Slashdot Mirror
PATRIOT II Legislation Leaked
Buck Mulligan writes "The Center for Public Integrity reports that it has obtained a copy of PATRIOT II -- a huge law enforcement power grab that is intended to build on the USA PATRIOT Act. It's called the 'Domestic Security Enhancement Act.' CPI says it would increase domestic intelligence gathering and surveillance while reducing judicial review and public access to information. For more on the first PATRIOT Act, see the EPIC page."
that, soon, Alot of our Base are going to Belong To Them. :(
You are not the customer.
The all american hitler!
It's kind of sad that the government actually needs more power than what's provided by the first Patriot Act. It's also ironic that it was called the Patriot Act, because it doesn't make me feel very patriotic...
"To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit." -Stephen Hawking
For if we don't we deserve what we get, and anyone voting to keep the current Bush administration, must be insane.
3000 dead over past 2 years, still no free Palestinians, still
Privacy is not for the boring. Those of us with colorful lives want privacy. But if you're lame and boring you dont really need privacy, and dont care about those who value it.
Unfortunately the majority of people dont want privacy except _maybe_ in the bedroom.
Apparently terrorists have tragically gone free due to the inability of investigators to pull up their credit records.
I also like the bit about how the use of encryption in the commission of a crime would be a felony. Recursion anyone? Sounds like a blank check search warrant on anyone using PGP to me.
Oh boy, that quote never stops being funny!
....
In A.D. 2101
War was beginning.
Captain: What happen ?
Mechanic: Somebody set up us the bomb
Operator: We get signal
Captain: What !
Operator: Main screen turn on
Captain: It's You !!
Cats: How are you gentlemen !!
Cats: All your base are belong to us
Cats: You are on the way to destruction
Captain: What you say !!
Cats: You have no chance to survive make your time
Cats: HA HA HA HA
Captain: Take off every 'zig'
Captain: You know what you doing
Captain: Move 'zig'
Captain: For great justice
Now, If we could only get the British gov to stop proposing similar dumb laws (ie. EUCD) that make the EU look more like the USA.
If this one goes through, I've got yet another reason to avoid going to the USA and working/living there.
Well, anyone who wants to weaken the security of the HomeLand(insert-your-best-trumpet-'dum-dum'-for-ef fect) would be against this Legislatoin. Everyone whos not a leftist, pinko, commie knows that the PATRIOT ACT is vitally necessary in the new Post 9/11 America.
I for one look forward to the security that the US PATRIOT ACT II will bring to the Homeland. Anyone who would be against this effort is an enemey of the state -- an Anti-American if you will -- and is obviously involved with the Terrorists Themselves -- please notify your local HomeLand Security Office of any suspiscious Anti-American Activity.
Thank-you,
Sincerely,
The Deacon of the Bipartisan Party.
Holy damn...
Got your tinfoil hats ready? Ok...here we go.
Patriot Act. v2.0
Section 101:Would extend the idea of a "foreign power" to include all persons. Regardless of if they are affiliated with terrorists or not. mmm...ok
102: v 1.0 limits "agents of a foreign power" to people to are activly violating or have the goals to violate federal law. v2.0 wants to eliminiate this.
This alone, combined with the known abuses of v1.0, would give any administratiion absolute and ultimate control. There is another 15 odd pages of further detail..but no more is needed.
I believe that somebody overreached. Between this and the doubling of the tax cut, things might be about to change...
-----
The problem with the two clauses listed above is that it opens ANYBODY up to a full investiation..which includes revoking citizenship and deportation.
Mmmm...facism...*drool*
it is done. It is too far gone to fix without going well outside the Constitution.....
Where else is there to move to? I'm done here.
So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
Is immigrants swimming BACK to where they came from.
Anyone know of any tech jobs in Cuba?
If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
I would take this story more seriously if it wasn't written with such breathless and hysterical overtones.
Michael is a tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorist. Any story that supports his conclusion that the government is out to get him is autmomatically posted.
BTW: This is not offtopic, it is a meta comment. And don't be a pussy by overrating this just because you don't like it.
SIG:Slashdot: indymedia for nerds.
The Center for Public Integrity has intercepted a sequel to the Patriot Act that is being called the "Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003". Here are a few mirrors to the document... (we will need more): one, two, and three. A notable part of the prospective legislation is that a new federal felony is created for willfully using encryption during the comission of a felony and that a judge in a different part of the country can issue a search warrant for another part of the country for terrorism or "computer crime". Why should you care if this isn't even close to law yet? 1) It's written by John Ashcroft and 2) The Bush administration is great at getting these things passed during emergencies (wasn't the homeland color just kicked up a notch?)
....Is that John Ashcroft is just tring to get back at the citizens of Missouri for electing a dead guy instead of him. Too bad that the rest of us are going down with them.
Hate to by cynical, but...
Funny how the Homeland Security Advisory System went up a notch when it looks like CPI was calling around to the DoJ asking about this legislation...
How does something like this leak? If it is proposed it becomes public knowledge, does it not. So how did this somehow slip through the cracks? Is it simply in the works and supposedly not ready for public consumption?
Anyways, IF and I mean IF it is true that in order to know what is going on in the legislative body of the government these days that we have to rely on leaks then I ask what freedom do we have left in this so-called Democracy.
Okay, the odds that this legislation would get passed right now is really slim. I mean, without the pressing fear of imminent terrorism, there's no motivation for it. So, I'm wondering if the DOJ's intent in drafting this was to keep it on the shelf until the next terrorist attack happens. Then they would come out and explain that they couldn't stop it because they didn't have all the powers they need, and conveniently they'd have legislation ready to roll.
I'm very glad this has come out at a time when our heads are mostly screwed on straight so we can shoot it down in the light of day.
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
America is rapidly degrading and the majority of its citizens either don't know, don't care, or are simply powerless to do anything about it.
History will look back at 911 as the beginning of the end of America as we knew it.
You whining liberal wussies make me sick. The only way to protect our freedoms is to allow Herr Asscroft unlimited powers to do whatever he wants. He is an honest, moral, ethical Christian man who loves, nay, reveres the US Constitution. He and pres shrub will not rest until all of our rights are suspended, in order to protect our liberties. God bless America.
---
SCO is weenies
Gator is Spyware
Microsoft is thugs
Why do you think electing a Democrat would make any difference?
Remember what Sen. Feingold said about a *return* to an era of invasion of privacy and harrassment.
In 20's and 30's america labor leaders and other troublemakers could expect to be spied on, harrassed, framed for this and that (John Steinbeck never went to a hotel alone for fear of
being framed for rape).
In the post-war era it wasn't so bad, but even then there was McCarthyism and spying was done on suspected communists that'd raise quite a few eyebrows now. It's really only since the civil rights era that Americans have come to expect the very high level of privacy and fairness that our generation has enjoyed.
Rather than sinking into a new and unexpected bad patch, it's more that along good patch may be ending.
Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
civil liberties have we given up? I can still do the same shit I was doing even before bush was in office or even before Patriot. The DMCA was put in BEFORE bush and even that hasn't affected my life. How has any of this affected you? Have any of YOU been wire tapped lately? Have any of YOU had your homes searched for no reason? Have any of YOU been hauled off to jail out of the blue? Have any of YOU had your book collection thrown out in the street and burned with everyone elses? Have any of you been shipped to a death camp in a car with 100 others, crying, screaming and wallowing in your own feces as well as the feces of others?I didn't think so. I think /. is over-dramatizing these Patriot laws that get passed. The day that ANY of these things happens to someone that is NOT an extremely shady character to begin with, is the day you can bitch. But as far as I can tell, none of these laws have impeded on a single civil liberty since their inception. If you can think of something I could do before Patriot that I cannot do now, please, please post.
My physical body is in America... but really, there are places I'd prefer to be where my heart is. Canada, where are you? Am I allowed to pass through the Iron Border? Or does America have to seize my computer at the border for illegal MP3s, PGP encryption, movie trailers and more?
I can't stand the way the USG is handling this. If Americans would stand up for their rights instead of being in a stupor over "terrorism", we could get our hard-earned rights back. One of my Canadian friends from online has called me an honorary Canadian and is offering me safe haven should the USG ever come after me lol.
Enough rambling... go talk to friends and more, print out pamphlets, write your Congresscritters, do something constructive towards repealing and destroying these evil policies.
Section 501, "Expatriation of Terrorists": This provision, the drafters say, would establish that an American citizen could be expatriated "if, with the intent to relinquish his nationality, he becomes a member of, or provides material support to, a group that the United Stated has designated as a 'terrorist organization'."
Would that include the US government for giving $43 million to the Taliban in May of 2001 for their "War on Drugs" efforts?
Call Gore. I think we just figured out how to evict the squatter.
Washington DC (Reuters) - Today, a inside leak occured of new legislation currently under vote in the US Congress. This bill seeks to strengthen and further refine the previous USA PATRIOT act.
The Domestic Security Enhancement Act of Two-thousand-and-three, commonly called D-SEAT, seeks to further build domestic strength for intelligence and surveilance, but many civil rights protestors claim it will lessen political freedoms and civil rights in the US.
