda and then he attacked our army bases in retaliation. It is another thing when he declares war on America for having army bases in Saudi Arabia and then attacks our civilians. I do not have to accept responsibility for that.

  149. TV by hendridm · · Score: 1

    I have to sit through hours of patriotic programming on every channel instead of watching my normally scheduled programs.

    Have you gone to CNN, ABC News, NYTimes, etc lately? Apparently, there is no other news. I'm bored of 9/11. I read all there is to read in the year since it happened. Thank you, drive through.

  150. Liberals severely limit freedoms. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yea sure, the liberals so loved our rights. Like the rulings on affirmative action that say that it is OK for business and the government to punish you for having the wrong skin color.

    Or the liberal minority on the Supreme Court which last year tried to destroy democracy by approving one of Gore's vote tampering efforts.

    Why bring up the ACLU in defense? The ACLU is a leader in promoting censorship of religious views and other anti-Constitutional things.

    Freedoms are much more in danger when liberals are in power.

    1. Re:Liberals severely limit freedoms. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you sir is partikularly funny todey.

  151. The Puritans would be proud... by LuYu · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Are you asking how this has affected us in our daily lives besides:

    • the fact that governments around the world have now gotten the right to spy on anybody?
    • the fact that speech can no longer be free? (meaning that I and everybody has to watch what they say all the time... When I was a child, I was taught that this was a feature of oppressive socialist/communist regimes. Now it seems to be a feature Dubuya's global regime. You do the math.)
    • the fact that there is little or no regulation for these broad spying powers?
    • the fact that many countries are suggesting or enacting national biometric ID programs? (When I was a child, biometrics were for criminals (fingerprints). Does that make anybody who gives up biometric data to the government a criminal? I think so.)
    • the fact that by 2005 all foreign nationals (some of which are my friends) are going to have to submit biometric data to the US government to enter the country? (Is this like human region coding? It is certainly prejudicial, and you can count on the fact that they WILL ask US citizens in the future once it has been deemed "convenient" for foreigners. I suppose they could say it is not prejudical, then, could they not?)
    • the fact that by being a geek or different in any way I am now subject to the accusation of being a "terrorist"? (Looks like all those ex-football-player cops / thugs have an excuse to persecute geeks again.)
    • the fact that I cannot take a pair of tweezers on an airplane?

    The truth is, I am not really afraid of terrorists. I would certainly have a better chance of getting struck by lightning or winning the lottery and probably a better chance of experiencing both in the same day. I am afraid of government, though.

    The US government has been keeping records since the Social Security system was put in place. Everybody in the US has a primary key. IBM designed a similar system for the Nazis, and look what they did with it. What has IBM been designing for the US government since the 1930's? I am sure I do not want to know.

    When I was a child, I was taught that only people under oppressive socialist/communist regimes had to worry about their government spying on them. Now it seems, everybody has to worry. The entire industrialized world is now spying on its citizens, and these governments are looking to broaden their surveillance and information sharing.

    The government and the news media (the real terrorists) have drastically over estimated the threats posed by terrorists. As a result, the economy is in a slump. Jobs everywhere are scarce, and Linux has been directly affected by that ;)(ie. software projects canned by corporations, etc.)

    So, are you asking besides all that how this has affected me? Hmmm... Well, I have felt threatened since that day. A close relative of mine was fingerprinted at work (which means that she is now a criminal so far as the government is concerned, see above). I have postponed (indefinitely?) travelling to the US. I suppose I could also say that I have experienced a true witch hunt, just like the ones they told me about in school.

    --
    All data is speech. All speech is Free.
  152. Please Explain... by Robber+Baron · · Score: 3

    ...why in the hell you can still bring lighters on a plane! Well I'll tell you why...it's because fuckwad dumbya let himself get bent over by the tobacco lobby! His devotion to our safety is underwealming! Yeah, like he really gives a shit!

    Personally, I'd like to go back to the old way where you could bring nail clippers and plastic rifles for GI Joe figurines, but that would be asking the Americans to embrace logic and hell will freeze sooner than that!

    --

    You're using her as bait, Master!

    1. Re:Please Explain... by albanac · · Score: 1
      ...why in the hell you can still bring lighters on a plane!

      Bad grammer aside, I'd like to take issue with this statement. A very close friend and colleague of mine spent the months from July to November in LA. He was supposed to have been there for several years, and had therefore taken a large number of personal posessions with him, including a 20-year collection of unusual zippo lighers, which numbered about 30. Being a carefull person, he always removes the flints before transporting them.

      He is a white, professional, Englishman. His hold luggage was searched at LAX, and his 20-year collection of lighters was confiscated by the LAPD. He said 'Can I have a receipt for these, please, so that I can get them delievered to me?' They said 'No', and took 'em away.

      A mutual friend tracked several of them down, around February this year; the valuable ones had been sold at a collectors auction on behalf of the LAPD. The collection was worth some 3000 dollars. And it was stolen, because 'You can't take lighters on a plane'. In hold luggage, mark you.

      So I would like to dispute the statement (grammer corrected) that one can still bring lighters onto a plane.

      ~cHris
    2. Re:Please Explain... by unitron · · Score: 2

      If your friend had gone to that auction to try to buy back his property, would the LAPD have had someone planted among the bidders to run up the price? One of the greatest addictions these days seems to be that of law enforcement entities to seized property and money.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    3. Re:Please Explain... by albanac · · Score: 1
      If your friend had gone to that auction to try to buy back his property, would the LAPD have had someone planted among the bidders to run up the price?

      I have to say I fail to see how this is relevant. He'd already paid for his property, it was his property. Even if the price he bought it back at was a fair market value, the LAPD would still have made a profit off selling his property. Leaving aside the fact that I already pointed out, 1) that he was in Britain and 2) that the lighters were confiscated at LAX, so *whenever* he tried to come home, he'd just lose 'em again.

      ~cHris
    4. Re:Please Explain... by unitron · · Score: 2

      It's relevant in that the post September Eleventh changes in airport security proceedures provide law enforcement with yet another way to feed its addiction to the revenue stream provided by seizing assets, whether or not those assets were actually involved in real, proven in a jury trial crimes.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

  153. Look at Canada again before you say that by bluGill · · Score: 2

    Canada has its share of problems. Not the same problems as the US, but they do plenty of things to their people that a truely free socity would not do.

    Some of the things are different, so I cannot make a judgement of which country is worse, but for me, nice as the country is, their problems are worse than ours. (too bad, they got some beatiful girls up there who have made the opposite decision)

    1. Re:Look at Canada again before you say that by lburdet · · Score: 1

      you're on crack.
      i think that's all there is to say about that.

  154. Libraries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't know about you, but I think twice before I check anything out of the library.

  155. Don't support the ACLU by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Why support the Anti-Civil Liberties Union?

    Let's see:

    The ACLU is a leading force behind censoring religious speech.

    The ACLU claims to defend the Constitution, but basically ignores the 2nd Amendment.

    The ACLU is strongly in favor of executing people without a trial.

    The ACLU in its "diversity" efforts supports the idea of denying people rights due to their skin color. A major example of this is their resistance to the California Civil Rights Initiative. They argued that it was in the state's interest to deny opportunity based on race.

    The EFF? Yes!!! Unlike the ACLU, they are not hypocritical racist censors.

  156. Hysterical? by elefantstn · · Score: 2

    I just looked through this entire thread, and the worst thing anyone could come up with is longer searches at customs. So who's being hysterical here? Not /. posters, no sir, definitely not them...

    --
    If it ain't broke, you need more software.
  157. Crazy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All this extra security everywhere and I don't feel any safer.

    The only people who have "benefited" from all this are the congresscritters in Washington and they're Draconian laws. "Director of Homeland Security" seems like something from Nineteeneightyfour.

  158. Why Bush really won by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Republican that I'm at fault because Jeb Bush and the Supreme Court gave the election to GW"

    Bush won the same will Bill Clinton did: he won the states necessary to get the electoral votes. Jeb had little to do with it: he only had one vote, and his speeches on behalf of his brother swayed no-one.

    The Supreme Court had nothing to do with it. The redundant vote recount they denied Gore turned out in the end, when done later, to show yet again that Bush won Florida.

    Nader? Nothing to respect about him. He made destroying democracy (government funding and controlling elections) his top priority. Ill informed, and mean spirited. Not much comes out of his mouth that is truthful besides.

  159. Oh shit! You gotta fill out a card! by glrotate · · Score: 1

    WTF is this country coming to?

    1. Re:Oh shit! You gotta fill out a card! by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      Oh shit! You got to wear a little star of david on your shirt all the time! What is this country coming to?

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
  160. Re:Prepare for War! by BlackMagi · · Score: 1

    I think we all realise that this guy is basically wrong. Religious and racial tolerance are the best practise. Buttonholing the many for the wrongs of the few is a misguided approach. If you follow it, it will be to your detriment, and you will fall behind. Not to mention the hypocrisy. (something tells me I can't spell that word - it just look ... wrong somehow). -T

    --
    http://melbournephilosophy.com/
  161. The ACLU vs religious freedom. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "You should examine what the ACLU is doing in the area of religion."

    Yes. We have. Regardless of what the ACLU's "goal" is, they have in numerous cases taken the side of people in frivolous lawsuits which seek to censor/silence the speech of other individuals solely because that speech involved a religion that the intolerant plaintiff did not like.

    "The ACLU is seeking to enforce the SEPARATION of church and state. The separation of church and state is expressly stated in the constitution.

    No, it is not. All the document mentions is congress not making religion laws. You should examine the document sometime.

  162. Parking problems ... by jc42 · · Score: 2

    The biggest problem for me is that about once a week I go to a rehearsal that is in a building in downtown Boston that's close to the Hancock building. For those not familiar with it, this is one of the tallest buildings in Boston. For the past year, barriers have blocked all the parking spaces for the blocks around the Hancock, and the result is an even more serious parking shortage than usual in the area. It's a good deal for the commercial parking lots, though.

    Cute story: I couple of months back, I was walking past the Hancock, close to a small group of people who were obviously from out of town. One woman asked why all the barriers were in the street. A man replied "They're to keep people from flying planes into the building." Without missing a beat, another guy said "Looks like it worked!"

    The Onion isn't the only gang to manage to find humor in the situation.

    --
    Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
  163. Rumors and paranoia by uncoveror · · Score: 2

    While I can't blame legislation for the changes I have gone through, I can blame rumors and paranoia. At work, all non-office people have to pass through metal detectors, and be frisked, and wanded if the detector goes off. This was allegedly for "more security, but really, they are assuming that everyone but "the suits" is a thief. At work, they tell us every day how us lousy drones are lucky to have a job. The desk jockeys seem to think any chimp could replace those of us who actually work for a living. My wife was treated in very cruel fashion at the Social Security Administration by security for bringing in her purse. The sign that said "no packages" did not imply tat a lady's purse would be considered a package She needed to get a social security card with her married name on it. That security pig got off on rifling through her belongings, and accusing her of being illiterate, bringing in a "package." Since that day, every security guard thinks he's a real cop, and every real cop thinks he's god almighty. Last October, kids weren't allowed to have any Halloween because of absurd rumors about poisoned candy. It made me sad not to have trick or treaters coming to see my cool haunted front porch. They had loved it in 2000. Now not a day goes by that I don't here that absurd rumor about poisoned Coke or Pepsi told to me by a stranger, co-worker or relative who actually believes it. Since that day, we have been living in a state of siege, and America has been the land of the fearful, running scared. Freedom has been just another marketing buzzword. All the jingoism and flag waving that people call "patriotism" does not console my grief for the over 3000 dead, the kids who weren't allowed to have any Halloween, or the simple liberties we have lost. These things rub salt in my wounds. Far too much of the joy in life has been taken from us all. The terrorists have successfully terrorized us, and continue to. I could go on forever about how rumors, paranoia, crass attempts to make money off of our grief, and false patriotism have upset me, but that would be just too much to read. I think I will leave the idiot box turned off tomorrow.

    --
    The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
  164. Terrorism only works on victims like you by alienmole · · Score: 3

    Sorry you've been scared so much, but as a solution, I highly recommend trying to grow a spine!

  165. ACLU is never worthy of support. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm not sure that this attempted denial of rights by the ACLU is religion based, although they have a reputation for trying to censor and quash religious freedom.

    They are truly an anti-civil liberties union; the major lobbying group opposed to the Bill of Rights.

    I think they have been involved in efforts to stop private property owners (not just churches) from excersizing their property rights in other situations.

  166. Re: Sacrasm Detector by hburch · · Score: 1

    Sorry, my sarcasm detector exploded.

  167. australia doesn't matter. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're a former penal colony. Who cares what the genocidal, racist country of Australia thinks? Take care of the aborigines before you dare to type a single criticism of the world's greatest country.

    If the USA's Middle East policies were the "cause" of 9-11, what is the cause of Islamic Terrorism in Kashmir, the former USSR, Malaysia, Indonesia, The Phillipines, Sudan, etc, etc, etc?
    The problem is ISLAMIC TERRORISM, not the USA defending the Jews that have lived in the Middle East since before there was any such thing as Islam.

    Remember, if it weren't for the USA and the USSR most of the world would be speaking either German or Japanese today.

    1. Re:australia doesn't matter. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      to further the AC postings... cocksucker.

    2. Re:australia doesn't matter. by Empty+Threats · · Score: 1

      "Remember, if it weren't for the USA and the USSR most of the world would be speaking either German or Japanese today. "

      Instead, most of the world is speaking english, and corporations hire the death squads. Such an improvement on the imperial japanese system.
      (*Cough* Exxon, Coca Cola, we're looking at you)

    3. Re:australia doesn't matter. by sg_oneill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You're a former penal colony. Who cares what the genocidal, racist country of Australia thinks? Take care of the aborigines before you dare to type a single criticism of the world's greatest country.

      Ok, let's get one thing straight. (1)Like america , Australia treats it's aboriginals like shit. I'm not proud of it, and I hope the fuck you aren't proud of your country ppreceeding over the genocide of the 200 nations. Secondly, FOR FUCK SAKE THE USA IS NOT THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD. For instance many defence analysists have refered to the USA as , and I quote ;- "The #1 threat to world peace in the world today". The USA is not loved. Get over it. It's tolerated, and only because everyones fucking scared of it. At the moment it's led by a psycopathic nutter who didn't get in on a popular vote, who has signed the death orders of hundreds of his fellow countryman and seems hell bent on Killing any country that disagrees with it. Actually dude I'll give you a hint;- most of the world is terrified of the US and believe the world is in big fucking danger, and that's not from terrorists, it's from the US.


      If the USA's Middle East policies were the "cause" of 9-11, what is the cause of Islamic Terrorism in Kashmir, the former USSR, Malaysia, Indonesia, The Phillipines, Sudan, etc, etc, etc?
      The problem is ISLAMIC TERRORISM, not the USA defending the Jews that have lived in the Middle East since before there was any such thing as Islam.


      Whatever...... Just because theres overwhelming evidence that the US fucked up by installing Sadam Husain & the Taliban into power, it's OK, because USA #1 USA #1


      Remember, if it weren't for the USA and the USSR most of the world would be speaking either German or Japanese today.


      Oh yeah.. by the way I actually like americans, I just get wild when they put my country down and try to tell the world they are less then them. And I apologise to any americans out there, it's not really the best day for these sort of arguments, but a spades a spade, and I gotta call it.

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    4. Re:australia doesn't matter. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually...yuo're wrong....If every country hates us, how come we have 3 MILLION third world immigrants pouring into our country a year?? How come no matter WHERE you go, the stores, the companies and the WELFARE lines are run by Indians, Pakistanis or Mexicans? I wish those countries WOULD hate us.....then the poor kid in the slums can actually get a job at a decent wage rather than competing with a Pakistani for $2 an hour....

    5. Re:australia doesn't matter. by NetSerf2000 · · Score: 1
      Remember, if it weren't for the USA and the USSR most of the world would be speaking either German or Japanese today.


      Would you please explain to me why we should be thankful to a country who sat on their ass in two world wars until either they were attacked (Pearl Harbour, Dec 7 1941. 2 years after the war started) or some of their people were killed (Lusitania, May 1, 1915. 1 year after the war started) when my country was one of the first to go and fight.


      In the second world war. Of a population of approx 7 million, 1 million men and women joined up and serve their country in the war. Can America claim a similar percentage?

      Australia has never shirked from doing it's duty to help preserve world peace.

      Australia has never attacked anyone... Can the same be said of America.

      Australia has never used it's influence to topple a government to put a corrupt dictator on the seat of power, and then try and knock him off again after he takes the money and turns against you.

      I really feel for the people who died in the towers and I honestly think that they would be ashamed of the US government for abusing their death's in a powerplay to try and gain a foothold in the Middle East oil fields. Which Middle East country will be the next one to harbour terrorists, Iran? Syria? Lebennon? Saudi Arabia where Bin Ladin comes from?


      Or do we all have to start speaking with an American accent (to counter the german and japanese accents we would be speaking with now) because a corrupt small minded (man who is dominated by his father and the arms manufacturers and texas oil men who contributed to his campaign) wants to extend America's peace all over the world?


      Australia didnt fight in two world wars to stop dictators and tyrants just to let another one push the buttons of the world. If there is an attack today on 9/11 or close around it. Look for the bush administration's hand in it. How to justify an attack on another country... lets set them up... Gee... Hitler did that with Poland and then with Russia, so it has been tried before and it failed... I have a lot of American friends who read this website. I hope that they are ashamed of what their government is doing to propagate war instead of peace.


      And one last thing... If you had the strength of your convictions that your forefathers had, you would have posted your nick and email address up there so you could be flamed properly instead of hiding behind the Anonymous Coward tag like the gutless coward that you obviously are... I am properly going to be modded down to hell because of this and I will lose karma for it... But hey, learn a few things about the rest of the world before poking your useless head out of your shell again...

      PAX

      --
      *** I had a .sig, but then I got a life ***
    6. Re:australia doesn't matter. by Ex-Slinker · · Score: 1

      What he said !

    7. Re:australia doesn't matter. by Una · · Score: 1

      Now, while I truely hate to fuel a flame, I have a few issues with your comment.

      First off, Bush never signed anyones death papers.
      The people that signed these "Death orders" were Judges, who were acting on a conviction of CRIMINALS by a jury of their peers.
      As I understand it, the way the death sentance is carried out in Texas is the governer is given a form a couple days before the sentance, with two choices:
      A) Let em die.
      B) Give them a pardon.
      Dubba just decided to allways go with option A.

      Also, theres a reason everyone is scared shitless of the good'ol US.
      We have to keep all these crazy fuck nations in check, before they start WW3.
      I dont see anyone else trying to keep these whack job nations from nuking each other, causing a chain reaction of "Hey, India nuked pakistan, Lets go nuke someone just for the hell of it."

      The problem is, without the fear of someone totally fucking your day up if you decide to do something stupid, or pick on someone else, your just going to go ahead and do it.
      In the context of international politics, such actions can and often will open a whole 'nother can of worms.

      Theres reasons for everthing... Whats yours?

      --Una

    8. Re:australia doesn't matter. by FatAlb3rt · · Score: 1

      Texas is the governer is given a form a couple days before the sentance

      Actually, I believe that in Texas the governor only takes action when stepping in to stop an execution, otherwise it proceeds as scheduled.

    9. Re:australia doesn't matter. by FatAlb3rt · · Score: 1

      USA IS NOT THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD
      Easy to spout that out, but then who is? If the US is not the best country (remember, most folks speak of the best country as far as opportunity for the common man, not global politics), then exactly which country do you think holds that claim? I do think the US is the greatest country to live in, and I challenge you to show me one that's better.

      At the moment it's led by a psycopathic nutter who didn't get in on a popular vote
      Big frickin deal. Clinton got less than 50% too. Everyone knows the rules of the electoral college, it shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that it's possible to win the election with fewer votes. I feel the national election should be by popular vote, but it's not, and I'm not gonna whine just because things didn't go my way.

      seems hell bent on Killing any country that disagrees with it
      God, I hate sensationalism.

    10. Re:australia doesn't matter. by TheWickedKingJeremy · · Score: 1

      USA IS NOT THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD Easy to spout that out, but then who is? If the US is not the best country (remember, most folks speak of the best country as far as opportunity for the common man, not global politics), then exactly which country do you think holds that claim? I do think the US is the greatest country to live in, and I challenge you to show me one that's better.