D-SEAT is "merely a ruse to bring about more police controled state" according to activist Joel Mainem; however, the bill's author clarified that "D-SEAT is nothing new. All politicians are well familiar with D-SEAT. If there were any troubles, D-SEAT wouldn't be used."
"When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."
Of course this was a popular quotation for Timothy McVeigh. The second part of the quote: "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
Makes one think.
What is music when you despise all sound?
Keep in mind that the alleged document is draft legislation. It may be that everyone has put what they want in it, and it will be tempered down before it is handed to Congress.
It also might be yet another proposal where a group proposes something insane in order to gain more minor consessions. If so, hopefully Congress will recognize when someone keeps crying "wolf" that the wolf may not be there.
But what if the "wolf" does come along and someone says "if we had X, we could have caught them before this disaster." What should Congress do then?
***Your IP Address has been logged for reading this comment. Thank you for your cooperation.***
of a Nazi regime. The US is now officially a fascist state. Democracy is dead.
This is a wakeup call for EVERYONE OF US IN THE UNITED STATES to write to our congressmen and women. Do so in a sincere, intelligent manner so we can make sure this gets shot down before we really feel the brunt of it.
"Some people fight so hard for freedom until there is nothing left of it."
Though I strongly suspect the whole terrorism-panic and sudden need to attack states declared "evil" has other causes... Maybe the weapon industry needs new markets or the oil industry wants more countries to exploit... (and these are George W.'s friends so he is a nice guy and helps them)
I don't need a signature.
Section 501, "Expatriation of Terrorists": This provision, the drafters say, would establish that an American citizen could be expatriated "if, with the intent to relinquish his nationality, he becomes a member of, or provides material support to, a group that the United Stated has designated as a 'terrorist organization'." But whereas a citizen formerly had to state his intent to relinquish his citizenship, the new law affirms that his intent can be "inferred from conduct." Thus, engaging in the lawful activities of a group designated as a "terrorist organization" by the Attorney General could be presumptive grounds for expatriation.
so... they can take citizenship from anyone in an organization that they deem a terrorist group.
example:
i join a group that does guerilla-type media distribution, like maybe stuffing newspapers in those quarter machine things with pamphlets which include dying afghan children. then one day a police officer catches one of us, gets the group name out of them and the group members.
the government could then deem us terrorists as we scared many-a-christian-family with those pictures.
our citizenship could be revoked and we could be thrown out of the country.
god bless amerika
sig - .
That's what happens when you sit idly by watch the Nine Gavelers in Black give the Ring of Power to George Orwell Bush. He protects America by destroying it.
Funny that we would fight communism for 50 years only to see the eastern block fall and America gleefully embrace the oppressive Big Brother powers of a secret government.
At this point I have to wonder if some of the more ultra right-wingers like Ashcroft are arranging global annihilation so they can see their biblical end game fantasies come true.
America has been a "police state" for the last several decades... Everything our society does is regulated, the Feds have power that would be abhorrent to the framers of the constitution... They've been doing it for years covertly, in small ways... the real truth of the matter is that the US public doesn't know, and for the most part, doesn't WANT to know, just what the government routinely gets away with. As long as they can shop at the Gap, drive their SUV's, chat on their cellphones, Check their email at AOL, and watch the latest network tv drivel, they're happy.
Now at least the govt is being OPEN about its facist tendencies.. which makes it easier to resist, if anyone is left who has the heart. Ben Franklin said it best, I think... something to the effect of "Anyone who would trade freedom for security deserves neither."... And history will show, gets neither as well.
Oh, how Babylon the mighty has fallen.
pssst. the US is NOT a democracy.
Find the word democracy in the Constitution or Bill of Rights.
Its a Republic.
In the future, things will get worse becuase we allowed future abuses. This government was set up to prevent it, and now in the name of security, we are giving up the important checks and balances. These last 20 years have done more damage to these than at any other time in history (the WW2 damage was temporary, these are permanant). BTW, folks, clinton has been part of these stripping of rights as well.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Sounds awfully suspicuous to me, better round them up and send them to camp X-ray for our protection. Better yet launch a preemtive strike against their ;)
headquarters to be safe.
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), Letter to Josiah Quincy, Sept. 11, 1773.
if you've passed an act that removes more civil liberties than any other single act in the nation's history the thing you really need to do is follow it up by tightening the noose.
Thank God I'll be safe (cough) from terrorists though.
Now If I could only do something about those Black Marias. I know they'll be coming for me soon because I've downloaded anti-government texts over the internet.
They're called The Federalist Papers and Civil Disobedience.
KFG
the Office of Gestapo..
ein Hitler ist verbotten! we need to run this guy out of washington..
Don't Tread on OpenSource
Regardless of your stance on Israel/Palestine, you have to admit one thing. The terrorist attacks of 9/11 were really one of the best things to happen to the Palestinians. Perhaps they were right to cheer afterwards. Support for their cause skyrocketed. People that didn't know about them gave them alot of sympathy. Lots of Palestinian flags were/are flown. Tons of Free Palestine rallies were held. Tons of Down-With-Israel rallies were also held. etc etc.
All this widespread support and devotion suddenly skyrocketing after 9/11. This leads to the ultimate result that terrorism actually works, believe it or not. Just look at all the public support that the entire world has since given the Palestinian cause, primarily in response to 9/11.
Unfortunately, there will probably be more 9/11-like attacks in the future due to the relative success of 9/11 itself.
The only evidence we have is something published by the Center for Public Integrity. Are they reputable? Do they have an agenda?
I'm not familiar with this organization. Could someone reply who is?
RTFA: All you did was paraphrase the last paragraph of the article.
Hmm, "huge law enforcement power grab" sounds too negative. How about "temporary civil liberties adjustment"?
(With apologies to The Simpsons )
"Okay, the odds that this legislation would get passed right now is really slim. I mean, without the pressing fear of imminent terrorism, there's no motivation for it."
That's just it... my prediction is that they will introduce this legislation after a major (or moderate) terrorist event and claim that they could have stopped that last one if they would have had a law like this. Ugh...
Budding legislation that has to be leaked is, by definition, not conducive to any form of democracy, representative or total. ...even if this is just a draft and they plan on releasing the final version.
1 party owning both houses and the exectutive branch is just plain stupid. I hope this kind of shit gets worse before it gets better so we learn our lesson.
While a lot of people here are going to spend a lot of time bashing the Bush Administration and urging their ouster, let's pause for a moment and consider the fact that none of you could name a nationally recognized politician whose administration would be any better. I mean, seriously, can't you see the same sort of stuff coming out of a Gore/Lieberman/Gephardt/McCain administration? Or worse yet, a Pat Buchannan or Al Sharpton presidency? The problem is, all of the politicians on today's scene want to grab power for the government, and there's not a lot of hope for the future, because that's the nature of most politicians. What we really need is a system that imposes even more severe restraints on the power of government than what we've got now...something along the lines of a freshly drafted Constitution. Of course, this won't happen any time soon...so meanwhile, go write all of the people who are supposedly representing your interests and tell them just how strongly opposed you are to the police state a bill like this would create. Do us all a favor, though, and be coherent when you do it -- flames to representatives are about as constructive as your average mailing list flame war.
How To Get Humans To Mars
needs to see this thread. In which everyone who replied was modded down by the editors, and everyone who modded up had their mod privliges pulled. Nice.
BE AFRAID. BE VERY, VERY AFRAID.
I'm far from being considered a "political" guy, but this absolutely scares the shit out of me. DNA database??? Prohibition of Disclosure of Terrorism Investigation Detainee Information??? Sounds to me like a blank check for the gov't to do whatever the fuck they please. I'm trying not to be paranoid, but the people spearheading this seem to represent everything our forefathers stood against.
Let's pray that this thing never gets passed.
"Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned for SEGA. ..."
Surely at some point the provisions restricting judicial oversight become a slam dunk case for overturning due to fact the Constitution laid out the judicial system? Frankly, I thought the first Patriot act went overboard with that. Congress can't just tell the Court system to go stuff it.
I also don't understand why... well, I do, but for rhetorical purposes let's say I don't... the need for security necessitates less oversight by the court system. Once you've got the guy in custody, what's he going to do to the country while rotting away in jail waiting for judicial review? Is Congress seriously concerned that the judge is going to just let a criminal go? They're not in that business, assuming the government has enough evidence to back up their case. Oh, hey, think maybe the government wants the right to make wild accusations?
Sometimes, for laws like this, I wish you could bring a case before the Supreme Court for judicial review without an actual complainent. I understand the reasoning for not allowing this and generally agree with it, but in cases like this it's sad you have to wait for someone to be screwed over, and willing to spend years of their life fighting back, before the law might be overturned.
Why do you think Bush is poking his fingers into the eyes of the Arab world? Why do you think we keep getting upgraded to "orange alerts"?
Creating fear and starting wars gives politicians power.