      Damn, I am so sick of these childish claims and allegations... THERE IS NO ONE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD! Take Greece... Everyone who has ever vacationed there has had nice things to say about it... Yet recently they just outlawed video games. That is a little too socialist for me, thank you very much, but hey, that is just one more attribute of Greece that I must take into consideration when deciding whether I want to spend time there.

      The USA, likewise, has many good and many bad points... Australia the same.

      You sound like fools when you spout out opinions as fact. You might as well argue over the best movie of all time or the best color.

      --

      my religion lies somewhere between buddhism and super monkey ball - pamphlet?
    11. Re:australia doesn't matter. by TheWickedKingJeremy · · Score: 1

      ---- I messed up the link, but it appears as if it might not be an issue for much longer after all - so, bad example anyways...

      --

      my religion lies somewhere between buddhism and super monkey ball - pamphlet?
    12. Re:australia doesn't matter. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So is it a percentage question here? Because the amount of Americans in the armed forces by the end of World War Two exceeded the entire population of Australia. I can't find exact numbers, but it was over 8 million troops. And the U.S. suffered far greater casualties (295,000) than Australia (30,000), almost as many as Great Britain (330,000).

      So do those 30,000 Australian lives count just as much, or more, than the 295,000 US casualties? I'd imagine that each and every father, husband, and son who died fighting, as well as the women who died supporting them, counted far more as an individual than as a number or a percentage.

      Oh, so Australia was there first? Yes, the US was isolationist at the time, and very reluctant to get involved. How much of Australia's involvement was predicated on the allegiance to Great Britain? And why don't you take other countries to task, like Spain, that didn't even get involved? And why didn't Australia step in when Poland was overrun? Why wait until the faterland (good old England) was threatened?

      I've always admired the Ozzie spirit of self reliance, adventure, and toughness, but I don't see where you get off with your holier-than-thou attitude towards the US. Like just about every country, the US has, at times, been guilty of poor foriegn and domestic policy. Yes, although I count myself a patriot, I am ashamed of some of the acts committed in the past. And I often get frustrated with the way US society is today. But when it comes down to brass tacks, I think the US tends to do the right thing, and deserves the respect of the international community.

      As for some of your comments, well, you're just full of kangaroo dung. Comparing the Bush administration to Hitler? Come on! It's almost enough to make me think that I just bit into a big, steaming troll turd.

    13. Re:australia doesn't matter. by Libertarian+Girl · · Score: 1

      And something to keep in mind, is that not all American citizens approve of the way things are going, have gone, and currently exist.

      It is hard to balance two opposing emotions within one's self. The shame of being a USA citizen due to policies of the government & the bigoted prejudiced attitudes of many of the citizens; while at the same time being proud of being a USA citizen because of average ordinary people who had a dream of improving their life, came here, and actually put in the back-breaking effort to achieve it.

      I have moments when all I want to do is LEAVE. And then I look at other countries and they have their 'issues' as well. Different from ours in many cases. But I am forced to stop and think about the fact that there is no Utopia. And then my task is to see what I can do to create a little bit of positivity in my own small sphere of influence.

      compassion. tolerance. peace. spending money not on nuclear weaponry- but on researching non-radioactive-waste-inducing energy sources. spending money not on Standing Armies, but redistributing the vast surplusses of food crops to areas of the world suffering through drought and famine. allowing the peoples of the world to find a harmony of co-existence with religious ideals that are at odds with the other.

      Idealistic? yeah. I know. Don't be concerned for me though, I operate on a daily basis with a healthy dose of jaded cynicism. And I honestly do not see the USA making moves towards those directions for a loooong time to come.

      Out of all this garbage that has happened since the initial WTC disaster- one thing has stood out in my mind. The former NYC Mayor Guiliani rocking the boat and making waves by telling America that the proper and right thing to do is to make the entire area into a Memorial- rather than "redeveloping it". In honoring the people who got caught up in the tides of politics and died unnecessarily.

      ok. yeah, this probably isn't the best of days to be posting and ranting and such. I think I'll go water my flower that wilted, pet my cats, and do something low-stress.

    14. Re:australia doesn't matter. by quax · · Score: 1

      While living in the states isn't bad at all my wife and I currently very much enjoy living in Germany.

      My personal pet-peeve with the living quality in the states is the feeling of insecurity in some neighbourhoods. I very much enjoy feeling save here pretty much at any time at any place.

      There are some things I miss though. My wife's and my favourite country is Canada. We think it just has the right blend between European and US culture. If it just wasn't so cold.

      Don't know anything about New Zealand or Australia, but I was told that they also offer a very nice quality of living.

      I don't think anybody is qualified to call some country the greatest of them all, what is your basis for your decision, have you lived in all the others?

      DISCLAIMER: My wife is American I am German

    15. Re:australia doesn't matter. by SirSlud · · Score: 2

      > If the US is not the best country (remember, most folks speak of the best country as far as opportunity for the common man, not global politics), then exactly which country do you think holds that claim?

      Fortunately for you, the UN does a report to answer your very question. The US has never topped it, but its usually in the top 10. It was 6th in the 2002 report.

      I think what irks many people is that because the average patriotic american would rather have his guts torn out by a plastic spork than be, say, 6th in any given ranking, it is nearly impossible to get some americans to conceed that they are not the best. Nobody is saying the USA blows, and those that do are simply applying the same blind hyperbole that is found in blind no-questions-asked american patriotism.

      If I ran the world, my first priority would be to attempt to purge the #1 or Bust value so deeply ingrained in american culture. Out of 200-odd countries on this planet, 6th is still damned good. Plus, it leaves you with the ability and room to improve and become the best. Isn't it kinda boring just assuming the USA is #1? Why not enjoy being 6th of hundreds, and focus on the challenge and fun of improving certain aspects of the country (most notably wage distribution is much worse in the US than other countries).

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    16. Re:australia doesn't matter. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fascist, not socialist.

      Like the US.

      Sincerely,

      Australian

      P.S: To the international audience out there: I find it unfortunate that our own Prime Minister is a weak, pathetic worm who likes to lick Jr's crack. Please forgive Australia for acting like America lately. Liberal won't be in power much longer.

    17. Re:australia doesn't matter. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think that most USians think they are number one, because they don't really acknowledge the existence of anywhere else.
      For example: Where does an American come from?

      I'll bet 99% of USians wouldn't even consider the 20 or so other countries in the Americas.

      Another Example: In movies, whenever the US is in danger, it is always referred to as a world danger.

      And about being the greatest country: in girth, I would agree.

      Equalling the rest of the world in sales of pieces of KFC meat-like chunks is hardly a claim to fame.

      Sincerely,

      Australian (with a US citizenship so yes, I am unpatriotic and proud of it).

    18. Re:australia doesn't matter. by unitron · · Score: 2
      "If every country hates us, how come we have 3 MILLION third world immigrants pouring into our country a year??"

      Because they aren't stupid enough to let their hate interfere with going where they can make enough to live on?

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    19. Re:australia doesn't matter. by NetSerf2000 · · Score: 1
      You still dont get it do you...

      Per head of population, more Australians served their country in the war effort than the US did...

      You are right about the fact that each individual counts far more than as a statistic or percentage. Everyone who gave up their lives to defend the world against the tyrants of Germany and Japan are heros, they went the extra yard and gave their lives for freedom... But for a country which had fewer people than all the soldiers who were serving in the US military, those 30000 lives lost were a lot.

      As for doing the right thing, how many foreign governments has the US toppled with their black op slush funds and replaced them with leaders that were supposed to be supportive of the US. Only to have them then turn around, take the money and shaft the states... How many times have you been caught out at it...

      I wasnt comparing the Bush administration to Hitler... I was just saying watch out that there isnt a supposed terrorist attack that points straight towards Suddam and Iraq which then justifies an all out US attack on that country.

      Why dont I take Spain to task... Ummm if I remember rightly, wasn't Spain a neutral country... just like Switzerland?

      Neways... have a nice day mate...

      --
      *** I had a .sig, but then I got a life ***
    20. Re:australia doesn't matter. by sg_oneill · · Score: 2

      Actually...yuo're wrong....If every country hates us, how come we have 3 MILLION third world immigrants pouring into our country a year?? How come no matter WHERE you go, the stores, the companies and the WELFARE lines are run by Indians, Pakistanis or Mexicans? I wish those countries WOULD hate us.....then the poor kid in the slums can actually get a job at a decent wage rather than competing with a Pakistani for $2 an hour....
      I'm not saying everyone hates you. Maybe I needed to make that more clear. People are *frightened* of america. Not hate. The USA has a place in the heart , even for myself, but the govt fricking blows chunks. And over here in Aust, most Indians and Pakistani dudes tend to do pretty well for themselves. Most. Asia is on it's way up. I know here the old Australian fear of asians is fast disapearing (unfortunately displaced by fear of refugees :( and fear of middle eastern folk.) and the Indians and Pakistanis, perhaps being a former brit colony also tend to do well here.
      I dunno what I'm really getting at other than that the US is not the greatest country in the world. Neither is Australia or Brittain, or any of them. It's earth. Thats the best country.

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    21. Re:australia doesn't matter. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it seems you don't get it. I'm a little late to this, but you once again relate it to a percentage. But what about the natural resources and sheer manpower the US put behind the Allied effort? In fact, some say it was the sheer industrial might of the US that won the war. Much of that effort was supplied by those Americans who stayed home. So your first point about the sheer number of Aussies that shipped off to fight is just a stupid pissing contest. You choose to look at percentages because thats advantageous to you. I'll choose deaths because that makes America look a lot better than Oz. Maybe you should question why Australia is such a God-forsaken place that such a large chunk of its population jumps at the chance to die on foriegn soils? :)

      As for your final comment, it saves Spain from criticism to claim neutrality? But the US tries not to get involved but help out where they can, and you find fault with that? That's like approving of someone sitting on a fence watching a POW death march because they're "neutral" but finding fault with the person who tries to give the POWs water because they didn't start marching with them? Crimes of omission can be just as bad, sometimes. And do you think Spain would have lasted long as a neutral state, has the rest of europe fallen? Doubt it. Isn't that how it all started, letting your neighbor fall because you weren't directly threatened yet? Seems to me that Spain had more at stake that the US, yet they sat on their fence post. Oh yeah, the US is such a lousy next door neighbor. Whatever, you fsckwit. I don't have any more time for idiots like you.

  168. Average Workday in NYC: a year later by May+Kasahara · · Score: 1
    I've had my own little issues with the airports and the INS since "nine-eleven", but sometimes the most profound changes are the subtle, everyday ones.

    I get into Penn Station, and there are National Guardsmen scattered here and there. Walking to work, I pass souvenir stores with "FDNY" shirts and WTC postcards prominently displayed. Lots of people on the streets are wearing "FDNY" and "NYPD" clothing too. I pass by the bronze fireman statue on 44th (I think) and 8th, which is now no longer on a flatbed and has been permanently installed. A few more blocks up, and I pass the local fire station. Much of the stuff that's been sent to them from all over the country can be seen whenever the large doors are open. On the outside of the building as well. I get to work. "Can I see your ID, please?" Work like normal. During lunch, the Fox News channel blares paranoia. More work. Decide to hit the comic book store tonight-- they've got the new books in a day early this week due to "nine-eleven". Penn Station, more national guardsmen. Get home, feeling sick of this whole thing.

    Oh yeah, and tiny little American flags are everywhere.

    One thing I like to do: take the downtown E train. The cars still say "World Trade Center" as a destination. The conductors even announce it as a stop. Makes things feel a bit more sane, in a strange way.

    I'm going in to work tomorrow, but I'm dreading it. I want it to be a normal day, which it should be, but I already know it won't be.

  169. Photographing Police Officers by Alethes · · Score: 2, Informative

    A couple of weeks ago, a man was arrested for taking pictures of police cars in Philadelphia. You can read about it here.

    When I was in highschool 12+ years ago, I had a history teacher that went along as a chaperone on a school-sponsored trip to East Germany and the USSR. He relayed a story about one of the students on the trip starting to photograph a police officer and getting in a lot of trouble because of being perceived as a spy.

    We thought that was shocking, then, that a country could be so totalitarian as to prevent photographs of police officers.

    1. Re:Photographing Police Officers by hengist · · Score: 1

      I think the problem wasn't just that someone was photographing police cars - it's that someone middle eastern was photographing polic cars.

  170. BOOMTIME - no pun intended by gelfling · · Score: 2

    I'm in comp security. Every day the sky is falling and I couldn't be happier.

    1. Re:BOOMTIME - no pun intended by adb · · Score: 1

      No, yesterday was Boomtime. Today is Prickle-Prickle, 34th day of the season of Bureaucracy (of course).

  171. Dosn't Bother Me by Stigmata669 · · Score: 1

    I wasn't using my civil liberties anyway.

    --
    Yawn.
  172. Then watch Fox News instead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Fox News is a balanced alternative to the left-wing media you named (CNN, ABC, NYT).

    Sure, Bill O'Reilly is doing his show perched on the edge of the Ground Zero pit, but he is talking about other things of importance.

  173. Re:Prepare for War! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Amen to that. Plus, you spelt it right ;)

  174. get out of our country by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fucking H1B's are destroying America. Go back to your smelly fucking country and take your filthy habits with you. I swear, all immigrants do is try to make the USA into a stinking cesspool of shit. Quit taking our jobs, GET OUT!

    1. Re:get out of our country by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rofl, why not get off your fat white ass and go FIND a job yourself, instead of expecting one to fall in your lap and blaming those immigrants when it doesn't happen?

      And besides, wake the fuck up you disgrace to the white race, the USA is already a cesspool of shit. Take a look at the white trash (such as yourself) that has collected all around country. Instead of blaming other races for your unemployment and insigificance to the world, perhaps you should try doing something more productive, such as voluntarily getting out of the gene pool.

  175. He's right about the good McCarthy did by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He's right about the good McCarthy did. Most of those who suffered were actual Soviet agents (by benefit of having joined the Soviet government in the form of the CPUSA earlier). The result was that the Soviet force within the US was crippled and ruined forever.

    Then we cannot forget about the bad he did. A minority of those he persecuted were innocents who had friends who were Soviet agents (CPUSA members). This was not excusable.

    Elie Kazan was a hero. He was a former Soviet agent in the 1930s who saw the error of his ways. He did the right thing by "naming names" of those who still served the USSR in Hollywood. It is amazing how many in Hollywood, including younger guys like Ed Harris, look with favor on those in Hollywood who looked at Stalin killing tens of millions in Europe and decided "hey, I want to be a part of this!!!"

  176. Dissent is one thing. Treason is another. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dissent is one thing. Treason is another. Belonging to the "Communist Party of the USA", which was a branch of the Moscow organization, was basically a way to say that you hated the country and wanted America to go into the gulag.

    1. Re:Dissent is one thing. Treason is another. by chill · · Score: 2

      Political speech, short of advocating the violent overthrow of the government, has never been considered "treasonous" by any court in the U.S.

      Belonging to the Communist Party was a way of saying you were dissatisfied with the then current system. It was also, in some circles, fashionable. However, the vast majority of the members were "marching and chowder" members -- all talk, no action and there for the free drinks and wings. Hardly treasonous.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
  177. affected me?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I dunno... for some reason, every time I send an email about being "bombed" and talk to the "president" of my local charity (I'm treasurer on the board of directors), or happen to mention "bin" (/usr/bin) or how I'm heavily "laden" at work to the point where its really "killing" me...

    Suddenly these guys in black suits show up at my door to search my house...

  178. FEEL SAFE? by gnovos · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just flew into San Francisco this afterneoon and got searched *four* times. Now, there is nothing stange about that, becuase I flew one-way and had a lot of connections (got searched at each connection). The strange thing is this: I make a really spicy Habenero sauce, and just for fun, I carry it in a sealed medical waste bag complete with the biohazard flowers and multiple warnings not to open it. Didn't faze the inspectors one bit... Now my sewing kit, on the other hand, that instantly got them into a tizzy and it had to be thrown away.

    So, in case you were unclear on the concept of safety in America:

    Tiny sewing scissors with a blade capable of possibly cutting paper in about three-four tries - DANGEROUS

    Mysterious biohazard bag containing unidentified red goo - NO PROBLEM

    --
    "Your superior intellect is no match for our puny weapons!"
  179. Let's go to Canada! by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

    The most major change for me was that I could not get through an airport without being searched relatively thoroughly around 4 times apiece. I invariably, over 8 different airports, was singled out. The only reason for this so-called random selection (odds around 1:40000) that I could see was my longish hair and choice of wearing a beard. In other words, I somehow meet the profile of a terrorist.

    However, the good news is that I happen to live near a free country (Canada), and have considered many times to see whether I can part Lake Erie to lead as many of my people as will come to safety.

    In all honesty, I expected the Patriot Act sort of thing to happen soon after Bush's coup. 9/11 was for me, as soon as I had determined the extent of what had happened, the excuse to create a police state. For all I know, the president might know the exact location of bin Laden, or even be cooperating with him a la Attack of the Clones.

    And don't worry, I expect to be arrested for saying ... Oh S@$!T!!!!!!!

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  180. Flamebait!? by sapped · · Score: 1

    Why the heck was this modded flamebait? I was serious with each of these points!

  181. What the fuck are you talking about? by autopr0n · · Score: 2

    You forfeit your citizenship when you take up arms against the US. I, for one, am quite glad that Abdullah al-Muhajir is in a military brig with all access to his terrorist friends denied.

    If he committed treason, put him on fucking trial for that. Until he's convicted in a court of law, he is not a criminal. Innocent until proven guilty, damnit.

    And you know what, I don't give a fuck if it means that some guy who wants to blow up some buildings is walking around on the streets if the alternative is to debase everything that this country is founded on.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    1. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by joshki · · Score: 2
      Umm... no.

      Treason is a very specific crime. I don't believe anyone has been charged with, or tried, for treason since Aaron Burr. The process is laid out in the Constitution.

      If you decide to carry out a terrorist attack against the American people(or the people of any country), as he did -- you become an illegal combatant, a person who has no legal rights or claim to citizenship. Which means that a military tribunal will convene to decide his fate -- and you may never know about it. And I, for one, don't really care -- if some switch gets thrown in someone's brain that says "I want to nuke some civilians today" -- the world is better off without them.

      --
      I do not read or respond to AC's. If you want a discussion, log in. Otherwise, don't waste your time.
    2. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then how the fuck do you fucking know unless he is tried fairly?

      Shit your a dimwit. Your saying he's guilty until proven otherwise. WRONG it's innocent until proven guilty! Where is the evidence? Why is there no trial. Stop being a good little believer of the lies the Bush Administration say and think for yourself.

      Scum also deserve due process - that's what seperates us and the scum. They just want to kill indiscriminatly. We on the other hand prove they dotn deserve rights then lock em away forever.

      If he's guilty, fine, lock him in a 2 * 4 foot box in the desert. Until proven guilty however, he is innocent, so says even international law.

      Now, how about if YOU were being held without trial by the USA?

    3. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by sconeu · · Score: 2

      If you decide to carry out a terrorist attack against the American people(or the people of any country), as he did -- you become an illegal combatant, a person who has no legal rights or claim to citizenship

      Gee, even McVeigh got his rights respected. And he was definitely a terrorist.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    4. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by autopr0n · · Score: 2

      If you decide to carry out a terrorist attack against the American people(or the people of any country), as he did -- you become an illegal combatant, a person who has no legal rights or claim to citizenship.

      That's bullshit. If that were the case, the executive branch could imprison anyone just by saying they gave up their citizenship by "taking arms against America".

      Unless someone publicly announces to the whole world that they have given up their citizenship voluntarily, they should be considered citizens.

      Do you really think the founding fathers meant to have such a moronic loophole in the constitution?

      --
      autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    5. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by neocon · · Score: 1

      Umm, hello? He's not innocent or guilty, he's a prisoner of war, a combatant who is being detained. Or did you think that when our brave men stormed up the cliffs at Normandy, they read the Germans at the top their Miranda rights and put them in touch with their lawyers?

    6. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by neocon · · Score: 1

      True, because it was determined to not be worth demonstrating that Mr. McVeigh had violated the laws of war or taken up arms against us in contravention of the laws of war. Had these things been the case (as they were in the case of Mr. al-Muhajir, they might have taken this tack instead.

    7. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by ces · · Score: 1

      And why exactly can we not deal with Mr. Al-Muhajir the others in or against the United States the same way we dealt with Mr.McVeigh? If these people are such scum then there should be no problem obtaining a conviction in a fair and public trial.

      Think of it as the triumph of the rule of law against the lawless.