One aspect of the current erosion of our freedom is that it is unprovable whether it is successful. It is a classic case of success being indicated by the lack of identifiable events. Thus, the greater our loss of liberties and rights, the more statements we get from our "leaders" that these measures have been successful, and then we loose more rights. If, after all of these measures an actually terrorist event should occur, the argument will be that its because we have not passed strong enough anti-terrorism legistation and the pace of oppression will simply accelerate.
So, we are left with a feedback system that will only accelerate over time.
The terrorists have won... our way of life has been damaged seemingly irrevocably.
Who would dare oppose something called the Patriot Act? That's great fodder for political campaigns ("John Congressman says he loves America, but he voted to raise taxes and even supported terrorists by voted against the Patriot Act").
A vote against the "Patriot Act" is a vote for Osama!
why do we continue to let them thrash our rights and civil liberties this country was founded on? we hear the news, and we bitch, but no-one seems to be doing anything about it! each one of these fucking "acts" that we let slip through just makes it worse and another little peice of what makes america great falls away. so c'mon people, how do we fight this? any ideas?
Yesterday we created an OCR'd version of this document, now available at Daily Rotten.
I hate to tell you this, but all the front runners for the Democratic nomination voted for the PATRIOT act... Without even reading it, just like their Republican counterparts. That's why this thing was leaked. Someone wanted make sure that the public knew about this piece of legislation, and time to complain, as opposed to it being sprung on us rammed through congress like PATRIOT I.
Unless you vote for someone like Lyndon Larouche, or Pat Buchanan, or Ralph Nader, etc, you're only screwing yourself.
Call your Congressman and Senators and demand they not support this horrible piece of legislation that strips you of even more of your precious freedoms.
Please remember that the Supreme Court on which you now depend was appointed by the same folks now pushing these oppressive laws through the Congress. I don't see any rescue from that branch... and when W get to make an appointment to the court, it only will get worse.
Go download PGP and/or GnuPG right now while they're still legal.
accuracy.org
Didn't you read the article? There's apparently already a large amount of crap coming from the White house.
Fact of the matter is that Michael Moore aside, that donation never happened. $43 million was given to aid organizations to be spent in Afganistan, and we can assume that some of that made its way into the pockets of the Taliban, but the Bush administration actually put a good bit of effort into trying to get it to the people of Afganistan. Mr. Moore lies a lot, really. There's an article on Salon about that one, you can check SNOPES for a couple other cases of him continueing to make claims that were specious to begin with, and which he had been notified were false.
It really bothers me the blatant disregard that our elected officals have for what once used to be a wonderful country. I understand that they are trying to do good (I hope), but they seem to have forgotten that government is supposed to be FOR the people, BY the people. The founding fathers encouraged us to distrust the government which is exactly why it was given limited powers to work within. By allowing bills like this pass into law we as citizens are showing a criminal amount of disregard for the future of this nation. Your citizenship is not a free ride, with it comes responsibilities as well as privelidges and rights. Nobody likes what is happening, but nobody seems to be doing anything more than just bitch. Let's quit our bitching and finally do something about it!
E pluribus unum
This kind of slow, incremental wearing away of human rights is exactly what happened in Nazi Germany.
People need to wake up and understand that there are ALWAYS people who want to disenfranchise the rest of us. The wolf is ALWAYS at the door. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.
There are three things that people can do.
1) Vote
2) Join the ACLU
3) Joine the NRA
The reason for the first is obvious. The reasons for the second and third are that the ACLU is a strong champion of individual rights, even if they are part of the loony left. The NRA is of course a strong champion of individual rights as well, even if they are part of the loony right. I'm a member of both and give generously to them.
Laws like this can only come to pass when our representatives in congress are not representing us. The only way that situation can arise is if the voters in general have not been holding them accountable. Any legislator who would put forward legislation intended to deny us our rights is a traitor because they have broken their vow to defend and protect the constitution. Should we re-elect such a person? I'd rather elect a pig straight from someone's barn to office than see someone like that remain in power. The american political landscape is dominated by party politics and this is a big part of the problem. People will vote for someone because of their party, or will vote for a party because that is what they've always done, or because they've been suckered by the propaganda that both major parties just love to spew out. It is sad to see so many people led around by the nose and irritating to have to hear them regurgitate the propaganda that they've swallowed down with relish. Look past the propaganda and bullshit. Be willing to vote for a different party. Become informed about issues that matter and the party's agenda on these issues. If people would do this then a lot of this kind of bullshit would cease to exist.
Lee
Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
The 14th amendment says all people born in the or naturalized in the US are citizens. Congress only has the power to grant naturaliztion. Where in the constitution does it give power to Congress to revoke citizenship? Are there any laws now that alow for the revoking of citizenship?
Even the Germanys don't want anything to do with America, isn't that a huge sign?? A country that had been bent on world domination for so long, doesn't even want to touch the USA with a 10 foot pole. You might wonder if they know something based on experiance. Hell, don't jump in bed with a madman trying to turn the country into a policed state!.
.. was he.. damn America is full of stupid people..
The USA is passing laws for unlimited gov't control and secrect agencies. People disappear for no good reason or explaination and get deported (least they aren't gassing them on the way out, they wait till they get them to their home country and then just bomb the shit of it.. All's fair in love and war.) And all this time anyone who doesn't think this is a good idea is called unpatriotic and an america hater. I do beleive this all happened before, started with a guy named Hitler.
You know, say what you want about Clinton, but in the 8 years he was in office, there wasn't one major war.. Vote in two Bush's and you get a war for oil everytime.. oh but wait I guess the second Bush wasn't really voted in
It sure sucks to live in the USA.
Land of the free, yeah right.
I would love to know what members of Congress wrote what part of the bill. Of course, the guy who admitted sticking a 'Can't sue this drug company for causing birth defects' in the completely UNrelated, mis-named Patriot Act has got off scott-free - no media attetion, no questions about conflict of interest.
Where are the angry voters? I read (online, ironically) that it is thought that people like the ones who post to the YRO stories spend all of their outrage posting to discussion boards and clicking polls.
I am guilty of that as anyone else, "Ahh. George Bush IS coke snorting dumbass who has more command of swallowing pretzels than the english language."
I feel better, and job well done. Well I'm preaching to the choir. We need reforms in the US and quick - sadly, it seems the most outspoken Geeks are the most insular ones and don't vote, organize, or spread the word.
We need someone charismatic who can get the message across to regular Joe.
I'd do it, but I'm watching last night's Farscape on my Linux PVR while posting to the Our Government Sucks, But I'm Comfortable With Complaining About It, So Back To Buffy And Let Someone Else Handle It board. /Irony
This is the beginning of the end of democracy in the United States. If this passes, kiss elections in 2004 goodbye - while they may be held, they will be tightly controlled to produce a landslide for Bush & Co. Why? Well, due to the introduction of all-electronic voting systems...
We go to WAR and the first time anything happens here they will pass the ACT in 2 seconds.
I've always tended to be rather left-leaning, and during the '90s I heard the constant tirades from the fringe-right about the coming abuses of power from the U.S government.
My typical reaction was one of amusement and sadness that people had actuallly convinced themselves that such things could and more importantly, *would* happen. Especially in the short time-frame predicted.
I stopped liking Clinton years before he left office (Democratic Party != Left Wing, Bill Clinton != Ethical Man), yet I did not partake in the growing hobby of "List evil things the Clinton Administration will do next year".
Clinton left office, and a man touted as being responsible and ethical moved into the White House.
The rest, as they say, is history.
The push to circumvent the very spirit of our Constitution has been constant since 9/11. Though, I don't think a Democrat would have done any better - they have become a spinless party unable to even find a platform. Don't bother calling them Left Wing - that is so 40 years ago. They don't even know what they stand for and are unwilling to fight anything the Bush administration proposes. They have become the CNN of poltics. The people that just agree with whomever is in power 99.999% of the time. They could have done something, they could have tried to change the course of events, before the post-9/11 legislative momentum built up to the point it is at now.
But they did nothing.
And now they still do......nothing.
The fringe-right is silent. Their nightmares are coming true, but instead of doing anything about it, they are continuing to talk about what has already occured as if it is still in the future, while they throw their support behind Bush.
The far-left is too caught up in the legacy of the past 40 years to pay attention to anything that is happening today. Instead of uniting to fight the efforts of the Bush administration, they are leaving that to a brave few, while they remain largely fractured and busy with far too many issues to even make a dent. It's embarassing when I'm associated with these people. The left, while idealistic, has become unable to *do* anything with those ideals. Many of their beleifs could change things for the better, and are compatible with even Libertarian philosiphy, but as a movement - a political and social force - they are now a joke.
Too bad we could reallly use ther help right now.
So then this article that appeared in the LA Times in May of 2001 is incorrect? This article was published long before hating the Taliban was vogue.
Cuz you know, when you buy pot you're supporting terrorism. So does that mean people who smoke pot can lose their citizenship? Or at a more realistic level, those who sell/grow pot? And all the pot I've ever bought's came from Canada... So does that mean Canada is a safeharbor for terrorists, especially since they're slowly leaning past decriminalization to legalization?
Best mirror for the full draft is here.
Warning!
Or does being anti-Christian not make one a racist (unlike being anti-Muslim, for instance)?