      --
      Happy Fun Ball is for external use only.
    8. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by newt · · Score: 2

      How can he be a prisoner of war when Congress hasn't declared war?

      Bush is giving all these war powers to himself by declaration and fiat. But until congress formally declares war, he can't possibly be a prisoner of war, and should be given a fair public trial. ... and Congress can't declare war, because it hasn't the faintest idea about whom to fight. So instead it has passed a few bills to provide resources for fighting terrorism, but the only notion of "war" that the US is involved in right now is purely rhetorical.

      Americans can be so hypocritical about their principles sometimes - that's why the rest of the world holds them in such contempt: The entire country is living proof of the maxim that humans are intelligent as individuals but stupid in large groups.

      --

      -----
      I tried an internal modem, but it hurt when I walked.

    9. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by neocon · · Score: 1
      With due respect, none of these powers are `new', by `fiat' or otherwise -- if you had read the thread, you would know that all of this was upheld in 1942, in a case which in no way depends on a declared state of war.

      If you think you can only be an enemy combatant if a state of war exists already, does this mean that you think that any Japanese pilot who had been captured during the attack on Pearl Harbor would have to be released, since we did not declare war on Japan until after the attack?

      As for `the rest of the world', the US government is not responsible to `the rest of the world' to defend America's citizens, they are responsible to those citizens. That means that our national defense comes before stroking European egos or appeasing third-world dictators. Deal.

    10. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by neocon · · Score: 1
      Why can't we? We could, if we felt that that would adequately protect America's citizens. However, as practiced since the earliest days of this republic, and upheld by the supreme court, when trying someone for taking up arms against the United States in an act of war (as opposed to murder, for which McVeigh was tried), military jurisdiction is used.

      Think of it of the triumph of common sense (and yes, the rule of law) over irrational paranoia and civil-liberties scare-mongering.

    11. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by newt · · Score: 2
      The US presents itself to the rest of the world as the world's last bastion of freedom and democracy.

      ... then it locks up its own citizens forever, without trial and without legal representation. And it pretends that there are some parts of US territory where the constitution simply doesn't apply at all (Guatanamo Bay - It is in US jurisdiction, y'know? So why doesn't the constitution apply?)

      If you're wondering why the rest of the world looks on the US with contempt, that hypocrisy goes a good way towards explaining it.

      If you had absolutely no idea that the rest of the world looks on the US with contempt, then that also goes a good way towards explaining it.

      Anyway, to answer your direct question:

      If you think you can only be an enemy combatant if a state of war exists already, does this mean that you think that any Japanese pilot who had been captured during the attack on Pearl Harbor would have to be released, since we did not declare war on Japan until after the attack?

      Nobody is saying that anyone has to be released. The argument at present is whether people who have been arrested should be (a) charged with a crime, (b) provided with legal representation, and (c) given a timely and fair trial -- Isn't that everything the US stands for?

      The fact that that proposal can somehow be conflated with releasing these people only goes to prove the abysmal quality of the public debate that has been carried out on this issue.

      --

      -----
      I tried an internal modem, but it hurt when I walked.

    12. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by neocon · · Score: 1, Flamebait
      And the answer to that answer is that as in all times in this nations history, those who are captured while waging war against the nation are held as prisoners of war. Unlike any other nation on earth, by the way, if they are citizens, this designation is subject to judicial review.

      If Mr. al-Muhajir was not waging war on the US, he will be remanded to the justice department by a civilian judge at the end of his current hearing.

      If he was was waging war, he will be treated as a prisoner of war -- or did you think that when our brave men stormed up the cliffs on D-Day they read a Miranda warning to the Germans at the top and put them in touch with defense lawyers?

      Mind you, your other comments give away your actual agenda here. Of course I am aware that there are those in the world who view our ideals and our actions with contempt. As I said, the American government is not responsible to them, it is responsible to the American people, and that means that defending the American people is a higher priority than kowtowing to European appeasers or third-world tyrants.

      Times have changed. European-ness envy is no longer the guiding principal of American foreign policy.

    13. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by newt · · Score: 2
      When American soldiers stormed the cliffs on D-Day, they were functioning under an actual declaration of war, with actual objectives, and an actual enemy.

      Your president and your congress have not declared war. They have no objectives, no identifiable enemy, and no stated conditions for the end of the "war".

      WW-II prisoners of war were released at the end of the war. Current US foreign policy hasn't even acknowledged that a state of war exists, let alone defined conditions for its end. Meaning that people like al-Mahajir will almost certainly be detained without trial forever.

      I'm amazed that you can't understand the betrayal of American principles which that outcome represents. That an American citizen can be locked up by his own Government, without trial, without evidence, without access to a lawyer, forever -- Why aren't you and all your countrymen screaming your outrage at the top of your lungs outside the White House?

      Orwell had it right: Eastasia and Eurasia existed in a state of perpetual war, allowing the Government depicted in "1984" to carry out any travesty of justice it wanted to under the justification of wartime emergency. Why can't you see that Bush Jr has created an identical state of perpetual war in the US?

      Or, to put it another way, how are you going to feel about this if al-Muhajir is still in jail in twenty years time, and evidence emerges that the US Government fabricated its accusations against him?

      --

      -----
      I tried an internal modem, but it hurt when I walked.

    14. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by neocon · · Score: 1
      First off, you do your case no credit by citing Orwell as you do -- he himself was a strong advocate of war as the proper response to forces like those who we face today, and was wounded, nearly mortally, in Spain backing that ideal up with action.

      Second, the majority of the wars the US has fought have not been declared wars, and not all have been against state actors. Jefferson himself (lest you claim that this is not what the founders intended) fought an undeclared war against a shadowy international terrorist group not unlike the one we fight now -- the Barbary pirates of North Africa.

      Finally, scare stories (`what if the evidence against al-Muhajir is fabricated') don't help you case. His designation as a combatant is subject to judicial review, and his lawyers are making the case against this designation in a Manhattan courtroom right now. A judge will rule, and if it is found that there is not sufficient evidence to consider him a combatant, he will be remanded to civilian custody.

      This is how prisoners of war are held, and always have been. Just as enemy prisoners in the second world war were not put in touch with hundreds of thousands of defense lawyers for millions of trials, prisoners of war in this war will not be either. Your attempt to portray this as something new or strange is absurd.

    15. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by newt · · Score: 2
      The difference between handling of prisoners of war in this conflict as opposed to handling of prisoners in any other conflict is that this conflict is, in all likelihood, going to continue forever.

      The practice of denying legal representation to prisoners of war is founded on the understanding that the war will someday end, and when it does those prisoners of war will be sent back to their country of origin.

      But this "war" will never end. Ever. The Administration hasn't even said what it hopes to achieve by fighting it (indeed, the Afghanistan operations have been simmering down for months, but the war rhetoric is no less pronounced than it has ever been during the last year).

      When do you think the war will end, and the prisoners of war can be released? If you're going to argue that what's happening now is just "Standard Operating Procedure", then you can't have it half way: There MUST be a time when the war finishes and the prisoners go home. So when is it? Does anyone know? Will it ever happen? Does anyone even know who the enemy is? Do you actually seriously believe that the US Military will make any impact at all on global terrorism by waging a "War On Terrorism"?

      --

      -----
      I tried an internal modem, but it hurt when I walked.

    16. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by neocon · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      With due respect, if you haven't heard the administration say what the aims of this war are, you haven't been listening at all. The administration has been crystal clear about what our goals are, most notably in speeches on September 20, 2001, in the state of the Union, in speeches last month at West point and the VFW, this very morning and evening, and dozens of other times through the spring and summer.

      We are fighting to dismantle a specific network of terrorists which has attacked us in the name of their twisted ideology, and to deter or dethrone those states who are developing weapons of mass destruction which could make their next attack many times more deadly than those attacks we have already suffered:. As very clearly specified in the Bush Doctrine, we are doing so as an exertion of our national right to self defense, both active and anticipatory. This is not the first time the US has been forced into such a war, and as much as we may wish it to be, it may not, be the last time.

      Now it's easy for you to sit in your chair, and pretend that this war is `never ending' or is about `perpetual war', but only an idiot could believe that these, rather than what I saw in downtown Manhattan with my own eyes a year ago today are the reason we fight.

  182. I got a ID card by NoMercy · · Score: 1

    Well I live in the UK and despite YEARS of bombings and killings by terrorists, because something happned to america we now have to carry our student ID cards with us at all times not just to exams, and are geting flashy new all in one thingies soon too, though I think it's all a lil pointless no taliban would ever attack my uni since a quick headcount of the class shows that most of us are Muslim anyway.

    1. Re:I got a ID card by frrank+the+crank · · Score: 0, Troll

      AND.....

      thats why they have all under survelance - DUHHHH.

      I dont see anyone else bombing shit but muslims. Truthfully, I can hardly wait for the next one to go off, then they will deport all of you from the US.

      No seriously, you are bing watched because so many of you were seen partying after the WTC massacre, so naturally we dont trust you any more, hell, we didn't trust the Japaneese either after we eves dropped on the embassy communiques beginning in 1936, thats why the supreme court threw out the Japanese clim for reparations, a high percentage of them were agents of Japan, Clinton just gave them reparations to buy their votes, they had long since lost their legal case.

      Its really fun when they declassify this stuff, especially the KGB files, turns out Hollywood was full of commy agents after all!.

  183. 9/11 inspired underwear by British · · Score: 2

    I walked into a Sears after 9/11, and saw a patriotic set of underwear being shown proudly there. There were usa-flag boxer shorts, etc, and the big kicker of them all, a USA-flag thong.

    What hath the terrorists brought us?

    1. Re:9/11 inspired underwear by JohnG · · Score: 2

      I don't want to see the woman that fits in a thong that has enough room for 50 stars and 13 stripes!

  184. State Troopers and harass (was Re:Canadian border) by COredneck · · Score: 1

    I took two weeks vacation from Colorado to Indiana, Ohio and Virginia. Had very few problems except in Virginia when I got stopped for tinted windows. I got a ticket for tint and non-compliant headlamps (to US DOT specs). The trooper who happened to pass by me thought I was suspicious and decided to stop me. My vehicle was searched. Not much to find except tools, laptop computer, mountain bike and clothing.

    That fishing expedition cost me several hundred dollars in fines even after dealing with VA County Attornies who insisted on paying up or else.

    Kind of leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

  185. VFR flying is still plenty free in much of the USA by Nick+Driver · · Score: 2

    I'm VFR only and not much has changed for me. Granted, I do live in the middle of the boondocks and the only towered fields nearby are 3 class D airports within a 40 mile radius, which I never have reason to fly to, except one occasionally. I pretty much mostly only fly to uncontrolled fields. I've flown my little Cherokee almost 200 hours in the past year, mostly just for fun, but also for a few long cross country trips, so yeah, I've certainly done more than my part to help out general aviation.

  186. My crippled brother and I by Mex · · Score: 0

    My brother (17 years old) had an accident a few months ago that left him with no feeling below his stomach.

    We live in Mexico.

    We heard of a clinic in Cuba called the CIREN (www.ciren.ws), where we were told, they could help him recover a lot, perhaps even help him walk again.

    Now we got a notice from a person who works in customs here, and he informed us that we should wait, that people whose passports are marked as having traveled to Cuba will not be able to enter the US... where my brother was receiving attention already.

    Anyone know if that's true?

  187. well.. by LocoSpitz · · Score: 1

    It wasted a total of 1 second of my life scrolling past pointless stories about the subject on Slashdot.

    That's about it...

  188. It's been wonderful by frrank+the+crank · · Score: 0, Troll

    Ever since they started rounding them up, there have been fewer Muslims hanging out on street corners here in the midwest - so of course that's good.

    Also, the gang bangers over Minneapolis have settled alot as well - cops have shot quite a few lately.

    The other thing I noticed is that all the damn immigrants aren't up at the Capitol asking for more free housing so my property taxes went donw a little as well (although $8,000.00+/year is till to godamn high).

    THe other really nice thing is you can yell nasties at liberals now and everyone laughs, so all in all, it's been a change for the better. :-)

  189. Camping Gaz by plnrtrvlr · · Score: 1

    Here's an odd effect of legislation passed in response to the Sept 11 tragdy: the price of my camp fuel has skyrocketed. It has suddenly been reclassified as an explosive (camping gaz??? I mean.... C'MON!!) and the shipping costs are now about twice what the fuel itself used to cost. Time for me to find some back-packing alternatives..

  190. Its effected free speech/personal protection by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    At least in my area, books are being removed from libraries and bookstores, you cant speak freely about many subjects without fear of being detained or investigated ( hey its legal now for them to do that )..

    Or metal detctors in many public buildings, searches at public arenas..

    Denial of law abiding and licenced citizens to protect themselves in these pubic areas...

    Welcome to the f-ing USSA...

    Our founding fathers are rolling in their graves about now at what we are allowing to happen in the 'name of security'..

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  191. If your at college, you should study grammar. by Scratch-O-Matic · · Score: 2

    No further comment required.

    --


    Evil is the money of root.
    1. Re:If your at college, you should study grammar. by AntiNorm · · Score: 2

      If your at college, you should study grammar

      Indeed.

      --

      I pledge allegiance to the flag...
      of the Corporate States of America...
  192. Lighters on planes - explanation by billstewart · · Score: 2
    Unlike the rules against bringing weapons on planes, I'm not bothered by rules against bringing dangerous things on planes, smoking in the bathrooms on planes, etc. The pressurized-gas lighters have been banned for a long time, but the non-pressurized-liquid ones (Zippos with oily lighter fluid, etc.) usually haven't been. Air pressure changes can cause Bad Things to happen to the pressurized ones, though that's much less risky since they banned smoking on planes, but the the worst that your Zippo will do is drip oil on your plastic stuff.


    Of course, once you arrive, there are the usual announcements about "Please refrain from smoking until after you've left the state of California", but that's a separate problem :-)

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
    1. Re:Lighters on planes - explanation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good combination: terrorist + zippo lighter + a few bottles of strong booze.

  193. Message 612 by jag164 · · Score: 2

    Out of 612 messages by whiners, ACLU fanatics, AC's, young punks who enjoy there freedom too much, some rational people, and a bunch of...well, assholes. Let me be the first to say that IT HASN'T AFFECTED ME AT ALL. Oh, wait. I had to wait in line an extra 90 minutes at EWR last month. I'm going out on a short limb here (b/c I know the answer): If you were magically warped back to 1941 and lived in NYC durning the mandatory blackouts and air raid drills, you fucks would be the ones who refused to turn out your lights b/c it's your freedom to keep your lights on? It's a damn shame it couldn't happen b/c sometimes I'd just like to see the bombs dropped on ya'll. Darwinism at it finest.

    We study the past to predict the future. Things will return to normal. Stop your bitching.

  194. Re:Why would it? --- offtopic by DrFrob · · Score: 1
    What do you fnord mean the illuminati are fnord shit? They control your whole fnording life.

    Does anyone know if the illuminati myth can be found anywhere outside (and predating) the Illuminatus and Schrodinger's cat trilogy's?

  195. other countries? by ryochiji · · Score: 1
    >Practices like this have been common in other countries

    When I lived in Germany in the 90s, I flew quite often inside of Europe (where security has always been tighter) and also to Japan and the US. I always carried a Swiss army knife, but they never confiscated it. One time, they made me take out a different larger knife, but instead of confiscating it, they put it in a special bag and checked it in as luggage.

    In the last year, here in the US, I've had my nail clippers confiscated as well (I accidentally left them in my bag) costing me a couple of bucks for a replacement. Not to mention the few occasions when they took everything out of my bag and patted me down as if I were some criminal.

    >There are more people willing to kill you just for being born where you born

    Wrong. There are people willing to kill us, not because we were born where we were born, but because of the offensive nature of our culture and stupid foreign affairs policies our government has. They hate us for a reason. Without understanding that reason, there will be no solution, just more needless violence.

    1. Re:other countries? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      They hate us for a reason.

      Alas, your media seems to be deliberatly hiding this fact. Am I the only one worried by this?

    2. Re:other countries? by reallocate · · Score: 2

      Different countries and airlines will imposed dofferent security regimes based on their assessment of the threat t the time you fly. I've flown on domestic flights in South Africa that involved three separate checkpoints on the way to the gate (each staffed by armed military personnel with dogs). They didn't pat you down, but they searched every piece of luggage, carryon or checked. Anything with a semblance of a sharp point was removed, heavily taped to prevent use, and placed in checked luggage. Mideast airlines typically pat everyone down before allowing passengers to board, and baggage is matched to each passenger on the tarmac by the plane.

      As for why they want to kill us, I don't really care. Nor do i think "understanding" them will make them change their minds. (Although some of us might change our opinions.)
      They're wrong. We're right. If you think they hate us because they find our culture offensive, think again. They hate us because they are medieval fanatics who don't believe in human dignity. There's no more reason to "understand' them than there was to understand Hitler. They are beyond understanding and reason; they have declared war on us and the solution is their destruction.

      Almost to a person, everyone I ever spoke with in Arabic countries who launched on a venonmous tirade against America concluded the converstation by asking me to help him get a visa so he could move here. So much for finding our culture offensive. Those aren't Americans lining up at all those overseas McDonald's, you know.

      --
      -- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
  196. U Go Matt! by dbCooper0 · · Score: 1
    That reminds me of some semi-militant-mail things I've done.

    When a magazine offer came in saying "Free Subscription" I would accept the offer, then mail the "cancel" request taped to a postage-free postcard.

    Since Peter didn't seem to know Paul, the suggestion to cancel didn't take so awful quickly.

    Don't even get me started on how I'd use two modems to pester Rush Limbaugh's 800 lines to saturate them every 10 seconds...

    --
    db
    Cig:
    ôô
    /`
  197. i must say... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The people who are posting on here bitching about bush are ignorant because he isn't the only person taking freedoms...about 90% of our elected officials are. Gore would have done the same as bush...most likely nader also...in fact i think on Browne would have done differently. and no, i dont associate myself with ANY political party. I am just looking at what each of them stands for and well hey...

  198. 9/11...So What? by Black+Rabbit · · Score: 0, Troll

    Does it matter? Baby Bush would have found/created another excuse to continue the conversion of the US from a quasi-democracy into a police state dictatorship.

    More to come, folks! Just sit back, relax, and watch as everything you ever enjoyed gets taken away or otherwise monitored all in the name of national security.

    1. Re:9/11...So What? by frrank+the+crank · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Im 43 years old, my Dad is 75, the only people who have passed laws in the US limiting my freedoms are do-gooder liberals that have no made it crime to speak and think what you will (hate crimes, and they only apply to white people) my property rights - they can take from me at will and build a parking lot on it in the name of "community"- they can also tell me what i may or may not build on it, grow on it , etc.

      They decide what moral lessons my children will learn (not anymore though, they are in private schools)they decide who I MUST commune with, they destroy property values by condeming property and building "low income housing" on it, then moving a bunch of free loaders in.

      They have passed laws effectively removing the natural right to protect my home and property by declaring it a no loss situation because i have insurance. They tax me at ten times the rate of other people simply because I'm smart enough to know how to make money. they'll tax me when Im dead on money they taxed while I was alive so they can "even out' the balance between me and some moron who won't get out of bed in the morning, oh yeah, love those democrats of the farmer/labor party -

      Hell, it is no ILLEGAL to pick up a rock in a National Park, and the list goes on and on forever. But if your a poor victim "of the state" we'll let you out of Jail early and then you can go and rape/murder another child somewhere.

    2. Re:9/11...So What? by frrank+the+crank · · Score: 2, Informative

      Your a godamn fool, it was clinton and his left wing politics that could have locked bin laden up twice and didnt - he was too concerned with gettin his rocks off to be bothered with that.

      You dont even see that 1984 is all about whats going on in the public schools in this country, they are progressively dumbing them down - go visit a private school and be amazed at the difference in education - those kids actually still have to read and get tested on the Constitution. Do you really think it's an accident that the top schools in this country are private ? it wasn't always so, but it is now.

      All your being taught is how to pull the ballot for Democrats, period. THe sad thing is, now the republicans are into the same give away politics, take from the "MAN" and give it to you, 30 years we still could see that for what it was "vote for me and Ill set you free" dude, they have legislated away your right to think, Im not a racist, but any one used to have the right to say anything they wanted- except for the "fire" in a crowded theater test, all else was allowed, even saying "fu*k you" to a cop - which actually went to the SUpreme court, not anymore, thanks to do-gooder liberals, that's now considered "hate speech" ALL SPEECH IS PROTECTED BY THE CONSTITUTION- unless your a liberal, then you must control it.