Section 404: Use of Encryption to Conceal Criminal Activity.
In recent years, terrorists and other criminals have begun to use encryption technology to conceal their communications when planning and conducting criminal activity. Title 18 of the United States Code currently contains no provision on the use of encrypted communications to plan or facilitate crimes. This proposal would amend federal law to provide that any person who, during the commission of or the attempt to commit a federal felony, knowingly and willfully uses encryption technology to conceal any incriminating communication or information relating to that felony, be imprisoned for an additional period of not fewer than 5 years. These additional penalties are warranted to deter the use of encryption technology to conceal criminal activity. In addition, it does not address the issue of whether software companies and internet service providers should give law enforcement access to "keys" for the purposes of decoding intercepted communications.
"Attempt" to download a copyrighted work from Kazaa and email someone about it using PGP = 5+ years in federal prison.
Ironic that it is section "404".
The United stated may not be a democracy but it is democratic. If he said 'The Democracy is dead' then his comment wouldn't be valid.
they have enough power damn it...I am voting for the guy who wants to over turn this law.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
"...can only come to pass when our representatives in congress are not representing us."
After the last presidential elections -- esp. in FL -- there is a general perception among US citizens that our vote really doesn't count and that we aren't currently being respresented as advertised. The process can be altered by other means (judicial review of ballots) to ensure a particular result. (Paranoid, sure, but it establishes the perception.)
This will come to pass because we're about to head into war. There isn't much we can do about that either because the decision-makers we've elected have already set the wheels in motion. Once we're in a state of war, this proposal will become a law in a form very similar to the ideas discussed in the articule. Just like PATRIOT I.
Best move you can make as a US citizen is to do the things you mention (sure, it can't hurt to vote, I guess) and keep a very low profile. Or expatriate. But, better do that before this becomes law, otherwise the consequences of that will change quite a bit, also.
www.dedserius.com
VB != VisualBasic
I didn't read the article, but i have read a few reviews of it. Basically, this sounds like something i saw on dilbert a few days ago. Dilbert's co-workers offered their boss two options to any thing they wanted done. The first option was horrible, and far reaching, and the second option was less of a problem than the first one, but still probably wasn't something the management wanted to approve. in that example, the backers of the bill are the workers, and the general populace are the managers. They are introducting something so outlandish, that when they comprimise on a stripped down version, it just ends up screwing everyone less (but we all still get screwed).
I'm not sure where the US is headed. The past 10 years we have seen quite a bit of degraded rights, high powered officials blatantly lying and getting caught, and other types of corruption. Makes me wonder when it will hit critical mass.
Why read the article when I can just make up a snap judgement?
They may start caring when it's open season on whoever the 'law enforcement agencies' has a beef with. Pissed of some cop? Look out. Make one too many bacon jokes, all the sudden, you and your slashdot buddies are terrorists and they're allowed to watch you 24/7, or hold you without bail for as long as they want. The only criteria for watching every move you make is that you might be a terrorist.
I've heard a quote to the effect of "The election of an American President is far too important to be left solely in the hands of Americans". I think it was some Englishman that said it a fairly long time ago. Anyone got the exact quote and source?
Belief is the currency of delusion.
Especially if you live in Nebraska!
Per the Register story about ES&S and Sen. Hagel, let me give you a few more details that the Register didn't report, as well as some clarification on the alleged mail order guru Harris:
- ES&S is mostly owned by World Enterprises, not the McCarthy Group. McCarthy and World Investments (VC subsidiary of World Ent.) do lots of investments together, but World definitely lead on this one. Incidentally, World Enterprises owns Omaha's only newspaper, the Omaha World Herald. They have a hundred-year history of anticompetitive practices against other area newspapers and enjoy their monopoly status very well. They do an acceptable job printing a paper, though they've had some amusing missteps (i.e. declaring the Internet a "temporary fad only interesting to computer geeks" back in 1996).
- The Hagel election conspiracy story is unfortunately nothing more than a bizarre construction by nutcase and self-declared expert Bev Harris (btw, I think we've reached the point in society where the expression "right-wing conspiracy nut" needs to be changed to reflect the lack of party exclusivity on these oddballs!). Anyone familiar with Nebraska politics knows that the state's democratic party is in total disarray and has failed to produce any viable candidates other than quasi-moderate Senator Ben Nelson (the 2002 races were a total disgrace and provided no political balance and parity to the state's republicans). Nebraskans rarely ever elect leftists and see themselves as moderates. Hagel is a product of uncontested elections.
- Hagel does have his own set of problems, including presidential ambition that frequently sets him at odds with his president, and his excessive comfort with the views of lobbyists. He's been very pro RIAA and broadcasting industry, pro-baby bell, anti open source, anti-internet broadcaster, etc. He's not much of a person of principle and quite the "vote to the highest bidder" type, unfortunately.
- The real story on ES&S: A few years ago, my company was asked to assist ES&S in their documentation. After assessing the project, I declined and indicated the problems at ES&S were structural, not cosmetic. Inept management, totally absent process management and the usual Omaha "big small town" practice of putting incompetent but aspiring sons and daughters of the community's social elite into senior management of each other's companies was much to blame. There's plenty of "high self-esteem, low competence" at ES&S but no grand conspiracy.
*scoove*
I don't have any problems with any of the key points brought up in the article, when applied to terrorism. As I read through the sections thought to be the most egregious, I'm just nodding along going "mm hmm", "sounds good", "hell yeah", and "why aren't we already doing this?"
The only problem, of course, is who defines "terrorism"?
Think about that for a while.
I went to CNN's site and they didn't mention it so it must not be true... ;)
Seriously though - holy shoot! It looks like they can really make your day (and rest of your olife) pretty miserable if this thing passes! So what can you do about this? I mean really? If you rise up against the government, they might think you're a terrorist or something. If you sit back and do nothing, then it goes through.
If you wait to vote, the next guy in might like the situation that the previous people put in and not change it at all...
Write to your congress critter? Sigh...
Yikes!
Sigh....
Sigh...
I wish you all good luck...
I stick to walls...
Defending the proposed legislation, Bush was quoted as saying:
I love democracy, I love the Republic. The power you give me I will lay down when this crisis has abated.
Ahhh, what a nice man.
How many people had to die for freedom, because appearantly it only takes 3000 deaths to take it back. More people die every year of the flu, but I don't see acts of congress trying to prevent flu as serious as these. Aids will kill more people this year, but the government isn't sinking the kind of money they used to fight Afghanistan to find a cure. This isn't about American lives, it's about changing our govenment to a police state. We're going to war with Iraq for 2 reasons. #1 oil, #2 to try to keep Bush's popularity up amongst the red-necks. He's the most horrid president that the US has ever seen. Even if his policies tend to show that he wants to rid the US from dependance on oil, he has done so much to harm freedom and the economy. From his tax plan to having the DOJ pretty much drop the MS issue, he's screwed the economy to the point of practically no return. The job market is getting thinner. He has allowed or worked to create many laws that break the fundamental rights of Americans. The Patriot Act should be unconstitutional because we are given freedom from unreasonable search and seizures. Don't depend on the courts saving you though, because the whole MS issue has only taught us that they can't be trusted either.
Karma Clown
Although I must say that Liberman as a veep would have been rather scary.
OK, I'm assuming you're planning on voting Dem in 2004; what are you going to do if Lieberman wins the nomination?
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley
Troll.
I'm new to slashdot (though not the tech industry) and I don't understand the general panic here. Yes, the so called PATRIOT ACT is terrible. Yes the PATRIOT ACT II is also awful and it would be terrible if it were passed. Hasn't anyone here read history though? This is not the time America has had a stupid leader or a decent leader who has made stupid choices. Yes it is good to follow these events, be worried about them and act on them - that is what a Democracy is for. No, it is not useful to run around screaming 'the sky is falling' and say that we're all moving to Canada becasue America is doomed to be the new nazi regime. I think the country I grew up in is pretty good compared to many others in terms of rights and freedoms and I honestly think eventually the scales will tip, the general public will understand what is happening and things will change. Being cynical and pessimistic can help you see problems before the majority but also makes us assume they're smarter in seeing all the possible ways things could go wrong instead of looking at the broader view and the hundreds of years we have maintained our freedoms.
just my two cents.
Pat Buchanan has been against foreign military intervention for the past decade. He'd be a lot better than the other guys you listed.
*read* the Federalist Papers lately.
Trust me, *this* government will think they're anti-government.
KFG
sorry for the double post, it gave me an error the first time
Latewire
SecurityFocus also has an interesting write-up;
Note this is an OR, not AND... So operating a computer would be, by itself, an aggravating circumstance on par with terrorism and attcking critical infrastructure. Happy day!Timeo idiotikOS et dona ferentes
what a sad world we live in, when someone like me, someone who is generally anti-political, someone who despises the self-serving two choice system we have today, can say right now that he'll vote for whoever the crappy Democrat candidate will be in the next election. George Bush is that repugnant.
The fools who voted for Dubya can consider themselves responsible for this steady erosion of our rights, and the steady consolidation of power by Big Brother. But hey, at least the economy is humming right along! Oh, wait.....
a totoal paranoid, but I'm not as worried about legislation like this. Why?! I hear you shout. Simple; the US will be under martial law before long, and we'll be living in a facist dictatorship. I hate to say it, but it looks like we've got a "Righteous Right" version of Hitler on our hands. Just take a look at how the whole thing has taken place. I'm surpized we haven't seen more buildings blowing up, giving him more "right" to clamp down on the citizens he is supposed to protect.
I'm beginning to understand why you guys distrust your government so much. Nowhere else talks so much about privacy and liberty as you guys, but nobody else has a government trying so hard to take it away.
dominionrd.blogspot.com - Restaurants on
Great, the site is linked both here and on Drudge.... which pretty much ensures that nobody can access it. Clear proof that both sites are tools of the CIA.
...you're missing the point that Ashcroft want to give us all as many guns as we can carry out of the store, no waiting or checks! [deliberate hyperbole] Now, personally, I think the man's unholiness incarnate, but I do sleep a bit better at night knowing my small arsenal in the closet will be there safe and secure for the day the Ministry Of Homeland Security comes goose-stepping through town. I hope they put nice bright decorations on their chests...
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley
If you're really concerned about this do something. Write to your representatives in the U.S. Congress. (www.senate.gov and www.house.gov)
It was probably meant satirically. I mean D-SEAT? Doesn't that sound like Deceit?
Ever heard of the military industrial complex? CIA? NSA? The whole Cold War and all that went with it? Temporary ...
This points out something I have been coming to realize. There are really only two choices in american governence anymore. They are NOT Republican/ Democrat. It is between freedom and, for lack of a better word, slavery to the state. Both partys are moving to complete governmental control of our lives. They are just heading there via different paths. It's time for those who love freedom to stand up.
To be fair, the US payments to Afghanistan started under Clinton, I believe in around '98 or '99. The idea was to foster some sort of agricultural besides poppy growing.
In retrospect that was a colossal disaster.
As to Moore. He tends to hyperbole and exagerration, but I've not seen him out and out lie. Certainly not to the degree our Republican friends have done as documented by David Brock and others.
If you have a Salon article that says otherwise, I'm sure we would all appreciate a link to it.
Third time's a charm, eh Sluggo?
So they can send in the (to serve and protect folks) when the power goes off and you are in candle light...
dont throw away your old phones that need elctricity to work.. it might be your last and only call..
We are a democratic republic, fuckwad. Or did I just imagine going to the polls last year to vote against building another sports stadium in my town?
When the people of the USA become more afraid of those they elect to protect them than they do of Al Qaeda then the terrorists have won.
Will the words of the national anthem have to be changed by the insertion of the word "formerly" before the word "free"?
As said in a song by Midnight Oil, "it's better to die on your feet than live on your knees."
Considering the actions of Bush, Cheney Ashcroft, and their supporters, it seems that the religious right literally want to bring about the end of the world, as if they think this will force the second coming, and they will personally get to meet Jesus. They are as dangerous to the future of all humanity as Osama Bin Laden with nukes. Religion is going to be humanity's undoing.
The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
As a child, I was told true patriotism was the mindset of "give me liberty or give me death." A little more than 2 centuries later that has become "take all the liberty you want, just please, please don't let the 'terrorists' kill me." Early Americans would shoot these easily-frightened pussies of today.
If you look at the political scale Bush is on the right wing and Hitler (being a socialist) was on the left. Its laughable to even compare them.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
--whenever third parties get any even modicum of press coverage they do quite well. And there's no telling if it was to continue how the political landscape might change. That's why the two headed hydra junta who control government now won't let a third party candidate or candidates on the podium in the "national debate" on TV.
Best thing would be to allow a choice by number, ie, first choice for pres is yada, next choice, yada, etc. People would be more inclined to vote their REAL first choice that way. This "waste your vote" stuff is designed to scare people into voting gang A or B, and that's it. The only wasted vote is one not cast, IMO.
"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in Government"
--Thomas Jefferson
And I'm sure that the government is now much more tyrannical than was ever imagined possible in his day.
All this frenzy is being whipped up by Israel. Israel wants oil fields more than anything else.
I saw on the Chicken Noodle News, of all places, the Ariel Sharon has his ground and air forces ready to "secure" the oil derricks this time. And once he gets his hands on them, the Jews will have them forever.
Just watch.
with Office of Legislative Affairs control sheet showing Speaker of the House Hastert and Cheney were sent a copy of this proposed legislation with a request for comments on Jan. 10, 2003. So did FBI, INS, CRM, ODAG, OLC, OIPR, EOIR, CIV, TAX. I don't know what most of those acronyms stand for but note comments are expected BY 01/13/03. Three days!
Looks like another con job in making. In that typical skullky, dishonest way of theirs.
Likely scenario. Invasion of Iraq starts sometimes this month. Two-three weeks later most of Iraq is in flames. In patriotic euphoria ensuing Congress does whatever Bush/Ashcroft demand is their patriotic duty to do.
How is it that something that's intended to become public law should be secret? Are they trying to slip it through congress without anybody knowing? It's very disappointing.
Are you pondering what I'm pondering?
Constitution 2.0
We the Government...
So, from an atheist/secularist perspective, having 6 year olds throw stones at military men is just peachy?
I'm not to proud of when american kids were doing it to the british in Boston either. It's a dangerous thing and only happened once in the US revolutionary war, probably because colonial parents had the good sense not to encourage it. The palestinians seem to be making it a habit.
Jefferson was referencing the British gov't, we've got a ways to go yet to get there.
The Brits rampaged through Ireland multiple times. They hung so many sheeney they ran out of tree limbs. They didn't treat the Welsh, Scots, or their own citizens any better. You don't want to know what happened in India, South Africa, or their other conquests, either.
Ever wonder how the Acadians wound up in Louisiana? It wasn't voluntary emigration.
A new word for you - BLOAT - Buy Lots of Ammo Today.
This is more of "Your Rights In General" than online.
I am no logician but isn't this the very definition of a slipery slope? I just think its funny how people here use slippery slopes to get across their own points of view while in the next breath trying to invalidate someone else's point of view by pointing out the use of this logical fallacy. Like I said I am no logician, so my question is when is it ok to use a logical fallacy and when is it not? Or do you just try and see what you can get away with? :) I've seen people argue that that abortion and euthanasia will eventually lead to a society that calls for the unhealthy and old to be euthaniszed - this train of thought is of course a logical fallacy (and would be torn to shreds here on slashdot), but someone says that this bill will lead to that bill and before you know it we'll be living in a communist country and you get modded up to 3...4...5?? What gives?
Oh yeah, because they're reporting on the new Code Orange terror level...
It's remarkable how John Ashcroft is the karmic successor to Joseph McCarthy; we're in a modern-day Red Scare, but with a very sympathetic administration and a apathetic public. The potential for (further) permanent damage to Americans' civil liberties is very real and very frightening.
Am I exaggerating? Well, can you tell them apart?
FWIW, link to ACLU coverage and a Google News search.
"...the ACLU is a strong champion of individual rights, even if they are part of the loony left. Just what's so loony or leftist about what the ACLU does? They represent everyone across the political spectrum from the Klan to pornographers to anti-abortion protesters. Just because the right finds it distasteful when the ACLU defends controversial art or illegal immigrants or drug dealers doesn't make the ACLU part of the left. How do you think liberals feel whent he ACLU ponies up valuable resources to help make sure the Klan can march through minority neighborhoods chanting racist slogans? The difference is that you won't see Ted Kennedy calling someone a "card carrying member of the ACLU" as an insult. Think of the ACLU as the EFF for every issue.
"The NRA is of course a strong champion of individual rights as well" The NRA doesn't give a shit about individual rights. The NRA is a political lobbying organization whose only concern is maintaing gun manufacturer's ability to provide as many weapons to as many buyers as possible with minimal government regulation. That's all. Any other activity sponsored or initiated by the NRA is a politically expedient means of achieving this goal.
Remember the scene in the movie "Minority Report" where the team is searching for the hero - and drop the 'bugs' into the building - and everyone has to stop what they are doing and assume the postion to get scanned.
Its coming. When Federal Agents come knocking on your door because an electronic filter decides that your purchase of certain books, your web browsing propensities, and some people you met in passing at the coffee shop (caught on video) - adds up to something dangerous (to the state), and the agents don't need a search warrant to invade your privacy and tear apart your home in search of something that isn't there.
The NSA was profiling peace activists and human rights activists during the 60s and 70s - intercepting and analyzing their communications during the 1960s. During that time this was abused, and it was stopped for a reason. Now we are starting to do this again - civil rights will suffer. Witch hunts the likes of the communist scare of the 50s will happen in secret as people mysteriously disappear without habeus corpus rights. The government has been removing large amounts of information that was public knowledge a year ago. What else are they doing under the ospices of secret executive orders? Why do we have to give up our rights to protect this country? If something smells bad, it generally means it is bad; this smells bad.
We will probably wake up as a people when things get too unbearable. Hopefully it won't be too late (I have faith in the sense of democratic principles and right and reasonable government by the majority of people when push comes to shove). Just hope you are not one of the Minorities...