      AND that, oung man, was what the book 1984 was all about, dumb the masses down so they cannot think critically anymore, reduce their vocabulary and reduce their ability to think, and control their speech, make it "politically/culturally" incorect" to speak your mind, and thus control your thoughts.

    3. Re:9/11...So What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm a fool? Holy shit! It was YOUR OWN FUCKING GOVERNMENT, probably that brain-dead Reagan, but just as likely Papa Bush, that trained and financed Osama in the first place!

      If all speech is protected by your constitution, why has Baby Bush managed to pass laws restricting it, i.e. the Patriot Act, or whatever it's called, in the name of national security, just as I point out.

      As for the 1984 process, this has more to do with the Right Wing controlled media down in your country that has more to do with dumbing down things so that people don't think about them. You think your media is left wing? Take a close look at who owns the bulk of it, and you'll notice that it's all Big Business, who, by definition, have a vested interest in keeping people occupied in things superficial rather than what's really going on, not only so there's any reason to change, but so they'll keep on being good little consumers, because that's what your media is really all about...selling beer and cookies. Left wing types watch PBS, not Big Brother, Cops and The World's Worst Drivers, and care a little more about what the government is doing, rather than concentrating on what Bill Clinton chose to do with a certain intern. Has it occurred to you at all that the media keeps you preoccupied with stupid crap like that, rather than report on things that really matter?

      9/11 should have been a big eye-opener, but it's clear that Americans have learned nothing whatsoever from the experience. All of you, right now, ask yourselves, just as you should have done this time last year: "Why do people hate us so much that they're willing to do this?", then sit and think, really THINK, about it!

      So don't go telling me I'm a fool, when it's really the lot of you who can't or won't open their eyes to what's really going on. Don't automatically wrap yourselves in your flag and bury your heads in the sand! You people obviously value your freedom...does it make any sense to forfeit your freedoms so you can keep your freedoms? Can you say "paradox"? But this is clearly what is going on.

      As for my previous post, it most certainly wasn't meant to be a troll. The American people really need to wake up and smell the post-9/11 coffee!

  199. Radioactive Story by silvaran · · Score: 2

    My uncle finally got cancer after smoking 3 packs of cigarettes a day for 25 years. He had thyroid cancer, which is one or more tumors located near your thyroid gland (in your neck). This was discovered shortly after his mild stroke. He ended up getting a tracheotomy (they punch a hole in your throat and you breathe through a tube) after the surgery, and had what he calls a "nuclear drink".

    While down in the states, he lost his traech (the tube that sits in the hole), and didn't notice until they crossed the border on the way into Canada. He and his wife decided to go back to the U.S. to find it. While driving around late at night, retracing their steps, a cruiser pulled up and armed guards jumped out of the car. They rifled through my uncle's truck, throwing things out, and finally stopped at the window so my uncle could explain he had cancer and was taking a "nuclear" drink. The troopers were carrying some kind of geiger counter that had picked up his medication. They let them go.

    On the way back to Canada (for the second time), they were about to drive away from the booth when an armed officer comes rushing out out of the customs office screaming, "stop that car!" The fallout from the medication had set off the sensors in the customs building. They had a bit of explaining to do.

    So yeah, if you have anything that even remotely decays (some home appliances, like smoke detectors, may even have traces of radioactive elements), be prepared to be seized and searched.

    1. Re:Radioactive Story by adb · · Score: 1

      An interesting question is whether a genuine smuggler of nuclear material could have done exactly what your uncle did to get something genuinely dangerous through the border.

    2. Re:Radioactive Story by silvaran · · Score: 2

      Not unless this smuggler was hiding it in his stomach - they searched everything (except rectal cavities). Colon cancer? I think so.

    3. Re:Radioactive Story by adb · · Score: 1

      I guess my real question was, do the customs inspectors necessarily know the difference between a "nuclear drink" and an equally radioactive liquid whose radiation source is Pu or enriched U?

  200. Only in America... ? by Cinematique · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Only in America would we have personal liberties taken away under the guise of fighting the war on terror, or am I wrong? Surely, I am. Video game ban in Greece, anyone? There are other countries that pull this shit. America is not alone. Anyone that's reading this from Canada, a European Union country, or any other nation, really, thinking that your shit doesn't stink, wake up.

    But here's the real question: Why? What incentives are there for the leaders in OUR government to take away personal liberties? Do they get more money? Do they feel safer? Do they feel as if they're "doing something" instead of standing around "ignoring" an issue? It really boggles my mind. If someone can answer any of these questions for me, you'd earn my utmost respect.

    The thing that really blows my mind is how we have so many new laws as result of the attacks on 9/11. I don't feel any more secure due to them. So why were they enacted? I certainly don't feel any safer knowing that murder is a serious crime if I'm walking around alone at night in a seedy part of a town I've never visited before. And I don't feel any safer knowing airline passengers can't carry toe clippers onto 747s.

    There are two things I have learned from these attacks. Not only have I firmly cemented my anti-racist core, but furthermore, I have found, for lack of better words, that I am a "Logic Elitist." What's this, you ask? I have a strong hatred for those who can't backup their reasoning with sound, logical conclusions and reasoning. I hate stupid people.

    We shouldn't test people for drugs, we should test them for stupidity, ignorance, greed and love of power. -PJ O'Rourke

    1. Re:Only in America... ? by adb · · Score: 1

      Why do our rulers take away our rights? Here are some possibilities:

      1. "Because they can." Anyone who has a lot of political power got it because he wanted it so much he dedicated his life, his honor, and his sacred fortune to getting it. Do you think that kind of motivation comes out of a desire to help one's fellow man, rather than being simply for its own sake? If not, then it is clear that any politician will try to maximize his power, taking whatever he thinks he can get away with. It merely happens that now he can get away with more.
      2. They're genuinely interested in protecting truth, justice, and the American Way, and now it is necessary to override the Constitution at any and all points so that the terrorists will not be able to kill people fast enough to destroy America and what it stands for (i.e., the Constitution). Under no circumstances will persons or organizations be designated terrorists who are not actually terrorists.

      I can't imagine what conclusion a rational person would draw, being myself a stark raving paranoid loon.

    2. Re:Only in America... ? by frrank+the+crank · · Score: 1

      It isn't for power, they already have it- loads of it, you can't even imagine. I can, I have been with in it's sphere before, it is truly amazing to see, touch, feel, smell( yes, you can indeed sense it that way, most of all in those around it who want to be close to it).Its not just money, it's the power to change people's lives, for the good or the better, at the whim of your choosing, not because of your wallet (although having a fat one is part of it) but because of who you know, and control.

      For a better grasp of what's going on, study Lincoln's reasoning behind suspending the "writ of habeus corpus" during the civil war, it is a text book analysis of civil liberties and the issues surrounding national security ( required study for both Poly-sci and law majors) and it is from thence that the Fed is drawing it's present powers - and they haven't even suspended the writ yet.

      What you do not understand, is that they cannot treat billigerants as citizens, it is impossible and no nation has ever done that, it's more then impossible, it's down right absurd. DO you think we read Japaneese or Germans their rights? NOOOO.

      THe government is in a position of "damned if you do, damned if you don't" Dont you see what would happen if another attack is successful? And it's successful because they decided not to inconvienience people? WHat americans are being asked to deal with, and anyone who crosses our boarders, is nothing more then you put up with any where else in the world you travel.

      Are you all forgetting the nut case islamofascist who they caught trying to cross the border between BC Canada and Washington state with a trunk full of explosives just before New Years Eve in 1999? where do you think he was headed with that stuff?

      It will not be an air liner the next time, it will be a bomb, made right here in the US. Dear god, they are selling copies of the Dan Pearl video (WSJ reporter) showing his torture and execution. You cannot apply western thinking to these people, they are not even remotely aware of the value we place on life, not even close.Jesus, they stone people to death, in Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, et al.

      The long and the short of this is thus, study history, we have, as a nation, always reacted this way when our shores were threatened. Had you even an inkling of US history you would know that.

      Go to debka.com and get an outside view of it from someone else involved in it.

  201. Despite everything by tutal · · Score: 1

    I have not been affected one bit.

  202. I choose the former... by Pollux · · Score: 2

    ...and I don't live in NYC.

    Of which are you more afraid: of what you say in public or of death from above while you're just minding your own business?

    If you chose the former, you probably don't live in NYC.

    Let me put it this way: If I choose the latter, I may as well be dead. I would be sacrificing one of the fundamental rights that this country was founded on: the pursuit of happiness. I absolutely refuse to live a day of my life where I am paranoid about dying from sunrise to sunset. No terrorist will make me fear my life. They cannot take that away from me.

    My problem is when my own country tries to take the same principle away from me when that is the foundation of the country. A country that tears itself apart so that others may not have the pleasure of doing so is no country at all.

  203. Re:State Troopers and harass (was Re:Canadian bord by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well it sounds like you're the type of person with the type of car modifications that do nothing but make the car look disgusting, and i think that deserves a ticket, especially if its a neon, civic or jetta.

    But really, this has nothing to do with september 11, you had the misfortune of running across a state trooper who was being a dick, perhaps because he was having a bad day or had the same opinion of you're car as I do. Unprofessional, but in no way is what he did wrong, you allowed it to happen.

  204. Good luck with your speech... by Pollux · · Score: 2

    Yes, I was surprised when I saw that it was modded to Funny, because I was being downright serious. Anyway...

    I think the best speech you can give fits the same guidelines. Be serious, though with a humorous overtone. Remember, though...Slashdot has always been about free speech, because America is suppose to be founded on the same principles. Rosa Parks wasn't upholding the "American rights of the 1950's" when she got on that bus. She redefined them. Don't be afraid to do the same thing.

  205. Foolish Beyond Belief by reallocate · · Score: 2

    Anyone who wants to turn a nail clipper into a weapon is going to do it before they get on the plane. And just because airport security is lax enough to allow one kind of weapon through is no excuse for laxity about other weapons.

    I'm not selling anyone's freedom. I'm not arguing that U.S. airline security is good. I'm not fooled or lulled into a false sense of security by anything that's going on at U.S. airports. Airport security here is still nowhere near what it should be. (See the post directly below about El Al.)

    I am, however, arguing for the freedom to fly without threat from terrorism. I have absolutely no sympathy for the original poster who whined about his dad's nail clipper. Are you people so pampered, so isolated from mainstream American reality, that you equate a ban on a small cosmetic tool as a threat to the republic?

    If you are willing to die so you can carry a nail clipper onto an airplane, you're foolish beyond belief.

    --
    -- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
    1. Re:Foolish Beyond Belief by GigsVT · · Score: 2

      If you are willing to die so you can carry a nail clipper onto an airplane, you're foolish beyond belief.

      If someone ever manages to take over a plane with a goddamn nail clipper, I will willingly kill myself. How's that?

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    2. Re:Foolish Beyond Belief by Carter+Butts · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you are willing to die so you can carry a nail clipper onto an airplane, you're foolish beyond belief.

      And if you are foolish enough to think that these so-called "security" measures are somehow "worth it," I've got a large bridge to sell you. Tell me, how many miles per year do you travel by automobile? Do you have any idea how much more likely you are to be killed by a car wreck than by a terrorist? The cold, hard fact of the matter is that majority of Americans are quite willing to make risk/convenience trade-offs on a daily basis which display far less risk aversion than would be needed to justify the massive inconvenience of current airport security measures. Alas, mention the "T-word," and all sanity flees the room on wings of silver. "If even one terrorist is stopped," we are told, "any price is worth it!" But this is folly, and should be identified as such. We don't think this way when purchasing insurance, and we surely should not do so when purchasing questionable security with our valuable time, freedom, and money.


      I for one, will take chances for my freedom -- and, yes, for my convenience as well. Ironically, so will virtually everyone else, so long as the decision isn't framed in terms of a "terrorist threat."


      -Carter

    3. Re:Foolish Beyond Belief by xtremex · · Score: 1

      2 million people died ths year in the US from fatal diseases, car accidents, etc. My mother-in-law died of cancer in January..while THOSE people's loved ones suffer in silence, the the family members of the 3,000 who died in the WTC are on Larry King Live...and get money from the government...how come no one is mourning the millions who dies a year?

      --
      If you're not a Liberal in your 20's, then you have no heart.If you're still a Liberal in your 30's you have no brain.
    4. Re:Foolish Beyond Belief by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      I could probably kill someone with my bare hands. Does that mean that I should be required to have my hands tied behind my back to fly on a plane? What about the rest of the passengers? They have hands; maybe they should all have their hands tied! Including the 70 year-old granny; she might be a trained killer!

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
  206. Constitution, Treason, Unlawful Combatants by billstewart · · Score: 2
    There's no Constitutional support for your assertion. The Constitution says "Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court." and the following amendments are quite explicit about the rights to due process for everybody - there's no mention of Citizenship affecting any rights up through the 12th Amendment other than the right to be President and who gets counted for voting. The only limitations given are that if you're in "land or naval forces or the Militia", during war or public danger, they don't need a Grand Jury to accuse you to a court, and there's nothing that prevents Congress from letting the military have their own courts for their own members, subject to their legal definitions of due process, but there's still no definition of "illegal combatant" that has Constitutional backing except when applied to members of the US military, and there's entirely no way that native-borns lose their citizenship without a trial for treason. You may lose your moral right to citizenship by deciding to attack the US, but until and unless there's a trial and you lose, you still have your legal right to it.

    This doesn't mean that the military or police can't shoot you to protect the public if you're in the process of shooting people or waving around nuclear weapons, but it's illegal for them to do so except in clear and present danger, and if they can arrest you without killing you, you still have the right to a speedy and public trial with full due process, with none of the kind of Star Chamber secret trials or military kangaroo courts that helped motivate our predecessors to throw out the King. If you're a US soldier or actively in the Militia during a war, they may be able to give you a trial that's speedier and more public than you'd like before shooting you, and it might be argued that if you're planning the terrorist attack, there's a war or public danger even though the rest of the military doesn't know about it yet. But if you're a civilian, that still doesn't apply to you.

    There's some ambiguity about whether being a citizen of one state makes you a citizen of all of them, which the 13th Amendment tries to address, and there was an amendment that may or may not have been ratified in 1819 that would revoke citizenship from people who accept foreign titles or (without permission) foreign government employment, and there are some civil rights you can lose as a penalty for some crimes (or until 1870, by being a slave or politically incorrect color), and the 14th Amendment distinguishes between privileges of citizenship, which can be abridged as a punishment for crimes, and equal protection of law, which applies to everybody within the states' jurisdiction.

    There's an Ask Yahoo question asking if anyone's been tried for treason in the US. It gives a rather incomplete answer - details about Aaron Burr and John Brown, and also about a German-American who was imprisoned for treason in 1947 for non-violently helping his son, a Nazi spy who was executed. There's been lots of other press about the topic of treason since Johnny Walker Lindh got caught. Aaron Burr was acquitted; Tokyo Rose was convicted and jailed, later pardoned by President Ford.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
    1. Re:Constitution, Treason, Unlawful Combatants by joshki · · Score: 2

      Check out this link. neocon has done an excellent job of laying it out in his journal, so I won't rehash it. The point is, you give up many of your constitutional rights by taking up arms in a manner that contravenes the laws of war (Geneva Convention, etc.) This is what he did, and why he will probably be tried before a military tribunal at the convenience of the government.

      --
      I do not read or respond to AC's. If you want a discussion, log in. Otherwise, don't waste your time.
    2. Re:Constitution, Treason, Unlawful Combatants by GooberToo · · Score: 2

      He did lay it out rather well but unless I completely missed something, they do not give up their constitutional rights. Furthermore, I read that they, the tribunal, is allowed to "handle it", however, I did not see where he would be deprived of due process of even being classified as an illegal non-combatant.

      This means, Constitutional protection exists until it's been proven that he falls under their jurisdiction.

      One of the passages even site that it must be "constitutionally established". This means, in no way, shape, or form, should he denied his chance for constitutionally protected due process to establish his status.

      Bluntly stated, assertion that these people no longer receive any constituational protection is grossly incorrect.

  207. "Funny"? by CrystalFalcon · · Score: 2

    This was moderated Funny for some reason. I don't find it funny at all, just depressingly true and insightful. :-/

    1. Re:"Funny"? by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 1
      "This was moderated Funny for some reason. I don't find it funny at all, just depressingly true and insightful. :-/"

      True. But we're so used to it that we don't usually consider it to be something debatable or out of the ordinary anymore.

  208. Re:Even less confidence...Funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Democrats think Republicans use war to push their agenda.
    Republicans know that Democrats use Recession to push their agenda.

  209. Re:Prepare for War! by jdbear · · Score: 1

    I don't know, he has a point. After all, have you ever read the koran? Mohammad was a raving lunatic from the get-go. In a single breath he would say how the Muslim would find a friend in the Christians, then he would go on to explain how a good Muslim should then "Kill all the infedel whenever you can."
    Read a bit of it first, then tell me how peaceful and loving the muslim faith is. After all, islam doesn't mean peace, as was explained by several muslim clerics shortly after September 11th, 2001. It actually means "Submission" and a Muslim is "One who submits."

    --
    If you're not living on the edge, you're taking up too much space.
  210. Re:Soviet Union by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Um, you do realise that millions - between 10 and 40 - million people were executed under Stalin...

    The US isn't there yet :-\

  211. Re:State Troopers and harass (was Re:Canadian bord by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You don't even know what you are talking about, asshole. Someone goes on vacation gets hassled for something they are allowed to have at home like in Colorado and you have the audacity to blame COredneck for getting stopped in Virginia.

    FYI, Virginia has some of the harshest anti-car laws on the books and happens to be so anal that radar detectors are illegal there. It is well known that Virginia cops hassle out of staters for stupid things like window tint. Give the guy a break......

  212. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  213. Turnabout by N8F8 · · Score: 2
    I wonder if we'll ever get to the point where Americans are freelancing around the world using terrorist tactics against countries who support terrorism? Like float a boat into Lebanon and drive a bomb-packed motorcycle into the hotel where the terrorists hold regular meetings. You can bet if my children were harmed by one of these wacko groups I'd be looking for payback.

    Having said all that, I do know that these wackos are in the minority in most of the countries they come from. I've had many Saudi and Bahraini friends who had no animosity for the USA. But they still preferred their own country and lives over our own.

    --
    "God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
    1. Re:Turnabout by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "But they still preferred their own country and lives over our own."

      As long as we view such cowardly attacks as the actions of countries or religions wouldn't we be at the same level as terrorists?

      You use the word 'our' as if your or another americans life is different then that of any others, and that lives are to be grouped in order of preference or priority.

      Not all of those killed -by- september 11 died -on- september 11. I'm sure they preferred their lives and country too.

  214. One of the unaffected masses? by still+cynical · · Score: 1

    I can honestly say that I haven't seen any (direct, observable) effect on my day-to-day life. I suspect that the vast majority of Americans would probably say the same, and this is what worries me the most. We are rushing to sacrifice the rights and freedoms of OTHERS for OUR "safety". This is why poll after poll shows Americans willing to sacrifice their rights and freedoms, because they beleive it won't affect them, only someone else. Why don't people realize how quickly they can become the "someone else"?

    --
    Ignorance is the root of all evil.
  215. Re:Prepare for War! by BlackMagi · · Score: 1

    No, but I hear it is full of rather Draconian stuff. I've always been of the opinion that whatever you take to extremes will be bad, never mind the underlying religion. But I'll agree on a personal level that I think that the Muslim culture seems to foster an extremist attitude more than most others. I'm not saying I approve of the approach, but I think that the correct response is to try to foster peace, rather than us it as an excuse for violence of our own. Down with the other guys! Hooray for us! Yaaay! -BM

    --
    http://melbournephilosophy.com/
  216. The WTC BOMBINGS are an ABSURD LIBERAL MYTH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We've all seen the news coverage surrounding the anniversary of September 11, 2001. It amazes me that so many allegedly "educated" people have allowed themselves to be so swiftly deluded by a fraudulent fabrication of such ridiculous proportions. The very idea that not one, but two jumbo jets would crash themselves into a famous New York skyscraper -- in broad daylight with vigilant air-traffic controllers and tight airport security watching every move of every craft in the air -- is laughable. Furthermore, it is a horrendous affront to the world-renowned intellect and common sense of the American people. The fact that anyone could actually believe this is evidence that the Liberals -- after decades of waging war against intellectual integrity and honesty -- have finally ripped the few remaining, tenuous strands of control of our educational system from full-blooded, hard-working, God-fearing Americans.