Lodragan Draoidh
The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it. - Mark Twain
we are just a bunch of pussies that will just whine about it. We no longer have the balls to defend ourselves. We are gonna sit and just suck on it. Open wide!!
I'll just read freshmeat.net and hope for the best. Not much I can do about this stuff anyways.
--jeff++
ipv6 is my vpn
Duh!
"When the people fear the government, you have tyranny. When the government fears the people, you have freedom."
- Thomas Paine
This kind of slow, incremental wearing away of human rights is exactly what happened in Nazi Germany.
People need to wake up and understand that there are ALWAYS people who want to disenfranchise the rest of us. The wolf is ALWAYS at the door. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.
There are three things that people can do.
1) Vote
2) Join the ACLU
3) Joine the NRA
The reason for the first is obvious. The reasons for the second and third are that the ACLU is a strong champion of individual rights, even if they are part of the loony left. The NRA is of course a strong champion of individual rights as well, even if they are part of the loony right. I'm a member of both and give generously to them.
Laws like this can only come to pass when our representatives in congress are not representing us. The only way that situation can arise is if the voters in general have not been holding them accountable. Any legislator who would put forward legislation intended to deny us our rights is a traitor because they have broken their vow to defend and protect the constitution. Should we re-elect such a person? I'd rather elect a pig straight from someone's barn to office than see someone like that remain in power. The american political landscape is dominated by party politics and this is a big part of the problem. People will vote for someone because of their party, or will vote for a party because that is what they've always done, or because they've been suckered by the propaganda that both major parties just love to spew out. It is sad to see so many people led around by the nose and irritating to have to hear them regurgitate the propaganda that they've swallowed down with relish. Look past the propaganda and bullshit. Be willing to vote for a different party. Become informed about issues that matter and the party's agenda on these issues. If people would do this then a lot of this kind of bullshit would cease to exist.
> The day that ANY of these things happens to someone that is NOT an extremely shady character to begin with, is the day you can bitch.
How about all those "persons of interest" who were detained without charge and (much) later released?
What qualifies someone as a "shady character"? Let me guess - you're white, Christian, middle- to upper-class income, and probably still in high school. Those "Other People(tm)" are the problems and need checking out.
Your background in history is likely limited to patriotic accounts of battle and sound bites from Gulf War videos. (I am a veteran of the Gulf War, FWIW. USMC, front lines of Kuwait. Videos are flashy. Reality is not.)
You lack any in-depth knowledge of past abuses of government - by Nixon, Hoover, etc. (And those are only the more recent ones). You missed the recent coverage of Denver's police dept. "intelligence files" they were gathering on citizens for doing things like... attending peaceful rallies and protests.
Funny. When the East German Stasi did it, it was tyranny.
Now consider this - Prior to 9/11 the most devastating terrorist attack in modern America was committed by a young white Christian army veteran. Curiously the government didn't start hauling in young white Christian males and start spying on Christian churches.
But hey, I'm a white middle-income guy too. I "fit" right in to Ashcroft's master kampf. Guess I have nothing to worry about.
Yet.
Dont Tread On Me. Freedom First.
fault-tolerant
Did you vote?
Not just for the President, but for your Congressman and Senator? State Governor and legislators? Mayor? City council members?
They're all important, you know...
Schwab
Editor, A1-AAA AmeriCaptions
I used to like the ACLU, but my veiws on them have changed some. As a teenage boy, the ACLU does not supprot my rights. They support NAMBLA for christsakes, i'm sorry, but defending child molesters... its just wrong. Also my ex Girlfriend made some good points against the ACLU(she was jewish, and couldn't stand the ACLU for supporting Neo-Nazis like they did), that further changed my attitudes. I know placing limits on free speech is worse, but c'mon, child rapists and Nazis.
"Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
It looks as if the United States is turning into just another USSR. The irony of the USA becoming its own biggest enemy is stunning. Whatch out for that one party system, its obviously the next step.
Can you say Yes Master like a good totalitarian state citizen?
HTTP/1.1 400
I am CANADIAN.
Yes I vote, doesn't seem to matter anyways.
U.S. policy ends up dictating Canadian policy.
--jeff++
ipv6 is my vpn
MOYERS: Chuck Lewis, whom you just saw in that piece is with me now. He is the Executive Director of the nonpartisan Center for Public Integrity, the organization responsible for obtaining that document. Chuck Lewis, thank you for joining us.
LEWIS: Thank you.
MOYERS: The Patriot Act was passed six weeks after 9/11. We know now that it greatly changed the balance between liberty and security in this nation's framework. What do you think -- what's the significance of this new document, called the Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003?
LEWIS: I think the significance is it just deepens and broadens, further extends the first Patriot Act. That act in 2001, they had six weeks, which was not a lot of time to throw something together. Now there's been 18 months of all kinds of things that have happened and court decisions that have tried to roll back some of the Patriot Act.
And other concerns, law enforcement, people have, and so they've had time to sift and sort what they want. And it's arguably might be a more thorough rendering of all the things law enforcement and intelligence agencies would like to have in a perfect world. It's sort of how I look at it, and I think it's a very tough document when it comes to secrecy and surveillance.
I understand the concerns about fear of terrorism. And it certainly...
MOYERS: We all have those...
LEWIS: We all have those and there are things in the legislation that make sense, and that are reasonable, I think for any American. But there are other things that really take some of the Patriot Act civil liberties issues that folks were concerned about and go even further. And I think it's gonna be very controversial. Some of these sections are gonna be debated for weeks and months.
MOYERS: So many of these powers latent in this draft legislation were powers that were taken away from the intelligence community some years ago because they were abused.
LEWIS: That's right.
MOYERS: Do you see any protection in here against potential abuse?
LEWIS: I don't think there's very much -- there's a lot more authority and power for government. There's less oversight and information about what government is doing. That's the headline and that's the theme. And the safeguards seem to be pretty minimal to me.
MOYERS: I just go through here, you know? "Will give the Attorney General the unchecked power to deport any foreigner?"
LEWIS: Right.
MOYERS: Including lawful permanent resident aliens. It would give the government the power to keep certain arrests secret until an indictment is found never in our history have we permitted secret arrests. It would give the government power to bypass courts and grand juries in order to conduct surveillance without a judge's permission. I mean these do really further upend the balance between liberty on the one hand and security on the other.
LEWIS: Well, they do. They reduce judicial oversight with the secret intelligence courts instead of saying the court may do this now it's the court will do this. They can have ex parte conversations where they go into the judge without anyone else around. In terms of information about detainees, not only can they detain anyone they'd like to detain, there is no public information about it.
Journalists cannot find out the names of -- we detained over a thousand people after September 11th because we thought they might all be terrorists. Not one of them was really found with any criminal charges to be a terrorist. And we don't know the names of almost all those people, still. And so it does appear that everything that folks might be concerned about with the Patriot Act, this is times five or times ten is what I look at it. I see it very serious.
MOYERS: You and I have had this kind of discussion often, we go back a long way together. The foundation that I serve on has been a big supporter of yours and you've been a big supporter of our journalism. If we were fighting terrorists instead of being journalists, wouldn't we want this kind of power in our hands?
LEWIS: Well, we would, but we operate in a democracy and there's other considerations. I mean I think, you know, there's no question, if you're in law enforcement, this is gonna make it easier for you to do your job. The problem is, we have a history in our country, just in our lifetime, in the last quarter century.
Where we've seen FBI and CIA abuses of ordinary citizens. Where mail has been opened, where homes have been broken into. Where infiltration has occurred in political groups. Informants have been used, misused. People's lives have been ruined. People have committed suicide because of the pressures brought against them by the government, by these kinds of secret intelligence agencies.
This is not a completely crazy idea to worry about the power of the government. And it was curbed and rolled back in the '70s. And there is something obviously occurring here in the public space around the whole issue of liberty and security right now.
And it is clearly changing and it's moving towards security. And the question for us as a people is what is the right balance. And I think my biggest personal concern is that there ought to be a debate about this. So the Patriot Act jammed through Congress in six weeks.
There was a Congressional -- there was a Senate hearing that lasted an hour and a half, there were no questions to the Attorney General by the senators. This is too important for our country. Whatever anyone's point of view, this should be a conversation that the country should have.
And if I'm afraid they're waiting for a war or something and then they're gonna pop this baby out and then try to jam it through.
MOYERS: You mean that if it were not rolled out and discussed publicly until the United States has had war in Iraq, people might not pay as much attention to it as they would now.
LEWIS: They wouldn't pay as much attention and you know, our worries and our fears are gonna be different than they are now. And there will be less of -- all these things will melt away. These are nice concerns about liberties but we'll be at war. And we'll have presidents and attorneys general and other government officials telling us things. And I just see a -- I see that it wouldn't work quite as easily for them if it comes out in the next few weeks as opposed to then.
MOYERS: Congressman Burton, Dan Burton, of Indiana, a very conservative congressman, who is Chairman on the Committee on Government Reform. He said recently, "An iron veil is descending over the executive branch."
Now your forte is moving information around in Washington trying to find out what's going on. Would you agree with what Congressman Burton has said here?
LEWIS: I absolutely agree with what he's saying. I mean there have been 300 roll-backs of the Freedom of Information Act since September 11th. All over America, at the state and local level, as well as the federal government. The Attorney General sent a message to every federal employee, when in doubt, deny any Freedom of Information request.
We have other things like presidential papers being sealed off. We have reporters trying to cover things in Afghanistan being locked in a warehouse and not able to file their stories. Even before September 11th, we had one reporter's home phone records seized by a grand jury without telling him or his news organization.
There's a lot of things happening with information, access to information, and efforts to stop journalism that I have not seen in 20 plus years of watching Washington and journalism and government interact. And it's not just information. It's not information for information's sake. This is about health, safety, lives...
MOYERS: What do you mean?
LEWIS: Well, you have this whole thing in this current draft legislation that there's a worst case scenario type requirement that every company that is making hazardous or toxic materials has to make that information available to the public. So if something terrible does happen they know that it's possible that it could happen and there's some sort of assessment about it. Well now that is not gonna be required. Chemical companies will not have to tell the world about these problems.
And they will -- the citizens in that community will not have access to that information in an easy accessible way. And that's new and that affects their life. If some problem occurs, they're unrelated to the terrorism. Something just goes wrong, they will not know anything about that in their community.
So we're rolling back health and safety and environmental and other considerations and sensitivities that have been in our culture now for decades. Are melting away because of -- all in the name of fighting terrorism.
MOYERS: What would be the Attorney General's justification for wanting to restrict access to information about toxic chemicals?
LEWIS: Well, the -- I haven't heard one. But I think the rationale is that terrorists could get information about a chemical plant and its security, bad security, inadequate security and somehow then bring about a threat.
But the problem is sunlight is the best disinfectant. If these plants have bad security or they're not being well run and they're actually unsafe it's usually exposing it and talking about it and the public being aware of it that ends up improving the plant or the facility or whatever it is.
I actually find that that's how change occurs usually. And so the ostensible rationale is to keep it away from terrorists. But I think it's also a rationale to protect companies frankly in this instance. Well I happen to know that's been the chemical lobbyist's dream for a long time.
A long time before 9/11. They did not want this information made available.
LEWIS: I see a lot of opportunism here around the fear and paranoia in the wake of September 11th. And taking advantage of the insecurity that we all feel today. And that is, to me, incredibly offensive. And that's why a conversation about it, there's 40 sections in this thing. The public needs to have a sense what exactly are we getting here. There needs to be a chewing over. This should not jam through Congress. This should be out there and being -- be talked about.
I mean the realm between public and private, between foreign and domestic, all these things have morphed into the citizen against all of this out there -- this morass of regulations and rules and intrusions. And at the same time they can come after you, get your credit card data, your library records, your Internet searching, everything. And they'll decide whether or not you're a suspect or not.
Whether or not they like you. If you're a disfavored political group, or from the wrong ethnic background, then you might become on the radar screen of some folks that you don't know about, you can't find out about, and they can do things. They have -- this is incredible power.
MOYERS: One of the provisions in here as I understand it is that the government could actually strip citizenship from someone if -- for example, if you were found, according to this, if you were found making what you thought was a legitimate contribution to some non profit organization.
LEWIS: Right.
MOYERS: Foundation. And months from then, that foundation were deemed by the government or that organization were deemed by the government to have been in some way supporting terrorists, you could lose your citizenship because of your contribution, even if you didn't know...
LEWIS: That's right.
MOYERS: That you were contributing to an organization like that.
LEWIS: No, that's absolutely -- they have that power. They can also extradite all over world, even if we don't have treaties. I mean, some of the things in here are -- strain credulity for legal scholars. They're not sure, they've never seen these kinds of provisions trotted out. I mean, a lot of the question is if it does pass Congress, what would the courts do with it later.
I mean I think there are some legitimate issues there.
MOYERS: What do you make of this? This is the document that went from the Department of Justice with this draft legislation to certain very key people in government. Among them, Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert and Vice President, Richard Cheney, for their comments on this obviously confidential document.
Why the Speaker of the House and the Vice President and not the committee chairman of the Judiciary Committee in the Senate or the appropriate committee in the House?
LEWIS: It's a way to say you've consulted Congress to some extent by sending it to the Speaker and not really consulting Congress.
As far as I can tell, and we have not polled every member or anything like that, but it appears that virtually no one on Capitol Hill, except for the Speaker, has seen this legislation. I'm talking about the people at the judiciary committees in the House and Senate don't have this legislation. And have even been kind of yanked around a little bit for months about whether there will even be legislation.
MOYERS: The House Judiciary Committee actually asked the FBI a few months ago how it has used the new powers that had been given to it under the Patriot Act. And the Justice department said, "We can't tell you that information, it's classified."
And this prompted then-Congressman then Bob Barr, from Georgia, another conservative, by the way, he said the attitude of the Justice Department seems to be that even Congress isn't entitled to know how they are using the authority that Congress gave them.
LEWIS: It's incredible. I mean, if Congress doesn't have oversight over the Justice Department and these programs, who does? That's how it's supposed to work in our constitution and in our set up for government.
MOYERS: That's one of your real concerns, isn't it? That there's no oversight when secrecy is this tight.
LEWIS: Absolutely. The Congress is the people's chance to monitor the executive branch. That is the only... it is the closest branch of government to the people. The House members are up for election every two years. If the House of Representatives and the Congress in general cannot keep a watch on the executive branch and cannot be informed about their activities. There's something very serious here.
MOYERS: Chuck, I hear people out there in the audience thinking, you know, I'm scared. We're -- this is a new ballgame, to put it trivially. War on terrorists, they came on 9/11, we keep getting reports they're coming again, who knows where it'll happen. Everybody's scared.
You guys are living in Lotus Land, you journalists talking about this sort of thing. Because we really want the government to protect us from another World Trade Center attack on the Pentagon, which is not far from where your office is in Washington.
LEWIS: Right.
MOYERS: What about that?
LEWIS: Look, I wanna be protected by the government as much as anyone.
But actually, in some ways that's beside the point. There are also freedoms and rights and liberties that, you know, millions of Americas have fought for over 200 years to make sure that this is a special kind of country. And isn't it possible that to be secure and have liberties?
Why give all the power and authority and have no oversight and accountability. What are the safeguards. And that's the question.
MOYERS: When someone inside government, inside the Justice Department, presumably, gives you a confidential document marked, "Not For Distribution," The Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003, knowing that this administration has been cracking down on watchdogs and leaks from inside government, do you consider this person a patriot?
LEWIS: I really do. I think it takes incredible guts to take something that bothers someone, and for whatever reason, they feel they must give it out. And they know they're gonna be polygraphed, they're gonna be questioned. There's gonna be a clampdown found, there's gonna be a witch-hunt after this occurs. They could very likely not only lose their job but-- maybe worse.
MOYERS: Be sued by the government?
LEWIS: Be sued by the government and otherwise ruined professionally. That is the most incredible kind of courage. And I have an incredible respect for anyone who does that.
MOYERS: I should make this clear this is not marked "Top Secret" -- this is not a classified document. It is stamped "Confidential" but nobody is betraying the Secrets Act.
LEWIS: Yeah, that's right, I mean, I've -- I'm glad to say that that's right.
MOYERS: There was a story this week in Congressional Quarterly, which is a very respected non-partisan journal in Washington. It says "Pentagon's proposed changes strike some as difficult, dangerous and destabilizing." And one of the things Donald Rumsfeld wants is wavers of environmental laws so that troops can conduct more "realistic exercises."
And then this magazine, which is non-partisan, says this is part of the administration's broad campaign to run the federal government more like a private business. And with private businesses you have more control over employees, you have more control over information. Do you see that developing as a syndrome of this administration?
LEWIS: I think it's incredible what's happening. I see a wholesale assault on access to information in this country that has not really been seen, I have to just say it, since Richard Nixon.
When you look at the roll-backs of freedom of information, when you look at things like meeting with energy companies with the Vice President. It's simple things though in government property with government officials getting paid by taxpayer money and it's not available to the public.
When you see some of the things that we have talked about earlier with reporters from detainees to military actions not being able to see things. I see a lot of very aggressive behavior by government officials towards the act of getting information out and information itself. I think that we're in a very unusual situation right now. And it really worries me actually.
MOYERS: Chuck Lewis, Center for Public Integrity, thank you very much.
LEWIS: Thank you.
This is so true. It's time the strong start standing up for their freedom. If the weak are scared of freedom well to bad.
With regards to section 501, I can see it being only a matter of time until someone comes along and says that if you're enlisted in the armed services, you're giving support to terrorists (or they'll say it can be inferred from your conduct). And then poof! Away goes your citizenship. How much longer until we live in a world like that starship troopers where the easiest way to get citizenship is to enlist in the armed services?
My Slashdot account is old enough to drink...