    As such wonderful documentaries as The Siege have so articulately exposed, the Liberal masterminds in Berkeley and their toadies throughout the nation have been silently waging war against the American people and their God-given rights to protect themselves, their worship, their family values, and their hard work. Much of this has been conducted under the guise of preventing "terrorism", a meaningless word engineered by radical left-wingers specifically to bring fear into the hearts of honest Americans. Think about it -- can you remember any reference to so-called "terrorism" that occurred before Liberals invaded our government offices in the last decade? Of course you can't, because despite whatever the revisionist histories may tell you, there is no mention of any "terrorism" in classic literature before 1980. Only then did the neo-Marxists invent such absurd figures as Timothy McVeigh and Osama Bin Laden in order to legitimize their anti-freedom agenda, drowning the spirit of the American people in a blatantly-engineered machine of fear and mourning for "victims" of these "terrorist attacks".

    In fact, it should be incredibly obvious that the concept of a 110-story building even being built, much less two, is a clear and obvious fraud. No documentation that these "twin towers" existed before a "terrorist attack" occured on September the 11th. I've recently been to New York, and there are no such towers, no rubble, no debris, nothing. I doubt any of you have ever seen these buildings in person either. There is no trace of these "twin towers", save for the manipulated imagery and photographs put forth by the media. Due to this hoax, perpetrated by the Liberal-controlled media, people all over the world mourned the loss of thousands of people. Innocent men and women, some brainwashed by the left-wing education institutions, others knowingly taking part in the deception, gave firsthand accounts of losing "relatives" they never had.

    But the most outrageous aspect of this hoax is the "Pentagon" -- a supposed government office located outside of Washington, D.C., conveniently distant from downtown D.C. Liberal media claims this building to be "the center of America's defense system", although obviously an organization as proud and God-fearing as the United States Military would never think to station themselves in a building of five sides, so obviously close to the pentagram, mark of Lucifer himself. It is insulting to the nation's intelligence that eight hundred members of the world's proudest institution would be made to meet their Lord inside such a demonic symbol, by something as graceful, efficient, and secure as our country's fine aviation system.

    Don't let the devious tricks of the Liberals allow you, a citizen of the greatest nation this Earth has ever or will ever know, to surrender your freedoms. Any lesser nation would have succumbed to their wills long ago, and indeed the socialist states in Europe already have. It is only the superior resilience, pride, and intellect of America that has allowed it to withstand the constant threat of Liberal control.

    Freedom is deserved only by the vigilant. Don't let them pull at your heart-strings with this fraud. God Bless America.

  217. However you slice it, by orKiD · · Score: 0

    life will always go on.

  218. Re:Prepare for War! by DEBEDb · · Score: 2

    They'll just be killing each other
    off for other reasons...

    --

    Considered harmful.
  219. Re:Prepare for War! by DEBEDb · · Score: 2

    Few points.

    1. Have you read the Old Testament? There's plenty of God-approved violence and atrocities there.

    2. Have you read the New Testament? Does Jesus sound at all like Jerry Falwell?

    --

    Considered harmful.
  220. Washington D.C. area by bezuwork's+friend · · Score: 1

    I live within 15 minutes walking to the pentagon and work in D.C. Overall, there hasn't been alot which has affected me overtly and in a major way, but there is alot which remains visibly changed.

    After 9/11, we did have HumVees on every corner 24/7 for a few months. The soldiers seemed to be alert, but were ok to talk to. It is just beyond me what benefit they actually were, unless there would have been a land assult on the white house...

    The trashcans and all other recepticles were taken out of the D.C. metro stations after 9/11. They are still gone. There seem to be more announcements reminding riders to take personal belongings when exiting.

    For awhile normal citizens were unable to go nearer than a few blocks of the white house. For some reason that really angered me. It just felt really insulting. On the other hand, I didn't make a fuss, there was just this feeling that if one did, one would get in big trouble.

    Some buildings in the area (D.C.) which used to allow people on the roof no longer do.

    For awhile, all the buses which loaded at the Pentagon were switched to Pentagon City. Pentagon City isn't set up for so many buses, though, so that situation ended pretty quickly. I recently switched at the Pentagon, they now have earth dams between the bus area and the Pentagon. (I never switched at Pentagon before, so I don't know if these dams were there before, but the grass on them is new).

    There are signs at the Pentagon which prohibit taking pictures. This actually strikes me as funny - of what value are external pictures for terrorism ...?

    The road beside the Pentagon, route 110?, does have HumVees and cars on it. The HumVees have machine guns pointed at the road. Funny to me again, is that they all have flashing blue lights, though. I guess their purpose is to be very visible.

    Oh - and our local Pakistani restaurant (quite good) immeadiately after 9/11 got red, white, and blue takeout boxes.

    On the other hand, I have had to walk home from work after the metro stopped twice since 9/11. My route goes right by the Pentagon, right next to the reconstruction area. I passed there in the wee hours of the morning - but both times, I really think no one paid any attention.

    Overall, alot of changes, some minor, some not so minor, alot meaningless but still 1984ish.

  221. America doesn't matter. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    America was a place for all the religious zealots noone wanted. Not much difference. Perhaps YOU should take care of your aboriginal peoples before casting aspersions on others.

    How many full blooded cherokee still have thier land? Or even LIVE?

    Typical hypocritical american attitude.

    The US's policies brought about conditions that caused 9-11 to happen. Kashmir is a result of India IGNORING A UN RESOLUTION TO ALLOW FREE ELECTIONS FOR SELF-DETERMINATION. Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Phillipines are now basically dictatorships, with extreme rules of conduct (Remember... the caning?) that are breeding grounds for violent uprisings.

    Islam is more prone to uprising, that much seems clear, but it doesn't happen in a vacuum.

    Oh, and as for ww2... GET OVER IT. Zippy fucking woopie doo, your great grandpappy died on a beach 60 years. What have YOU done for your country aside from be a typical arrogant prick and prime example of what makes people dislike your culture so much? Or any of your friends, or your parents? Just because one generation had enough balls to go and die for what they believe is right doesn't mean you have the cahones to do it yourself.

  222. Parent post VERY good, mod up. by ces · · Score: 1

    Damn, I even had mod points today, unfortunately I posted in this topic before I saw the above post.

    I hate it when people do this but "mod parent up"

    --
    Happy Fun Ball is for external use only.
  223. Your taxes are misspent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least you are a voter. How much money did you pay for taxes when you were still a minor? I payed about 6 grand last year in income tax, above and beyond the state and federal refunds. I am a dependant. I just turned 18. I work for Hewlett-Packard and have a larger salary than the average teen, but that is no reason to not give a full refund. The government steals from me. If you want to complain about where your tax dollars go, look at whose tax dollars are keeping them company. I could have paid for the entire year this year at college with the money I earned my Junior and Senior years in High School. Instead they go toward denying me the limited freedoms granted to minors in the United States.

    As a minor, I don't even enjoy the rights that you feel may be enfringed upon by big government. I have no freedom of speech, religion, or property rights. If you look closely, my parents can even control any money that I make, using it as they will.

    You can vote out of office those who misspend your money or infringe on your freedoms. I have to wait until the next election, and can't even have my revenge becuase the encumbant was voted out of office last election. And when was the last time a politician took advice from someone who can't give them anything in return for representation?

  224. Re:State Troopers and harass (was Re:Canadian bord by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 1
    "FYI, Virginia has some of the harshest anti-car laws on the books and happens to be so anal that radar detectors are illegal there."

    Anal? Don't bring your radar detector to Canada ... they are illegal in all parts of the country. People in my family have gotten stopped multiple times by cops because we have an air ionizer device that looks a lot like a radar detector. And here's another: those anti-photo-radar plates for your license plate are illegal. (You can sell them but you can't use them.) And they do have tint-level laws in some areas where the cops have devices to quantatatively measure your tint.

    On the upside, it is supposely still legal to run a red light in Canada if you are carrying mail for the Queen. (Maybe I should write a letter to the Queen and keep it in the glove box ...)

    I have been to VA (before 9/11) but the cops did not hassle us in our tinted Mazda Mini-Van.

  225. Security checks by Alien+Being · · Score: 2

    Searching for nail clippers? Give me a break.

    Before 9/11, we knew that the World Trade Center had a bullseye on it. For years we've known that airliners are targets. We had even heard speculation that terrorists would someday attempt a 9/11 style attack.

    Why were the cockpit doors open? If the airlines had taken security the least bit seriously, they could have taken a few pages from the security manual at El Al and 9/11 would not have happened. IMO, the airlines were negligent and are responsible for all losses suffered that day.

    "Don't you dare try to bring nail clippers onboard, even though just 1 year ago *we* were stupid enough to give terrorists access to the controls of a 100-ton guided missile."

    Why haven't I heard criticizm of the airlines in the mass media? All I hear is how *they* are losing money because of the ordeal. Congress is bailing them out. Where's the outrage? The media aren't talking, probably because airlines buy lots of ads.

  226. I'm a lawyer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... and my clients with cases in Federal court have to wait an extra year (or more) to get their day in court because of court overcrowding due to all the criminal cases prosecuted by Ashcroft. NO, I'm not talking about terrorism cases, I'm talking about sick Californians charged with growing their own medicine.....

  227. And, speaking of Salon... by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 2

    ... don't forget This Modern World, a pithy look at our modern-day politics delivered fresh to your screen evry Monday.

    --
    That is all.
  228. the people that are affected are in jail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this whole over reaction is going to lead to a huge geek population in jail. btw how many slashdoters are in jail right now?

  229. Scared. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm a 6 foot tall white male..
    I drive a little black honda Del Sol.....

    I'm as american as the next guy, but because I drive a non-american car, sometimes I get treated like I'm a terrorist or something. People are rude... I only fill up at 24/7 gas stations in the middle of the night now, because durring the day, more people are around, and most of them are angry, callous, and rude as hell.

    Why can't they all just leave me and my honda alone!

    I'm scared of what i say in public. I'm scared of morons in sport ut'es not caring if they hit me or not, because they figure they'll be unhurt, and the insurance would cover their car....

    People are morons..

    Scared in Iowa

  230. Why should we care about 9/11 ?? by brakken · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why do we REALLY care about 9/11? Is it because we've all been brainwashed?

    Let me simply ask this question? What would make 80% of the general population give up their Civil Liberties, spend houndreds of thousand of millions of dollars, and start a National Holiday?

    One would think that something that kills 340,000 to 450,000 people a year would justify such actions. What kills that many people a year? Tobacco does. Not an airplane. Or take Alcohol for example. Just drinking down some old' Budweisers and more kills 150,000 people a year. Listen folks, this is PER YEAR! Sorry, but we are the terrorists here. We condone such activities.

    Isn't it a bit odd that all of a sudden the Police can stop anyone at anytime with or without reason to search them? What happens if you refuse? You get arrested, harrased and jailed! Why refuse? In the Constitution of the United States it cleary defines that the population not be searched for unreasonable reasons. I don't find walking down the street late at night a good reason to stop anyone.

    Why does 80% of America find it to be reasonable? They have been brained washed by various sources, including television. Heck, most of the United States ACTUALLY BELIEVES what they hear and see on TV Newscasts.

    Personally, I watch the TV News for pure entertainment. Most of the time the reality behind the situation is so far off that it makes me actually get sick to my stomach and vomit. You ask "How does he dare to say that?" That is pretty simply, "I get off my arse and check the stories out. I talk with people from both sides of the issues, get their versions. Sometimes it takes a little bit of leg work to get the truth." And that truth is what I need to make my decisions on, not some make-believe Newscast or falsified newspaper article from the Toledo Blade.

    You see, the news usually takes all the facts they can find, twists them up to fit local and federal needs. They rarely actually talk about the REAL version of the truth. One hundered thousand people die each year from using the perscription drugs that the government gives to us. What? My facts are talking about what people willingly do to themselves? Might I not be mistaken, but didn't 3,000 some odd people willingly start working for the government and willing work in a gigantic building (duh! Easy terrorist target. Sometimes it's the little things like SIZE that kill us).

    Common sense would tell them that this could result in their deaths. Terrorist minds would select a target that it could easily take out and cause the most damage. Heck, they teach you in school that at any moment you might die. It's a fact of life.

    Just like the facts clearly show that Caffeine kills 1,000 to 10,000+ people each year. And this is something that we can forsee and prevent, but we don't. What I am saying here is that the Government is trying to take our rights away to give them more control over us, not for our personal safety, but for making money. It is a very sad thing that 3,000 people had to die, but what about the other 670,000 people I mentioned? Why don't we even THINK about them? I wonder ...

    Don't let me even get started on Car Accidents. How the hell are you going to jump into a big peace of steal, go 60 MPH, and then when you crash, call it an accident??? It's a possibility that should be taken in account for before you drive. You'll probably die. One third of the USA population dies in car accidents each year. You will probably die in one before you die from natural causes, or from some terrorists from overseas. How can you even compare 9/11 to this? Why would you sanely support the 9/11 Holiday but let car crashes to continue to happen? I can tell you, you've been programmed since birth.

    Fact. The USA has never been to WAR over something that didn't make us money. We have never went to WAR for a GOOD CAUSE. This whole 9/11 thing has just been a TOOL the government has used to scare us into submission.

    And, we are scared! Long ago, if someone were to come into your house and try to murder your family, you could defend yourself with a gun and it would be over. Long ago if a terrorist came into your house with a gun trying to kill your family and you shot him everything would be fine.

    Did you know that in the State of Ohio, killing someone in self defense will result in you serving jailtime. (hint: If you have to shoot someone, shoot them below the waste. This will make it less of a crime, and you will not go to jail as long for saving your family.)

    Now a days our children aren't educated on guns. We hide them from them. They look at them as something like a toy they can't have and want because they can't have. Back in the old days parents were responsible and taught their children about guns and their dangers. And there were a lot less killings. Today we are afraid, so afraid that we let our own Government take away our right to bare arms. The same thing the last Country did before will split and created our own.

    Get this, if you get caught smoking marijuana (which has never, ever in history killed someone) you can never own a gun again. So it's okay to carry a gun and smoke Tobacco, that remember, kills 340,000 to 450,000 people a year. What lunacy!

    Now how to solve this problem? Speak out, spread the word. 3,000 people in a building dead isn't that bad compared to this other stuff. Instead of spending $5.00 on a flag that does no good, spend $5.00 into cancer research, or laywer fees for groups trying to outlaw Tobacco.

    You are waisting your time and money and becoming a slave if you don't change and speak out.
    9/11 is not a national holdiay in my book. And I will protest it until the day I die.

    --
    [ brakken ]
    1. Re:Why should we care about 9/11 ?? by tres3 · · Score: 1
      One third of the USA population dies in car accidents each year.

      3 years and we're all dead!! It kinda casts some doubt on the rest of your figures! Perhaps you meant 1/3 of people die in car accidents.

  231. OT: Why Nobody Takes Libertarianism Seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Libertarianism is capitalism without bounds. Plain and simple.

    Want to know why nobody takes Libertarians seriously? Libertarians claim to hold freedom as their highest ideal, yet at the same time they support pure capitalism. In any capitalist society the power necessarily lies with whoever controls the capital, NOT the general public and certainly NOT the governemnt. If the public or even the government turns against these holders of capital, they can simply threaten to move their capital to another country. Whoever controls the capital controls the power. And in our modern society corporations control most of the capital. What does pure capitalism lead to? Monopolies. Eventually you have a few mega-conglomerates who control all of the capital and have more power than the government itself. But at least you can still smoke pot. LOL!

    Libertarianism is a strange paradox: freedom + pure capitalism. Freedom of choice + governemt de-regulation of mega-corporations like Enron. These things simply do not mix.

    I'm sorry but Libertarianism is a joke. Its no coincidence that most libertarians also happen to be white and middle to upper class well-to-do people. The rest of them are Ayn Rand fans :(

    (BTW I'm not the original poster)

    1. Re:OT: Why Nobody Takes Libertarianism Seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The ideal of laissez-faire is very seductive, especially to ambitious entepreneurs, but it ignores the plain fact that private institutions like corporations can be just as tyrannical as governments. Moreover, our government in the U.S. is, at least in principle, constrained by the constitution and the voters. Corporations in the absence of government regulation would be unbounded authoritarian structures. They are already, in my humble opinion, far more oppressive to our citizens than any government entity. The rank and file of our citizenry are constrained to participate in an economy that is essentially shaped by corporate interests that are consolidating their power in fewer and fewer hands. Without the hand of government to limit private power, we end up with effective slavery: sweat-shops, company towns, no collective bargaining, and a life with few choices for most.

    2. Re:OT: Why Nobody Takes Libertarianism Seriously by kaybee · · Score: 1

      Freedom and government deregulation is the same thing... you don't want the government telling you what to do but you have no problem having the government telling business owners what they can do? This is called hypocrisy and it's not surprising from the likes of you. Unless you don't care about any freedoms? At least you would be consistent then.

      Big companies like Enron are only possible with support from the government. There was so much regulation and cooperation between the government and Enron that it is no example of what could happen under laissez-faire capitalism.

      Whether laissez-faire capitalism naturally leads to monopolies is not a fact... in fact, we have never had laissez-faire capitalism anywhere in the world, so we really don't know for sure what would happen. I think that monopolies are not possible without government coercion... here are a few monopolies I can think of off the top of my head (note that some of them aren't really monopolies either):

      • Railroads: highly regulated and given free land from the government
      • Microsoft: flawed copyright law along with the police force of the government to enforce it
      • AT&T: highly regulated industry and it was impossible for new companies to enter the field due to government regulation

      There is always more than one source for everything. Even if you can't get the same thing from somebody else, you can get a substitute good. Freedom decentralizes power. Each person has as much or as little power over their own lives as they desire. Any power somebody else has over them is by their choice, not government coercion.

    3. Re:OT: Why Nobody Takes Libertarianism Seriously by kaybee · · Score: 1

      I don't think you read my original post. Corporations can be just as corrupt and inefficient as the government, no doubt. But can they really be just as tyrannical without government support? The government can take as much money of mine as they like... if I don't give it to them, I go to jail. Microsoft can charge whatever they want for their software, but I don't have to pay them! Microsoft can't put me in jail for not giving them money (unless I have an illegal copy and they use the government to put me in jail, which is a whole other issue).

      One thing is clear. The world has never seen laissez-faire capitalism. So, I don't see how you assume the result will be slavery, sweat shops, etc, etc. You can form unions without the governemnt, you know. Sure, most companies don't like it... but if you get enough members in your union the companies will have to accept you, without government coercion.

      The closest thing the world has seen to true laissez-faire capitalism is the older US. Sure we had some sweat shops and other problems... but nobody even said it was perfect. We also saw these same problems in all developing industrial countries... even ones with much less freedom. For one thing, times were different back then. For another thing, the world was poorer and couldn't take the effort to care about some of these things.

      But, the more successful a capitalist economy becomes, the better it gets for everybody. As companies and techniques become more and more efficient, people can work less hours for more money. In early industrialization, the men worked 12-hour days, and maybe the kids and wife worked. Today, most people can easily support a family by working 40 hours per week. Many people choose to spend more and then both people have to work, but their standard of living is way higher than anything we have ever seen before.

    4. Re:OT: Why Nobody Takes Libertarianism Seriously by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 2
      Big companies like Enron are only possible with support from the government.
      If I lived in the alternate universe where that was true, I might start believing the Libertarian position. But here in the real world, big companies with questionable practices do get there without the help of the government. All it takes is a product line where the subject matter is complicated enough that it's impossible for the majority of the marketplace to be informed (i.e. computer operating systems.) Microsoft does not have to use copyright law to get where it is. It got there by simply cutting deals with the suppliers of OS'es that removed choice from the eventual end-user - all perfectly within the ideals of lasseiz-faire capitalism, but not the law. Microsoft doesn't need to throw the copyright book around to make it impossible for a competitor to take over their market. Developers can't get Wine 100% functional. It happens naturally because they are facing a moving target that is undocumented. It takes longer to reverse-engineer software than it does to develop it, and that's why Wine doesn't work fully, and never will (in my opinion).

      In a high-tech world, it's not possible for the marketplace to be informed. It takes too much time for an individual to become informed on just one type of product alone. Each person is an informed consumer in only a minority of areas, but is an uninformed consumer in many more areas. People buy cars, houses, computers, software, food, furniture, and appliances, but nobody can be an expert on cars and houses and computers and software and food and furniture and appliances all in the span of a single lifetime.

      Lasseiz-faire capitalism functions to keep a check on corruption only in those environments where the majority of consumers are able to be knowlegable. In other words, products that are simple enough to understand that every Tom, Dick, and Harry understands everything about how they work. Everyone knows how a knife, fork, and spoon operate, so if a company tried selling shoddy utensils for more than they're worth, that company wouldn't survive. Everyone would be able to tell the company is screwing them. The same can't be said for modern high-tech products.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    5. Re:OT: Why Nobody Takes Libertarianism Seriously by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 2
      One thing is clear. The world has never seen laissez-faire capitalism.
      Only in the same sense that the world has never seen Communism, or Democracy, or Socialism. It's convenient for your argument for you to set the bar so high that even the slightest deviation from the theoretical ideal makes the example not count. It's just like when modern-day Communists try to claim that the Soviet Union was never Communist.
      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

  232. post-grad work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just come study in Texas. We've got good schools in every discipline you can name, and we hate everybody, so it's never anything personal. Hell, half the time whether you favor UT or A&M for the thanksgiving game has more to do with how somebody sees you than your skin color. As the columnist molly ivins wrote in ~1972 "Texas is like a seven layer cake made such that none of the layers get along with each other, and they regularly beat the shit out of/shoot/stab each other." I really don't know what the fuck America was thinking when they annexed us in 1845. Maybe life was too boring in the union? Though adding texans to a group to make things more interesting is like setting off fireworks in a muntions depot.

  233. Re: /. too! by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 2

    Get off your high horse. Your orignal comment had some merit, this is just whining about something you do not understand. Apparently you are using a web proxy, why I don't know, that is your bussiness. However, your proxy allows any person in the world to connect and use it, with no authentication. This is what is known as an "open proxy" and they are certianly not unique to the Arab world (most of the ones I find are in Asia as point of fact). These open proxies are very, very, very frequently abused by trolls, crackers, and other asshole out to cause trouble that wish to mask their identity. Hence Slashdot, and many other technically savvy sites, dissalow posting from them to prevent these people from abusing their sites. Most IRC servers will K-line (ban) you if you run one on your comptuer.

    So no, they are not giving you trouble because you are Arab, they are giving you trouble because you are using an open proxy. It has nothing to do with 9/11, it's jsut new troll prevention that Slashdot implemented. Not everything that happened since 9/11 is related to it. I installed a firewall since then, has nothing to do with terrorists, just has to do with keeping crackers out of my comptuers.

    Stop whining.

  234. Privacy by oakbox · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's made me actually figure out, and start using, PGP. Before the recent spate of laws, I was quite content to rely on just being boring to preserve my privacy. But now with so much more money available for intrusive government tapping and much less regulation to stop them, I am being more proactive with guarding my private life.
    In this small way, the terrorists have succeeded, I have less freedom and I trust my own government less.

    --
    Not just answers, the correct questions.
  235. Someone mod this up! by Mustang+Matt · · Score: 2

    Great stuff. I'm interested in hearing other people's thoughts!

    --
    The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
  236. Annoiance by KinkyClown · · Score: 1

    9 september I was on holiday in Schotland, to get back to the Netherlands took me extra hours in flight. The whole trip should have been 1 hour. I was checked like I was a terrorist myself. Since then every time I want to take a plane I have to pay terrorism-tax. Do I feel safer? NO, because that money is not invested in anti-terrorism training and equipment. It is just an excuse for the airline to raise the ticket price. Since 9 september even the Dutch (the most sober people in the world) are being irratic. Suddenly we had radical moslims that wanted to take flight training. More and more Dutch people are more discriminating against moslims. I do not know where it will all end...

  237. So. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have you only recently become this much of an asshole, or were you always that way?

  238. You know what's interesting? by Inoshiro · · Score: 2

    If they check everything, people complain that they checked everything. If they don't check everything, people say, "I could've been carrying *ANYTHING*!"

    And you wonder why those security idiots still try so hard. It's because they have no coherent policy, and keep hearing mixed signals from people who have to go through these measures.

    --
    --
    Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
  239. interesting report by __aahlyu4518 · · Score: 3, Informative

    You can find it here. One of the things mentioned is how America becomes devided about the measures taken after 9/11, and about their privacy.

  240. Unlike the Bush regime, the arms manufacturers ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These people have no axes to grind do they.

  241. From a Canadian... by DaCool42 · · Score: 1

    I'm sorry to say it, but because of 9/11 I will not be visiting the US again any time soon. I recently went on a weekend camping trip with a busload of people from my church. At the boarder, we had to leave 5 people behind (after much hassle for the rest of us as well). 3 of these brought it on themselves by not having their ID. The other 2 were students from Korea. I was almost not allowed thru because I don't have a passport and my birth certificate was at my parents, 5 hours out of the way. With all the border hassle, there is no way we are doing that trip again.

    --

    ----
    All of whose base are belong to the what-now?
  242. I wish it were that simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A Liberal Excutive, which the Democrats are not, will have to wait for the existing Supreme Court justices to A) resign or B) die since the Supreme Court is a lifetime appointment (barring voluntary resignation).

    We're fucked for at least the next 30 years thanks to Reagan and Bush Sr. packing the Supreme Court with conservative assholes.

    Oh, well I'm a member of the EFF and ACLU and I vote, so I do what I can.

  243. Bzzzt: Wrong! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Political expression is far more important that dating/sex.

  244. Beat you to it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've already left.

  245. SAVE MY SOUL MY BROTHERS! by Spam+Bonanza · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Hi, Now this thing here is non-profit so dont get all upset and nasty and shit. This only comes to clarify a subject me and my friends here were discussing. Please take this 5 second poll. I swear its only 5 seconds. really! Thank you pilgrims.

  246. EUROFAGS CHEER WHEN MUSLIMS RAPE THEIR WHITE WOMEN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  247. Pseudodiagnosticity by Carter+Butts · · Score: 2
    It was attacked by young radical Islamic fundamentalist men. Does it suprise you that greater attention is paid to people fit this description? Or would you prefer we waste every last resource frisking old ladies from Alberta just so it does not make you feel *uncomfortable*. Oh the discrimination!
    Even if it were true that all terrorists met some sort of "young radical Islamic fundamentalist" stereotype (they don't, as the Irish can attest), this would not imply that all (or even many) "young radical Islamic fundamentalists" are terrorists. Indeed, there is no reason to believe that fitting the stereotype in question is at all diagnostic of terrorism, since the number of stereotypees exceeds the number of known terrorists by several orders of magnitude....

    I suspect that you are confusing the probability of a piece of evidence given a hypothesis with the probability of said hypothesis given the evidence. These two numbers are, in general, not the same. In fact, they are often radically different. Alas, it is precisely this kind of mistaken reasoning which has lead to the attitude you display: "better search all those muslims, they might be terrorists!"

    If our school system provided better education in the basic principles of statistical inference, perhaps these grim mistakes would occur with less frequency. Alas, for the time being, I expect the pseudodiagnostic nonsense to continue.

    -Carter

    1. Re:Pseudodiagnosticity by meatspray · · Score: 1

      i certainly see what you're saying and i agree to an extent, however, let's look at screening as it applies to this case in real life.

      Of the terror groups that have claimed responsiblity for the attacks a year ago, the majority of activists in these groups do fit a certain profile.

      While it's true "the number of stereotypees exceeds the number of known terrorists by several orders of magnitude...."
      how many of the terrorists (in this case) fit the "young radical Islamic fundamentalist stereotype".

      I'll try to make this point, if I assemble a group of 500 people, evenly distributed in race and ask you to blindly pick out the 5 NBA basketball players in the group,(selecting only 10 people) you're not going to start selecting caucsaion and asian and people by the hordes. There are short white guys in basketball, and yes you're probably going to miss them, but does that mean that you'll choose random short white guys for the lineup, I doubt it.

      Yes profiling is to an extent ineffective,(look at John Walker) and there will be many many many false positives, but if you lack the time and abilities to check everyone 100% you have to do some basic filtering. If not, just close the boarders and airports now there's no way to handle that many people with that much resolution.

      it's not like they're screening 100 people attending a concert at your local bar, We're talking about some of the busiest airports in the world.(not to meantion quite a significant ammount of border with neighboring countries)

    2. Re:Pseudodiagnosticity by tenchiken · · Score: 2

      Another Simple Statistical fact. Lets assume that there are ~1000truly radical we want to bring back sharia, women must never be seen in public again death to infidel type radicals in america. Let's assume that there are ~100 terrorists in the nation. Since ETA, Basque/Irish/Itallian/zimbabwian (etc) terrorists are pretty much not likely to hit in America (where they do most of the fund raising, but that's another story), lets assume that the 100 are of the Arab persuasion. Let's further assume that 25 members of Indymedia have lost what further sanity they have left, and now decided to avenge Palestine using C4.

      Percentage of people who might have radical beliefs and use C4
      100/1000

      percentege of people who might use C4
      125/270,000,000

      Percentege of Americans who might use C4
      25/270,000,000

      Which number might you go after first? Even if it is by screening middle easter foreigners, assuming that 400,000 come thru a year:
      100/400,0000

    3. Re:Pseudodiagnosticity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those figures are neither percenteges (sic) or percentages, as i assume you meant. They are in fact fractions and that is 100% true

  248. Terrorism as a damning buzz word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    9/11 is now the oil that lubricates the gears of the american politicians' and corporations' personal agenda. If a politicians or the company that owns him wants to push a law through the system, they try to equate it with terrorism.

  249. It's about oil and killing Jews by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 2
    I Don't have the evidence to back this up, but I know it's true

    I'm not going to burn you for saying this, but I will ask you WHY you think you know it's true.

    Think about that one carefully. Who told you, and who owns them?

    In any case, the point remains: "So what if Iraq has nukes and chem warfare agents? --Iraq probably had nukes and chem warfare agents during the Gulf War, but it didn't use them because it knew that doing so would open itself up to nuclear and chemical reprival. Nothing has changed since then."

    The whole, "they might get nukes" argument is just an excuse for U.S. empire building.

    There was an article on the front cover of the Toronto Star today in which the Bush administration admitted that they didn't really care about weapons inspections being allowed into Iraq, and that what they really wanted was a 'regime change'. --Which means that Shrub's demand for "weapons inspections or else" was bullshit. It's all a damned puppet show, right from the airplanes to this stupid war.

    Your damned president is a greedy war-monger; this has nothing to do with terrorists, and everything to do with oil and killing all the Jews. (You watch what happens when the Jews declare full-on open season on the Palastinians when the U.S. starts bombing Iraq!)


    -Fantastic Lad

    1. Re:It's about oil and killing Jews by jafac · · Score: 2

      There was an article on the front cover of the Toronto Star today in which the Bush administration admitted that they didn't really care about weapons inspections being allowed into Iraq, and that what they really wanted was a 'regime change'. --Which means that Shrub's demand for "weapons inspections or else" was bullshit. It's all a damned puppet show, right from the airplanes to this stupid war.

      - - - -
      That's not exactly true, now, is it?
      We had weapons inspectors in there before, and at every turn, they encountered obstructions, armed threat, etc. There was ample evidence that the Iraqi's had something to hide. Why were they hiding it?
      Weapons inspectors allowed to return to Iraq would very likely be given the same treatment. So what's the point?
      The point is - remove Hussein's regime from the picture, get a regime in there that CARES about it's people enough to want to cooperate with the international community to get the sanctions ended on the international community's terms, not Hussein's terms.
      Sending weapons inspectors into Hussein's Iraq will accomplish nothing.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
  250. Copyright laws by vekotin · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It seems even here around EU that they're using 9/11 as an excuse to alter something as far fetched as copyright laws.

    And how do they do this? By claiming that money from production of pirated cd's and dvd's benefits international terrorism. That might be but I fail to see how true their claims can be that trading media files off the Internet can support terrorism...

    I don't mind people selling pirated cd's to get a painful kick in the rear end, but the nice professional people seem to agree that importing audio/video media from outside Europe is also piracy, even if they're very legitimate products(region code breaking is evil etc.). And all forms of piracy, including this can support terrorism. I somehow have a hard time believing that importing a region 1 dvd to europe causes any financial gain to any terrorists. But hey, those politicians do this to protect us, let's not question them at such a difficult time.

    Bottom line: whenever the lawmakers say "to fight terrorism", they can do pretty much anything, even when it has absolutely nothing to do with the matter.

    --
    /v\
  251. Open Question: by Squeeze+Truck · · Score: 2

    When is enough enough?

    Isn't it about time all us concerned citizens meeting anonymously over the internet actually [i]did[/i] something besides just talk?

    Future civilizations who investigate the catastrophic slide of the US into despotism will be amazed when they come across sites like /. and see that the people who knew exactly what was going on did nothing but document the event in excruciatingly redundant detail.

    I'm up for just about anything, but I would have no idea how to begin. Thoughts?

    --

    "Reactionaries must be deprived of the right to voice their opinions; only the people have that right." - Mao

  252. Airport check by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    During my trip to Dublin, Ireland, I was asked to open all my 35mm film containers (those small plastic see-trough cylinders), and I had a lot of the due to the fact that I'm a photographer. I understand that they want to check my camera bag for I don't put it trough the x-ray machine, but still. All the containers. You can clerly see without opening them that they only contain films.

  253. Yes, now I feel safer! by Alex+Belits · · Score: 2

    Now I know that if someone will try to bring a hacksaw in San Francisco and cut the truss on the Golden Gate Bridge, he will be stopped at the airport when he will be flying to SFO!

    --
    Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
  254. immigrants, out now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Quit stealing our jobs!

  255. immigrants, get out and stay out! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am sick of immigrants stealing jobs from regular people. Get out and stay out!

    1. Re:immigrants, get out and stay out! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you know it wasn't the Yank company stealing jobs from Canadians under this NAFTA bullshit?

  256. we don't care! Your border guards are worse! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am constantly jacked-up at the canadian border and questioned. I have no idea why. My gf and I have been seperated and questioned seperately at the border, too.
    I know a lot of people that have turned away by Canada just because they answer truthfully and admit to having been arrested for some minor offense, like drunk driving, trespassing, etc.
    Canada treats people from the USA like shit, even though Canada basically leeches off of the US economy and defense. Fuck Canada.

  257. The change in my life. by tres3 · · Score: 1
    Being one of those lucky few that got singled out for everything short of a public rectal exam on my last flight, I have decided that I will drive everywhere I need to go that is less than 1,000 miles and simply not go on longer trips short of something like a death in the family.

    I'd rather the old way with a few common sense precautions like strong and locked cockpit doors as well as a coded deadman switch (living pilots enter a code every 15 minutes) and just take my chances!

    They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Ben Franklin (1759)

  258. Re:Prepare for War! by mikerich · · Score: 1
    jdbear said:
    Read a bit of it first, then tell me how peaceful and loving the muslim faith is. After all, islam doesn't mean peace, as was explained by several muslim clerics shortly after September 11th, 2001. It actually means "Submission" and a Muslim is "One who submits."

    What you left out was that it means 'One who submits to Allah' (My emphasis). Christianity embodies similar sentiments with respect to God.

    As for the teachings of Mohammed being inconsistent, have you ever checked out the Bible? I seem to remember the Book of Exodus Chapter 20, Verse 13.

    Thou shalt not kill.

    Notice the lack of get-out clauses, weasel words, exemptions or hazy verbage. It couldn't be more clear if it were written on stone tablets - oh right it was.

    Yet the rest of Exodus and a good chunk of the remainder of the Old Testament apends inordinate amounts of time relishing various divinely-inspired murders and laying down supposedly God-given rules on who should be killed and just how they should die.

    Where is the consistency in the Bible?

    Should I mention that it wasn't Islam that started the Crusades? Islam, Judaism and Christianity were all getting on perfectly well in the Middle East until the Christian West decided to intervene; the consequences of which we are still feeling today.

    Best wishes,
    Mike.

  259. I don't get it... by syusuf · · Score: 1

    What happened on the 9th of November?

  260. Flying (UK) by Mr_Silver · · Score: 3, Interesting
    How has it changed me? Well, after 9/11 airports realised that they had to tighten up security to a point where it was actually half-way decent.

    To do this would cost money that they weren't prepared to cough up.

    So they levied a 7 UKP "security charge" on all flights, this money would then be used to beef up security and not etch into their precious profits.

    Unfortunately, despite everyone coughing up this extra money people still managed to get on planes with bombs in their shoes and cannisters full of petrol.

    Obviously they're using our money well.

    --
    Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
    1. Re:Flying (UK) by garyok · · Score: 1

      I flew down to London last week for the first time since last September. It never occurred to me that the penknife and pen (in the shape of a rifle cartridge - a friend got it for me from a touring James Bond exhibition) would be classed as hazardous until I reached the metal detectors. Possibly, I'm just not that bright.

      Now here's the funny thing: although I removed the penknife from the keyring at Glasgow (and posted it home) the cartridge/pen went right through the security checks after a quick look at it. Only in Stanstead, coming back, did the cartridge/pen get flagged as dodgy. I was asked about it, I dismantled it and showed it to them carefully (it was really just a pen) but they still didn't allow it on board and I had to buy a new padded envelope and find a post box with a gap wider than 5mm to post it back home again.

      I can understand them being cautious if something like my cartridge/pen turns up (believe me, i really can), but if they are so clueless when it comes to firearms that they can't even identify cartridges when they disassmemble them, then what use are the checks? It's slightly idiotic that someone who has never, ever seen a real weapon in their lives is asked to provide life-critical security cover.

      --
      One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors - Plato
  261. Well, I'm afraid to return to America by testadicazzo · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I've listed all the effects to my family in the states before. What they really wind up doing is killing my freedom of speech. I don't feel comfortable being politically vocal and living in America at the same time. The two big things that terrify me are: I can be held without a trial indefinately if I'm suspected of being a terrorist, and the complacent, bloodthirsty, jingoistic, my country right or wrong (well more to the point, my country can't be wrong) attitude the American public seems to have (based on what I see on the TV, which I hope is hopelessly biased).

    Why? Well back when I was 20 I was in the Marines, and I was against the gulf war. I was pretty vocal about it (freedom of speech) and that got me a lot of flack from the military (that's clear). I got in a discussion with some other guys during lunch and they were telling me "we gotta kill S.H. because he violated this and this international law, yadda yadda". I told them if we were going to kill violaters of international law, we would have to start with Bush for Panama. Clearly a rhetorical argument.

    Still, the Secret service was called, and I spent the night in a holding cell until my lawer came. I had to be photographed, psychoanalyzed, get a handwriting analyses, and had my background and family checked. But they had to let me go, becuase I was able to talk to a lawyer and he said "c'mon guys, it's obvious these charges are a bunch of shit". That happened a lot in those days, me getting arrested for a day and released without trial because the charges were just meaningless. They did this to hassle me and to keep me from expressing my opinion to people who might listen and change theirs. Noboddy, and I emphasize, Nobody, really thought I had threatened the presidents life. It was just a charade.

    What's changed? Now they don't have to let me speak with my lawyer, and they can keep me indefinately. That has terrorized me!

    1. Re:Well, I'm afraid to return to America by geekee · · Score: 1

      Ahh. I believe the approval rate in Panama for ousting Noriega was about 80%. Great example.

      --
      Vote for Pedro
  262. personal observation and IM redundance by Sem_D_D · · Score: 0

    i have personally noticed that precisely after sept. 11 last year, yahoo msgs on my cellular and odigo messages to it got repeatedly sent over and over again, sometimes 3,4 or 5 times. i literally had to quit this kind of service. and i'm paranoid enough to think tha some kind of active filtering has taken place after that date.
    i wish reality will prove my concerns groundless, but alas..
    we'll just never know for sure, wherever the truth may be out there.

    --
    Now, Make Your WISE Move...
  263. Re:Prepare for War! by Eltintalle · · Score: 1

    The conflict in the north of Ireland is not one based on religion at all. The fact that one side of the conflict is predominantly catholic and those on the other predominantly protestant is because of historical reasons. It was not, nor ever had been, a fued based on religious reasons. Granted, some religious bigotry does enter into it at times but this is not the source of the conflict.

    Then again, it *is* true that 'religion' has often been used as the basis for violence and discrimination. One particulary poignant example would be the Crusades during medeival times in Europe. These crusades are still seen as a reason for militancy among some Islamic extremists today.

    --
    --- Ralph the Wonder Llama lives!
  264. Easy cowboy... by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    ... moderators are complex creatures (I think others have undone the misdeed).

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  265. Well known methods by Piha · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm from a former communist country and this whole thing makes me unconfotable. Not the terrorist, but recognizing the methods the US goverment is using. They just point to a such a familiar direction. Although I believe they will never manage to reach anything near the shit we had here, they still have quite a lot of inertia and damage is getting bigger every day.

    Remember, of all the emotions FEAR is the most difficult to get rid of.

    Here is my own little experiance of this. Even a dosen years after the communism fell, I still get nervous when crossing a border to a neighbouring country. And now it only takes me showing about enough passports or IDs for all the passingers in my car to the border cop (they usually don't check them). This is a pure remnant from when I was a kid and had experienced border crossings in a tense atmosphere.

    Guess who were the people in former communist counties made affraid of before being told to act patriotic and encouraged to spy on each other? .snaciremA eht uoY

  266. Rant as much as you wish. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    The situation is that one year after you have no more security and your rights are being eroded.

    Journalists in the US and in Europe have shown that all the security measures are bull, racial profiling is stupid, Iraq hates Muslim fundamentalists and OBL was finance with CIA money, etc., etc. etc.

    SO you are as likely as to be vaporized as before but you have lost freedom and a degree of dignity for not be willing to defend justice and democratic principles in the time they were tested.

    Fortunatley most /. get it. Others, sadly, choose to be blind.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  267. First the came for the jews ... by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    ... ahhh forget it.

    Somebody like you would not understand.

    Please learn something from history, the "I am doing nothing wrong" is the most monumental piece of BS in the history of repression...

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
    1. Re:First the came for the jews ... by Em+Emalb · · Score: 2

      Yeah dude,

      and the legislation we have in place is similar to what happened to the Jews. Get a fucking grip.

      Dude, this country is still the best in the world, by FAR.

      --
      Sent from your iPad.
  268. none by ziggy_zero · · Score: 1

    9/11 continues to have no effect on my life whatsoever. Other than that my high school is planning a discussion in classrooms about it today for the anniversary, of which I will of course opt-out of. Soooo stupid it's not even funny.

    --
    I belong to the ______ generation.
  269. Australia: Shut up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's see australia has never done enough to help out brave english speaking countries like the USA and Britian. What is Australia doing to help wipe out the terror that is the the so-called "religion" of Islam? What has Australia done to put a stop to the Muslim practice of oppressing women and killing non-mulims?
    Your post has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Australia is a nation of cowards.

    1. Re:Australia: Shut up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      What is Australia doing to help wipe out the terror that is the the so-called "religion" of Islam?

      Well, they are not subverting democraticly elected goverments (setting up the likes of Saddam and the Taliban) in the middle-east to further their oil 0wnership. That's why the terrorists don't like the USA. How many Islamic terrorists have struck in Oz, Canada, Europe or anywhere else?

      Anyone that believes they "hate freedom and democracy" is a complete fool and a puppet of a large propaganda machine. Just don't drag us into your silly game of Risk. I can just the the US's mission card: "0wn all the oil in the world"...

    2. Re:Australia: Shut up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dude that is so sick and disrespective of the ANZAC core that it is not even funny any more. These people fought and died in both World Wars (as already mentioned, they jumped in slightly earlier than the yanks) The US is not the best country in the world, unless having one of the highest poverty levels in the developed world is a sign of grandeur.

  270. Re:Prepare for War! by wiretrip · · Score: 1

    What about the Orange marches? Or the terrible behaviour that could be seen around a Catholic *Infant School* recently! Whilst the conflict may have started over territory, religion was - and still is - used as the principal method of control and motivation in the warring factions.

  271. Re:Patriotism by JazFresh · · Score: 1
    It annoys me to see people cite patriotism to justify their actions. It's another form of tribalism, the happy feeling of belonging to a successful group of people, whether that is a family, a college, a group of friends, or a country. Try living in a few different countries, you'll get a different perspective on patriotism.

    To me, being patriotic means that you like your country's culture and landscape, and are proud of it. It does not mean you have to love that country's government.

    It's easier to put into perspective if you consider the government to be just like any other company, one that just happens to direct the economy, defend the area from attacks, fix my roads and take my trash away. To me, it would feel strange to feel 'patriotic' towards a company instead of a country.

    Well, I've used a few different 'companies' (governments), because over the course of my life, I've lived in 3 different countries. It's given me the perspective that my feelings for a particular country's culture and landscape have nothing to do with the group of people who manage that country.

  272. WME by jasonrfink · · Score: 1

    A freind of mine said this and I am sure it has been said elsewhere, answer is "Weapons of Mass Education", everything else (such as tolerance) gradually falls in line.

  273. My internet life is totally unchanged by nerdwarrior · · Score: 1
    9/11 and its legislation has done absolutely nothing to how I use the internet.

    For me, 9/11 changed one thing about my life's routines, and that's how long it takes me to get through the airport.

    I think all those people who think the internet was a "casualty" should realize that very little has changed.

  274. United States = The land run by terrorists? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It might not have directly been a problem to me, but when my country becomes non-democratic because of Bush I get deeply sad.

    Just because united states gets attacked by a handful of extremists does he (Bush) really have to go out and turn haft the fucking world into dictatorships?

    (What I'm talking about is: "Bush: Arrest these people who live in your country because they _might_ be funding terrorism. Swedish foreign minister: Well, we need some evidence. Bush: Just do it or get an A-Bomb up your ass!")

    United States, showing how terror is supposed to be used!

    Makes me wonder who's the real terrorists?! //fatal

  275. Re:Prepare for War! by jeremyp · · Score: 2

    Actually, the Irish problem does have its roots (or some of them) in religious conflict. The Battle of the Boyne (1690), for instance, was fought over whether the English throne should be catholic or protestant.

    You cannot explain the bizarre nature of Irish or English history without understanding that there has been catholic/protestant conflict in the British Isles since the time of Henry VIII.

    --
    All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
  276. The press is giving my brain a different pounding by shren · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In the 80's every press article about drugs rose straight to the front page to give me the impression that I'm surrounded by drug dealers. In the 90's every press article about school violence rose straight to the front page to give me the impression that I'm surrounded by homicidal teenagers. There was a brief break in there somewhere where I was scared OJ was going to kill me. Now we're in the naughts or whatever the hell you want to call it, and every press article about terrorism rises straight to the front page to give me the impression that I'm surrounded by terrorists.

    It's all crap. One incredibly shocking event later (9/11, colombine... what was the news maker in the drug war? probably stars dying from drugs or the violence in Columbia) and the press does a Gilligans Island bit and they go from a three hour story to a multi-year obsession with the same topic. If you want to see flocking behavior, don't watch the birds, watch the press. Canada and the US had about the same levels of drug use in the 80's, but it was first on the American list of problems and somewhere in the twenties for Canada. Why? The press. Or maybe the Canadians have some good sense.

    The ironic thing is that if you're reading for content, reading to try to figure out major trends in the world, the press was more informative about terrorism before 9/11 than after. Before 9/11, genuinely important terrorism-related news was the only news that would make the papers. If you saw terrorism in the news, it was a big deal - the government had thwarted something major or there had been an embassy bombing. World changing stuff. Now, if it has a terrorism angle it's front page material - even if the angle is something like "a man who might be a terrorist might have been caught at the airport. he might have had a nail file. there might be more news at 11." By and large each terrorism story is space filler in a space that has a proverbial "reserved for terrorism related news, regardless of if there's news or not" stamp on it.

    It's like wheat and chaff. When it comes to terrorism, the press prints both these days.

    Oh, well. At least the fact that our civil liberties are being used like an inflatable sex toy is coming to light. And, who knows? Five years down the road, something else Really Bad will happen and the press will be obsessed with something else. We should have a betting pool on the next big press fad. Personally, I'm predicting it'll be mega-storms caused by climate change. Some kind of giant hurricaine will level a nation to the dirt, and the press will drop terrorism like yesterday's news - which it already is.

    --
    Maybe the state's highest function is to grind out insoluble problems. (Zelazny, Hall of Mirrors)
  277. Must be a slow news day... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... the biggest story on most news sites is the current date.

    (Score -1 insensitive)

    they also keep getting the date wrong - it's 11/09/02 not 09/11/02 for the vast majority of the world.

  278. Weapons of Mass-Destruction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I filed a patent with the US patent office which is a way of verbally describing weapons that cause a great deal of damage.

    Blair owes me a pretty sum
    Bush owes me a mass sum

  279. Re: Now available in an easy-to-digest comic form! by lightcycler · · Score: 1

    Now available in an easy-to-digest comic form:

    http://www.stallman.org/images/cartoon-3f.jpg

  280. Politically Incorrect w/ Bill Mahr was axed by BlackMesaResearchFac · · Score: 1
    ABC shut down the show because Mahr made an unpatriotic statement when he responded to one of his panelists by saying (paraphrasing) we are/were cowards for lobbing missles from thousands of miles away.

    That was one of the best news discussion shows around.

    --
    -- Scientist: You aren't going to leave me here, are you? Boagh! Thump...
  281. Those who are really affected by yevgyeni · · Score: 1

    I would think that those people who are really, directly affected by the new legislation are in no position to talk about it. Incarcerated more than likely.

  282. September 11th, 2001 by janda · · Score: 1

    As somebody who lost friends in the world trade center bombings, let me tell you how my life has changed.

    It now takes me an extra hour to get through Denver International Airport (DEN) then it used to. Security is still a joke.

    It now takes me an extra half-hour to get through San Francisco International Airport (SFO). Security is still a joke.

    It can now take up to two additional hours to get through Lambert(STL) in St. Louis. Security is still a joke.

    I no longer watch the news. Not because I'm tired of September 11th stories, but because I'm tired all the sensationalism, fluff pieces, and "police today arrested a dark-skinned man walking down the street, news at 11:00" stupidity.

    I lost another friend. I've grieved, you (especially all the people who have never been to New York, don't know anybody who knew anybody that had a friend who was killed in the attack, and never gave a shit before it became popular to be "anti-terrorist", don't need to do it for me, so SHUT UP ALREADY.

    Dubya and company have managed to reduce or get rid of most of the Bill of Rights. I expect that will adjust itself after the next election.

    Other then that, nothing has changed. I refuse to change my life just because some lunatics decided to try and violate the laws of physics.

    --
    Karma: Food Fight (Mostly affected by Date Plate).
  283. Um, who is the propogandist here... by BlackMesaResearchFac · · Score: 1
    Fact. The USA has never been to WAR over something that didn't make us money. We have never went to WAR for a GOOD CAUSE.

    Excuse me?

    WWI, WWII? How much money did the United States make during those wars? They weren't for a good cause?

    Riiiiiight...

    --
    -- Scientist: You aren't going to leave me here, are you? Boagh! Thump...
    1. Re:Um, who is the propogandist here... by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2

      As a counterpoint, take a look at how long it took the US to officially enter both of those wars.

      I'd not say that, in those two instances, economics was the primary factor, but I'd say they were a major factor.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    2. Re:Um, who is the propogandist here... by BlackMesaResearchFac · · Score: 1
      I'd not say that, in those two instances, economics was the primary factor, but I'd say they were a major factor.

      Perhaps the sinking of oceanliners before WWI can be considered "a major economic factor" (arguable but it's a point).

      Yet I don't see where economics became a major factor for entering WWII, unless not wanting to be bombed, invaded and conquered by the Emperialistic Japanese counts. In which case, name any war/conflict that didn't have major economic factors involved...

      Every war contains people, land and materials.

      But I didn't see the USA entering WWII for profit (to gain materials/land/people). That was about survival.

      Russia took half of Germany, and what did we do? We flew in tons of supplies at our own expense, something called the Marshall Plan.

      But we were in it to help our economy? For no good reason (Pearl Harbor)?

      --
      -- Scientist: You aren't going to leave me here, are you? Boagh! Thump...
    3. Re:Um, who is the propogandist here... by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2

      Economic factors: the loss of several trading partners.

      Had Germany won the land war, which they may very well have, they'd have owned Europe, Eastern Europe, perhaps a good chunk of the Soviet Union, and the Middle East, and a good chunk of Northern Africa. This would have given them a very diverse resource base, plenty of room for industry, and a population that could be...motivated...to be productive.

      Thier Axis partner Japan, meanwhile, would have quite a bit of Western SSSR, China, and bits of Southeast Asia. This would mean that Germany and Japan, probably completely separately, but almost certainly by trading with each other, would have everything they could need or want. Not to mention MASSIVE industrial bases.

      The US, while itself probably big and diverse enough, geographically speaking, to be self sufficient in terms of agriculture and resources, not to mention having the same advantages in population and industrial base, would nevertheless of felt the sting of losing the vast majority of their European and Asian trading partners.

      Had Germany and Japan taken the majority of Europe and Asia, one likely outcome would have been another Cold War, only this time with the US in the position of needing to drive it's economy into the ground just to keep up with Germany and Japan's expenditures. In other words, what the US did to Russia, historically.

      Besides, I'll also point out that wars are good for the economy in general, especially when they're not being fought on your own soil, or even your own hemisphere, and WW2 is what wound up bootstraping the States out of the Depression.

      Now, I'm not saying that the States acted SOLEY out of economic factors. But I do wonder why, if they did it to save innocent lives and stop the depredations of fascist tyrants, they waited so long? I'm not criticizing them for it; it was the right thing, from their perspective, to do at the time, and hindsight is 20/20, blah blah blah. But war ALWAYS has economic factors as a very large part of it's core.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    4. Re:Um, who is the propogandist here... by BlackMesaResearchFac · · Score: 1
      Besides, I'll also point out that wars are good for the economy in general, especially when they're not being fought on your own soil, or even your own hemisphere, and WW2 is what wound up bootstraping the States out of the Depression
      Historically this has been true but it's also not a formula for success and therefore I think it holds very little water. I don't think when FDR was pondering whether to declare war on Japan & Germany he was sitting in his wheelchair thinking how great it would be years later to have a better economy at the expense of many thousands of American lives.
      But war ALWAYS has economic factors as a very large part of it's core.

      If you break it down that way, exactly.

      Which is why the original poster I was responding to made little point by saying the US entered war for profit (i.e. when you get down to it, people have a tendency to do things that benefit them, at least in some way).

      Yet despite the implications for the possible axis' world domination of the economy (had they won), don't you honestly think the US was far more worried about the implications for the axis' world domination in general. That is, the fact that two very large hostile forces would have no reason not to annihilate them (the US)?

      Somehow I think that was a lot more prevalent on peoples' minds than a difficult trading future.

      On a side note, I do think you take the delay by the US for declaring war a little skewed. People forget, but the US has historically been extremely unprepared for conflict and the public has also histically been very anti-conflict. President Wilson promised everyone he wouldn't get into WWI and needed those sinkings (more so the death of Americans) in order to sway public opinion and allow himself (via Congress) to declare war in the first place.

      The same goes for WWII and Pearl Harbor.

      --
      -- Scientist: You aren't going to leave me here, are you? Boagh! Thump...
    5. Re:Um, who is the propogandist here... by BlackMesaResearchFac · · Score: 1

      In any event, this is getting way off topic as his original post said...

      Fact. The USA has never been to WAR over something that didn't make us money. We have never went to WAR for a GOOD CAUSE.

      Perhaps you don't, but I see a difference between doing something to make money (which is what he's saying) and doing something to not lose money (i.e. keep the status quo) or to just plain survive.

      And if one doesn't see a difference between making money and keeping the status quo then he has no point because few (if any) wars are fought with the purpose of losing money.

      --
      -- Scientist: You aren't going to leave me here, are you? Boagh! Thump...
  284. Weed in Holland by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know this is a terrible misconception and everything, but I'll try to explain it clearly and ...s..l..o..w..l..y.

    Weed is _not_ (I repeat =NOT=) legal in Holland, it is however tolerated. If you had bothered to read something besides the weed menu when you were at a coffeeshop you would have seen that police can arrest you if you walk out of the coffee shop with weed you purchased there.

    The fact that they can do this makes it illegal. The fact that they don't means they tolerate it, although a stupid stoned loud tourist would certainly attract attention.

    It is also a misconception that tolerating weed has made Holland a better place, in fact many ppl are fed up with the washed-out addicts, but that is another story.

    I'm sure someone will just go "Aint so, i bought some" but heh, at least i got it off my chest.

    That will be all, move along.

  285. The US financed Al Qaeda by mirnav · · Score: 1
    Oil financed Al Queda.

    The US financed Usama Bin Ladin and his organization Al-Qaeda, at times training them in US military bases, so that they would fight the Russians in the period when they were occupying Afghanistan.

    This is not a conspiracy theory - it is an accepted fact. You don't have to trust me, better trust The Economist who said so in so many words some months ago. A simple search in their website should suffice to verify.

    Live with it.

  286. HUAC was a good thing... by Badanov · · Score: 1

    Wrong. McCarthy was a bufoon, but the HCUA was congress' way of dealing with a real threat from communist infiltrations in government and in institutions. A lot of liberals decry things as McCarthyism, but I think the concept is sound. No one was detained, no one was beaten, no one was shot. The only bad thing that happened is a few people lost their careers. A damn sight less than the communists would have done were they in power.

    --
    Dawn of the Dead
  287. Just a reminder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Today is also the aniversary of the military coup in Chile that was backed by the US against a democraticly elected government

  288. It's affected me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I was in college at the time, television broadcast/radio/internet backbone ran through the towers. Anyone familiar with the NYC area noticed that our communications dropped a lot (depending on which service). I live in NY. I work in NY. I've traveled since then, through the Canadian border, through JFK international airport, to downtown Manhattan. It's almost frightening when I saw Manhattan's busiest streets and neighboorhods, nearly empty the month of the attack.


    It's something we learned to cope with, and move on, but something we won't forget.

  289. Lives by N8F8 · · Score: 2

    I used the term "lives" to mean lifestyle and culture. Having lived in the mideast for several years and in the US most of my life I can say that our "lives" are different. Though we have much in common, Saudi culture felt more alien to me than any other place I've been to in my life. Not better or worse, just different.

    And like it or not, most terrorist organizations couldn't estist withour some form of government "assistance" wherever they are. So I do point a finger at Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, etc for harboring terrorist groups. I would also point a finger at the US if I was aware of a similar attitude of the government towards a terrorist group. Caveat: My defenition of terrorism basically rules out septratists groups. I'm talking about countries who fail to police their people from harming people in another country.

    --
    "God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
  290. The Internet has not been affected much. by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 2


    Many of the comments here describe how things have changed in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, but for the most part the changes have not affected the Internet. Although awareness of privacy concerns online is greater now than it was before, the online world has not changed much.

    I live and work within a few miles of the WTC site. During that morning one year ago, I couldn't get in touch with my mother to let her know I was alright. The phone lines were overloaded; the cellular networks too were beyond capacity. I eventually did manage to get the word to her by IM'ing a friend who lived further away, and he was able to call her and pass the message.
    Because I had a net connection (one that did not rely on a phone circuit, I suppose I must mention), I was able to keep in touch with loved ones with whom I otherwise would not have.

  291. The Point is... by reallocate · · Score: 2

    ...that I'm appalled at the unreasoning naivete of posters here who launch venomous diatribes because they can't take a two-inch nail clipper on board an airliner. Put it in your checked baggage, or buy one when you arrive. or trim your nails before you leave, for God's sake! Are your lives so bereft of any sense of adult civil responsibility that you see even the slightest inconvenience as a threat to all your freedoms?

    Are you all so willfully isolated, so comfortable stewing in your self-imposed wanna-be geek alienation, that you are in denial, that you simply can accept the reality that there is a threat?

    Are you so entrenched in your perpetual adolescence that you think freedom is only the satisfaction of your immediate individual desires? That if you can't have what you want, when you want it, that your freedom is being denied?

    In other words, feel free to take chances with your freedom, just don't take chance with mine.

    Rolling out citations of all the other ways people die is irrelevant and pointless. If we have the means to save lives, should we not do that? Or do you believe that the deaths of thousands on our highways justifies allowing others to die in terrorist attacks? The same logic would have us ignore cancer research because people die from heart attacks.

    During World War II food, fuel and other consumables were rationed or not available at all. I can only imagine how some of you would react to not being able to put gas in your car!

    Slashdot asked how 9/11 has affected us all. Well, for me, most of the responses posted here are convincing evidence that too many people equate freedom with fulfilling their own selfish interests, no matter the cost or danger to others. It's all about "me". Screw my social responsibilities.

    Right?

    --
    -- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
    1. Re:The Point is... by j-turkey · · Score: 2

      Here's the problem with your argument:

      In WWII, citizens were asked to make sacrifices for the war effort, be it doubling production of goods for the military/war effort, or by making the supreme sacrifice for their country. But these were temporary measures under war...real war (you know -- the kind that only Congress has constitutional power to declare) not a war on drugs or terrorism. WWII was a real war officially declared againast a real country. With this comes some serious temporary measures -- up to, and including martial law. In a time of war, this is acceptable.

      The US is not at war now. Yeah, there's a war on drugs, and a war on terrorism, but this is not (by any stretch of the imagination) a real bonafide, constitutional war (before you start to refute this, try finding an official declaration of war -- and a country tha we are at war with). However, during this so-called war, we have been asked to make some sacrifices. These are not temporary sacrifices, but permanant sacrifices in our civil liberties. Some of them no big deal. Some are the rights that we, as Americans hold most dear to us, such as due process and miranda rights. America now has Secret Police with secret arrests, and the secretly accused are tried in secret courtrooms...with and handed out secret sentences, to be served in secret institutions. How is this not reminicent of the former USSR's KGB and the Nazi's SS? Just because its in America? Is it OK just because we believe our cause to be just? Do the ends justify the means because we're really pissed off?

      So you don't mind being searched a little more often, or not being allowed to carry your nail clippers onboard commercial airlines. That's fine, I don't really mind either...hell, I like the TSA folks better than the folks handling security pre 9/2001. However, it is completely fair to criticize certian aspects of our new security practices...and speaking up when you feel that your civil liberties are waning away for a bad reason is the right (American) thing to do.

      As far as taking chances with my freedom and not yours...did you never realize that there is some calculated risk in being a free and open society? Do you recgonize the dangers of us not being that way (see former Soviet Union and Fascist Germany for recent examples)? It is determental for the people of our great society to act as the last check and/or balance against the power of our government.

      Are you really choosing safety over freedom? Just because cars kill people does not mean that cars should be illegal (safety over freedom). Just because there are terorists about, and our country is a target, that our freedom of association should be permanently revoked. Now I understand your point about making alot of noise over small inconviences, such as prohibiting nailclippers to be carried onto a commercial airliner...but there are greater issues of liberty at stake...and many of these are decidely not minor inconviences.

      --Turkey
      --

      -Turkey

    2. Re:The Point is... by reallocate · · Score: 2

      I'm more likely to vote for someone like Ron Dellums than George Bush, and tend to agree with your overall argument (altho I'm not upset that non-citizens resident in the U.S. who engage in espionage or plot acts of terror are denied our Constitutional protections.) And I made no argument to trade safety for freedom. But most of the posts here on this, and many other political or social issues, strike me as coming from deeply inexperienced, ill-educated and, seemingly, deliberately ignorant indviduals who see the world in black and white. Bravery is a good and necessary thing, but these people are saying that their alleged bravery can substitute for security. It can't. When a plane crashes into a building, the brave die along with the cowards.

      It all reeks of testosterone and alcohol.

      --
      -- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
    3. Re:The Point is... by j-turkey · · Score: 2
      Yeah -- I tend to agree...If I have to get on a plane, bravery be damned. I'd rather not have to die in order to keep an airplane from being used as a weapon. Some basic security measures are obviously needed.

      --Turkey
      --

      -Turkey

  292. Earn your mod points! by Badanov · · Score: 1

    Name ONE attack by the US government against the US...

    --
    Dawn of the Dead
  293. affects on my life by Libertarian+Girl · · Score: 1

    Well Spoken.

    The initial poster had asked how 9/11 has affected us, and I was going to say "well, in my day-to-day life, not much at all actually. I still go to the store for groceries,etc". But then I stopped and considered the 4th of July weekend. On that weekend my 9 year old son & I, drove cross-country with my mother- helping her move to another state for a job. For our return trip, we flew.

    What is the relevance? When I was 9-ish and flew for the first time, I got a nifty package of stuff, including one of those cheap plastic pins that is a set of 'wings'. What did my son get? Nada. The co-pilot of the small connecting flight into Denver did wish him well and hoped he would have a nice flight. But none of the airlines gives out the pins to kids for their first plane-flight. it is no longer "the custom". Being only 9 and really really excited to be flying in a big plane quickly overcame his disappointment in not getting the pin. My husband, however, the previous year (prior to 9/11 by merely a month or two) was able to procure a pin to bring home for our son. So you tell me, do they think terrorists are going to seize the box of Wings and use them to take down the plane? get real.

    As an added bonus- because we were flying on one-way tickets we both got to get the special wanding and having our shoes xrayed as well. Despite the fact that we were obviously a rather pregnant mom wearing sandals, and a very excited little boy who couldn't wait to take a picture of the 'very first plane he was getting to fly in'. There is just a computerized system that randomly spits things out.

    Trivial yes. But an indicator of how utterly absurd some of these "security measures" are.

    Snatching our nail clippers and doing random security checks isn't going to stop people who want to do destructive things. They'll just use something that isn't being checked for. They'll find some other method of attack. They'll not use a plane. And they will prey on peoples' fears of being attacked.

    I pity those who live in fear, I pity those who are so afraid of terrorism that they willingly agree to let the First Amendment be trashed.

    I feel sadness to know that people who have been Americans their entire lives, have travelled out of country on vacation, and are being detained for days upon re-entry. Because their ethnic background is of one Arabic nationality or another. Racial profiling is now the Accepted Mode of Operations. (did it ever really go away to begin with?) How pathetic.

    I read this slew of posts, and see all the emotional baggage that people have. The finger-pointing, the name-calling. The rampant bigotry and hatred. For what? What does this accomplish?

    I may not be able to waltz into D.C. and force some changes, there are only a 'select few' who have that type of power & priviledge. But I can look into my own community and make the effort to foster the sense of equality. To not edge away from someone in the grocery store because they happen to be of Arabic descent. I can teach my kids to respect another individual and their right to hold their own set of beliefs. That violence isn't the first answer to a problem. I can connect with other generations by being involved with Youth Mentoring programs, or assist at the local Senior Citizen's Center. I can vote, sit in a jury even though the pay you get is inadequate compensation of wages. Go to city council meetings and let my voice be heard. Feedback from situations like those do trickle up the chain of politics- but only if we all get off our collective asses and actually get involved.

    So, how has 9/11 affected my life? It has been the 'final straw' that has slowly overcome my willingness to live complacently in a state of non-involvement in my community, state, country. Am I some sort of militant, highly active, super-mom participant? no-.... I'm too much of a procrastinator. But I at least have a better idea of exactly what I 'can' do, and some goals in place for actually 'doing' those things.

    The only fear I live with, is that of not knowing what goofy freedom-removing thing the government will do next. Whether it is to its own people, or the people of some other nation.

    1. Re:affects on my life by unitron · · Score: 2

      Although I applaud most of your post, if you were a religious fanatic you might very well be willing to have that 9 year old boy die as a martyr and that bulge under your clothing might be something a lot more sinister than his soon to be little brother or sister. Not all Muslims look "Arabic" and Islam isn't the only religion with fanatics.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

  294. Paranoia! Its not just for civilians anymore... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you guys want to hear about what genius's those airport security goons are, listen to this: Im a US Marine, and I recently took some leave so I could go home and see the Mom. On the way home, I whisked through the airport security as I was using a small loal airport for my departure. But on the way back I flew out of Detroit Metro. Probobly due to the fact that I had a large backpack about 80% full of computer goodies and my laptop, I was put through a full frisking search, all of my equipment was rooted though, twice, and I was then asked to explain what some of the items in the bag were (My homebrewed 802.11b antennae raised some eyebrows). Mind you my nice green US Millitary ID was visible and shown to everyone involved in this whole evolution. I just think its funny that they wasted their time on me! Also I want to point out that there are alot of us in the military who just dont get why all of these civilians are freaking out. On my last deployment, the base we were on made CNN because of an attempt to shoot down one of our aircraft. It was a hot conversation item for about a week, then topics switched back to the old standby (This place sucks!). Sorry to post anonamously, but I am big brother after all!

  295. We agree then... by Badanov · · Score: 1

    Political speech is protected speech. Irrespnsible speech is not. Telling us you are going to vote democrat because you do not ilke what has been done post 911 is okay, but telling the world you think the USA had it coming is not. Praying to your God is free speech, but praying to God as your money goes to terrorist organizations is treason

    --
    Dawn of the Dead
    1. Re:We agree then... by chill · · Score: 2

      Almost... :-)

      Telling the world you thing the USA deserved it *IS* protected speech. It is an opinion. Unpopular and stupid, but an opinion.

      Sending money to terrorist organizations is a different ballgame. That isn't speech, it is an action that directly supports a crime, and possibly *IS* treasonous as it can be linked to an attempt to violently overthrow the government.

      Using speech to plot an attack would also be a crime.

      Standing up and saying "I hope you die" isn't a crime. Plotting the death of another, and/or acting on that desire IS.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    2. Re:We agree then... by Badanov · · Score: 1

      To me if you believe the actions of your nation's enemies' in causing the deaths of your countrymen is an acceptable response to your nation's policies, in time of war, is treasonous speech, and therefore unprotected speech. Such speech also identifies the allies of terrorists. I fail to see why such speech gets a pass in time of war.

      --
      Dawn of the Dead
  296. You'd Rather Risks Lives Than Be Inconvenienced by reallocate · · Score: 2

    It has nothing to do with anyone's courage. It has everything to do with selfish, spoiled Americans who would willingly risk the lives of others rather than accept the slightest inconvenience. All that I've seen here is simple whining from children who are stamping their feet because the adults need to impose a few rules.

    --
    -- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
    1. Re:You'd Rather Risks Lives Than Be Inconvenienced by alienmole · · Score: 2
      The selfish, spoiled Americans are the ones who immediately look to someone else to fix the problem and make it go away. In effect, they say "don't bother me with the details, I just want to carry on living as though the outside world doesn't exist". It is these people that result inevitably in the kind of government America now has: instituting senseless paranoid measures in order to make people *feel* safer, while at the same time trampling the values which America is supposed to represent, and not in fact succeeding in increasing security.

      Think through what it is you're really scared of, and how these various measures actually address that. I suspect they'd do better to encourage every American to learn a martial art, than some of the nonsense that's been enacted.

      Really, this has everything to do with courage. You've allowed yourself to be scared, and you're delegating responsibility for that, and for fixing it, to everyone but yourself. You're the only one who can fix it. I'm saddened that the terrorists have succeeded so well, when all it would take to beat them is to realize that all you have to do is think for yourself.

      Safety and security will only come from each individual being more aware and involved in the world around them, not in hiding and hoping that by giving up your civil liberties to a big brother government, that they'll take care of everything for you. Don't criticize the people you accuse of whining: they're doing more for America's freedom and values - including freedom from fear - than any of the quivering masses.

  297. The definition of Insanity by smammon · · Score: 1

    A famous quote purports that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Isn't that what we are doing with all the airport / event / monument security? Is it just me or didn't this type of thing fail to begin with and allow 9-11 to happen in the first place?

    In the last year I've been frisked, searched, sniffed by dogs, exposed to all sorts of radiaion and generally delayed in every possible fashon - each time thinking to myself how useless and costly the whole process is.

    Ok maybe I have an engineer's mind on this but it seems to me that we should actually fix the problem. Start by making hijacking a non-issue. Stop paying for these checkpoints and make planes that cannot be co-opted. Lock down the computer controlled flight deck and let the passengers have naked jello wrestling if they so desire - BFD the plane is still going where it's supposed to.

    Then move up the ladder to other issues ending up with breaking the US's drug like dependance on forigen oil (ok oil in general). Is it just me or do we need an intervention here? Lets see, what to drug addicts do to assure their supply. They threaten, steal, coerce, and get generally violent don't they? Pretty much describes US behavior whenever our precious oil supply is involved. And pretty much like a drug addict we've pissed off all our friends and family and our only companions are other addicts (are you listening UK? Hello Japan!).

    NO Mr. President! You cannot tear up the Bill of Rights just beacuse you used the "T" word. Pound Sand!

    --
    "Smile, listen, agree, and then do whatever the fuck you wanted to do anyway." ~Robert Downey Jr.
  298. Bad Grammar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I hope this is received in the spirit it was intended in.
    Never use a preposition to end a sentence with!
  299. Nope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because you are still entitled to state your belief in something that is wrong, or else no speech is free.

  300. SUPPORT THE ACLU! by Omega · · Score: 2
    The ACLU is a leading force behind censoring religious speech.
    The ACLU does not have the ability or the authority to censor anybody. The ACLU opposes government sponsored religious speech (as it is unconstitutional) and uses the courts and lobbying to protect the letter and spirit of the First Amendment and the separation of church and state.

    The ACLU defends the rights of individual citizens to exercise their right to religious speech in their private lives. For instance, the ACLU filed a lawsuit against the Lafayette-Parish school board in Louisiana because it's dress code violated the religious beliefs of Rastafarian Children. The ACLU also worked to pass the Religious Freedom Bill of 2000 which helped protect an individual's right to worship.

    The ACLU is opposed to government sponsored religion and government restrictions on religion. How more pro religion can you get?

    The ACLU claims to defend the Constitution, but basically ignores the 2nd Amendment.
    The national ACLU is neutral on the issue of gun control because they believe that the 2nd Amendment refers to the rights of individual states to maintain individual militias. The ACLU also believes that the Constitution contains no barriers to reasonable regulations of gun ownership. If we can license and register cars, we can license and register guns.

    For more information, see the ACLU's position paper online.

    The ACLU is strongly in favor of executing people without a trial.
    Ok, I don't even know where this one came from. The ACLU is opposed to all forms of capital punishment and the practice of capital punishment. Aside from the fact that it is a cruel and unusual form of punishment (in violation of the Eighth Amendment), it is also applied disproportionately to minorities and the poor.

    There is a whole section on their website about this.

    The ACLU in its "diversity" efforts supports the idea of denying people rights due to their skin color.
    Obviously this is patently untrue. The ACLU supports civil rights for all Americans regardless of race, creed, gender, religion, political affiliation or sexual orientation. You're referring to the ACLU's support of Affirmative Action, which is something quite different. I won't try to convince you why Affirmative Action is a good thing, but I'll just say this: there are hundreds of other forms of non-race-based Affirmative Action that take place every day. Things like networking, and knowing a friend of a friend. Things like being in a certain fraternity or going to a certain business school or belonging to a certain society. Nothing can stop these little forms of Affirmative Action from taking place, so the only solution we have to make hiring and school admissions more racially equitable is to introduce one more element into the equation. And contrary to popular belief, Affirmative Action does not deny qualified people access to jobs or schools.

    For more, please see the ACLU's section on Racial Equality.

    In addition to being a card carrying member of the ACLU, I am also a member of the EFF. I wouldn't pick one over the other because they are both important to civil rights online and offline.

  301. Re:The press is giving my brain a different poundi by jafac · · Score: 2

    Five years down the road, something else Really Bad will happen and the press will be obsessed with something else. We should have a betting pool on the next big press fad. Personally, I'm predicting it'll be mega-storms caused by climate change. Some kind of giant hurricaine will level a nation to the dirt, and the press will drop terrorism like yesterday's news - which it already is.
    - -
    no, it will be another bioterror attack, and thousands will die, millions will be scarred. The press will call for (and get) the destruction of all smallpox samples, and ban science altogether unless it is used solely for making companies money.
    Or maybe it will be an asteroid impact, and they'll ban astronomy - because if we hadn't seen it coming, it wouldn't have hurt us.

    --

    These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
  302. a word from europe by benson+hedges · · Score: 1
    after 9/11, the most drastic chance was that the governments of most western countries did not try to spy on their citizens secretly, but more or less demanded everyone to give up their privacy... linetapping, isp logs seized and so on without an order from a court and stuff like that.

    the local (austria) freedom party demanded that everyone's fingerprints should be taken (sic!) and put into a central database. there were other ideas, like taking dna samples from everyone, etc., but nothing really dramatic came out.

    on the other side, the whole discussion showed John Doe and his mother-in-law just how much their privacy is in danger, and led to numerous groups and activists working against the banning of privacy.

    disclaimer : please excuse the horrible english, it's 2am and I haven't slept in ages.

    --
    Karma : Soylent Green (Mostly due to eating junk food and mocking religion)
  303. Its not that simple by Suicyco · · Score: 2

    I still don't believe that the average person in the middle east really cares at all whether or not you can go buy a bear, for instance. They don't want that in their country, but thats a different story. I find it hard to fathom that they want to kill americans because they have the freedom to do things they cannot. The thin line here is the difference between what an american citizen can do in his day to day life, and the will of america to force the rest of the world to adopt that lifestyle. Its not our lifestyle that riles up other nations, its our desire to have them except it in their own countries. And its really non of our business. If it was, then why dont we stop being hypocrites and enforce our will on everybody equally. Are arabs free in Isreal? Are Somali's free in Somalia? So on and so on.

    Nobody wants to kill you because you can freely go buy a porn magazine. They want to hurt the bringer of what they see as decadence and evil into their own lands. Its a subtle but huge difference. One that is ignored in the "you will never stop our way of life" propoganda spewed by the mouths of our leaders.

    Not to mention they overwhelmingly closer to home facts of our attrocities in their own countries. Supporting and arming the Saudi royal family. Supporting civil war in Afghanistan. Supporting Iraq, then bombing them when they step on our toes. Supporting Isreal, etc etc. Those are things they are faced with every single day. Not you being able to go watch Spiderman uncensored. But your tax dollars going to pay for the methods and means to cause much anguish in their own home towns. If your child was maimed by a US made mine, that would upset you a lot more then your being against alcohol. Do you want to see the citizens of countries where child pornography is legal die in horrendous terrorist acts? Its morally against everything we believe here, yet we dont have militia groups planning terror attacks on them. Yet if those countries were actively attacking your children, you would do something about it, with whatever means you had available. Make no mistake about it, people in many middle eastern nations feel they are at war with us. Not for our way of life, but for our intrusive invasion of their own lives.

  304. these stories say it best by Magius_AR · · Score: 1
    One
    Two

    I'm tired of people parading and commercializing this damn event as if it's something to be sensationalized. Accept it and move on. If you want to remember or grieve in your own way, so be it, but honestly, they're going too far. My favorite TV station cancelled all programming and ran some 9/11 special ALL DAY LONG. I honestly feel bad for people who have birthdays on this day and now have to live with this crap.

    Magius_AR

  305. wow by shren · · Score: 2

    You combine cynicism and stupidity in impressive amounts.

    --
    Maybe the state's highest function is to grind out insoluble problems. (Zelazny, Hall of Mirrors)
  306. Patriot Games by lrbotch · · Score: 1

    Be sure to help others how to use their new computers and show them how to surf the net and set up email accts and register on as many different sites as possible...if you get spammed, just forward the spam to another spammer...allow others to use your login names and get permission to use theirs too! S. Africa, Saudi Arabia, Japan, Australia...all have many portals...surf every link you can whether it intersts you or not...soon the law will be seizing computers all over the world in your name(s)...hell, I like having my identity stolen...that wasn't me! I don't even know what Anime is...who's this Buffy the vampire thing...Tiger who? N'est pas? Wast?
    work your ass off, follow the golden rule, be vigilant, and smile when you greet your fellow humans and animals...it's all entertainment...someday when you least expect it the world will right itself...

  307. "It's Worth the Price" by quinto2000 · · Score: 2

    said by our own Madeline Albright. I hope you're not that callous.

    --
    Ceci n'est pas un post
  308. Re:Prepare for War! by jdbear · · Score: 1

    I tend to agree that the Old testament and the New don't seem to belong to the same religion sometimes. I really don't understand why "Thou Shall Not Kill," but then again, kill all those guys, and anyone who does this, and, oh yeah, kill him too. By the way, I didn't say that Christianity was peaceful, just that Islam was not. Christians have a long and bloody history, especially when the Vatican rose to power. I do think that you need to review your history of the middle-east just before the spread of Islam, though. Just after the death of Mohommad, the Muslims decided that they needed to spread their faith, and they used the sword to do it. The first Crusades were to take the Holy Lands back. Other Crusades were because the soldiers sent on the first ones were more interested in rape and pillage than conquest, but that's another story. It was a bad time to live in the Middle-east for everyone. Kind of like now. I don't know if there will ever be peace in the region. By the way, I am a Christian, and I believe God knows the truth, but we are VERY confused about it. We are perhaps as wrong as they are (whoever they are,) but what the heck? You've got to believe something! - JDbear

    --
    If you're not living on the edge, you're taking up too much space.