Dear European Friends:
We Americans have unfortunately lost control of our government. As you are aware, we did not elect the current administration but it successfully seized power on a technicality. At the current time an awesome assault upon our civil liberties and economic security is taking place and is expanding. As you are also aware, this government represents a growing threat to the security of Europe as well.
We implore you, our longtime friends and allies, to help us withstand this assault until we are able to remove this government from power. Many of us are working and organizing diligently to make this happen, but we need your help. We are concerned that the coming elections in 2004 will be compromised again. We request observers from Europe be sent to monitor these elections. We request that you use your power, including veto power, in the United Nations to thwart the agenda of this administration at every turn until we have stripped them of power. We request that you work diligently to get the truth about actual threats to the security of the United States through the wall of corporate media and to her people.
Our fathers and our father's fathers worked together to stop tyranny in Europe. Now the time has come where we must ask for your help.
Sincerely,
Concerned Citizens of the United States
..I'm listening to a live radio show right now, the hosts are reading off passages from this proposed act.
it's t-total fascism, no other word fits.
regional vague search warrants, mandatory sentencing for using encryption if they allege you are engaging in "terrorism", public financial records of high level political fatcats are now to be secret, legalization of allowing foreign military and police to operate domestically inside the US, federalization of local grand juries, federalization of autopsies, classification of literally any crime they choose as 'terrorism". It makes it illegal to disseminate any information that you might have about anyone "detained" who has been snatched and disappeared into the secret military tribunal system. Think about that one....
I'm going to download it and read it myself, but those are some of the larger high-lights I am hearing. If anyone is interested, it's alex jone's and john stadtmiller's dual-host weekend show.
infowars.com
Rep. John Conyers of Michigan, top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, said the legislation "turns the Bill of Rights completely on its head."
"This draft bill constitutes yet another egregious blow to our citizens' civil liberties," Conyers said. "Among other things, the Bush administration now wants to imprison suspects before they are tried and create DNA databases of lawful residents who have committed no crime."
And you're most certianly not being paranoid. When we start skiping due process we start finding people like McCarthy in power.
"Boring people" really are concerned about their privacy, if for no other reason than the fact that most people "don't think" they're boring.
They don't want the goverment having a right to spy on them, anymore than they want their company tracking them every time they a piss break.
There is somthing fundementaly demoralizing about anyone having a right to monitor you 24/7. Even the most boring of people recongize that.
They don't happen to do anything about the law though because most of them don't really *know* about them or the repercusions of them.
I am a Canadian, I was raised in canada, I have lived abroad. Things have gone down hill, despite the nay sayers.
We haveour own bill called C17. It's basicly the same as the patriot act.
Under the freedom of information act you can get anything, as long as you are willing to pay the money. I wanted some information regarding who is getting money for some of these tarrifs. Too bad they only wanted to charge me $30,000 canadian for it.
The goverment wants to control every part of your life and is moving for it. Every school in ontario teaches exactly the same thing, from exactly the same book and anything the goverment doesn't agree with or is contraversial is supressed.
TV is censored, despite our charter of rights and freedoms. American satellite dishes and C/KU band dishes are illegal, you can be thrown in jail for owning one.
The rights and freedoms are being eroded faster in canada, then anywhere else in the world right now.
Our goverment has been data mining and collecting information on citizens for years.
Books and other media are regularly seized at the border and held for ever if not destroyed. Customs has a quota to read and open any mail coming into the country and report on it's contents.
We have our own secert police that is accountable to no one, and no I am not a crack pot. CISIS has power the likes citizens haven't seen since the gestapo. They can wiretap your phones on a whim, no court orders. They can bug your house, hold you forever if they want. That's just a start.
Regular police can hold you for 60 days, and then require a judge to extend it beyond that.
CCTV is becoming a normal occurance all over the country.
The goverment is pushing for biometric ID's for everyone in the country, and with the "fall in line or loose your seat" politics in canada, you can be sure it will get passed.
You might wonder why I am still living here, it's because I'm fighting the goverment in it's own courts against this type of crap.
This is only a small taste of the DPR of Canada. Socialism run amok is the root cause, and you can see what it's gotten you in europe.
Before I forget, Trudeau tried to get canada to become a communist country back when he was in power. Many of the idea's have stuck around, and you can see them when you live here.
Om, nomnomnom...
And again I suggest you compare that news with this news and try to tell which one is true. ;)
Never email donotemail@WeAreSpammers.com
Law abiding citizens are safe from all those new laws, right?
Unless someone in power decides to go after you (out of malice or as a mistake.)
It's an entertaining movie to watch:
http://us.imdb.com/Title?0120660
"the land of the free and the home of the brave", what national anthem was that from again?
terrorisim begets terrorism....
So instead of creating destructive problems, we'd really be better off by genuinely fixing world problems and inherently removing any motive for terrorism to be able to gain any supporters.
Terrorism - the self supported dependancy of power and war mongers, regardless of what you might call them or what connotation you apply.
is an offence. If you don't have a good reason to be carrying it they can do you. A screwdriver counts. Of course, nerds get "stop-and-search"ed less often than other groups...
Jesus H., don't make me shoot myself!
"It's overkill, of course. But you can never have too much overkill." - Anonymous Slashdot Coward
[plugs ears]
BILL CLINTON! BILL CLINTON! BILL CLINTON! BILL CLINTON! BILL CLINTON!!!!!!
Seriously, this is a prime example of what Bush, and especially the MEDIA are doing. Has Bush taken responsibility for ANYTHING? It's been two years and they are still shrieking BILL CLINTON at the top of their lungs anytime something goes wrong. The damned media is STILL obsessing about Bill's wang while Rome burns.
the fucking wall. First, let me point out: Yes, I am white but by no fucking means a christian (and what is your point with that anyway), my background is white middle-class, however I now make 10,000 dollars a year because I told my parents to keep their money while I pay for my college education. It's people like me that hold my own that don't pick up after these far left view points like yourselves. Yeah, I am conservative, but that doesn't make me a christian, a high-schooler, or some fucking prissy upper-class punk ass. Why don't you take your skewed psycho-analysis and shove it straight up your ass. I am proud that you served your country in the gulf war, but that does not give you the right to spout bullshit from your mouth, about someone you don't know, without a reprisal. I'm in college... are you shocked??? You thought the system would have already molded my impressionable young mind into an upstanding liberal by now, right??? I hate to break it to you, it is just not working out that way these days. And how the fuck do you know what knowledge I am lacking? I probably know more about Hoover and his shady-ness with the FBI than you know about the crust that is forming on your ill-kept ass crack. All I can say is Assumption... assumption my friend. And you know what I am refering to. About Tim McVeigh, 80% of the fucking population in america is white christian. How would you expect the govt. to spy on that?
BTW, do you even know what 'kampf' means?
Easy. You get labeled as unpatriotic politican who doesnt care about the saftey of American people during re-election. This is how the first one passed. If you did not vote for the original patriot act, then you do not care about your country or nations security and the public who is ignorant wouldnt re-elect you out of sympathy and fear of 9-11.
The American public is quite unaware of the horrors of the first one but is less niave now since 9-11. Hopefully they will get the message to their representatives that they do not want this.
http://saveie6.com/
Ad Council's "What if America wasn't America?" campaign.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
One guy my dad was going to work for a couple of years in the states (he's a biologist or something like that). He had to answer questions like 'Do you belong to any terrorist group?' etc for his working permit. One of the questions was 'Are you a member Amnesty International?". I find this a bit strange...
America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards.
So I can filbuster one of these stupid laws by reading it, over and over again, making comments as I see fit.
does this mean we can take all of microsofts money? Then dismantel the company, and sell off its assets? After all they support terrorism by giving money to charity groups that have been linked to terrorist groups by our own us goverment. hmmmm ideas?
Hitler was right!
Man, are you lazy or what? Just go to Salon and search for michael moore.
Yes, it is. Additionally, it is clearly an opinion column and not a news article.
I think I'd qualify as "fringe right." I'm one of those religious conservative libertarians.
... ummm... PUBLIC foibles, I was told "you're persecuting the best liberal president we've ever had, over sex." Well, no. It wasn't over sex. It was over the damage that was being done to the country AND the constitution.
... and so on and so forth right on back.
But when Clinton was appointing Freeh to higher office for successfully gunning down Vicky Weaver [and yes, racism is dispicable. But it wasn't a capitol offense last I heard], and I raised my voice, I heard numerous times that I was a crazy wacko religious nut.
Okay.
And when I was decrying the ATF's terrorism, and the IRS's terrorism... I was told that I was a pro-gun nut, and that I favored the wealthy.
Okay.
And when I pointed out that Clinton was undermining the rule of law with his perjury, and was leading us towards social unrest with his
Okay.
And when I had a problem with using the SSN, for religious reasons, I had my rights summarily denied, and was denied a job without a hearing, but was told "although about 5% of Americans have major religious problems with the SSN, they and you are religious nuts."
Okay. But that first Amendment includes stuff about religion, doesn't it?
Now, last time I looked *before* Bush's (s)election, EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THE 10 AMENDMENTS WAS BEING REGULARLY VIOLATED!!!! REGULARLY (though not often) WITH DEADLY FORCE!!!!
It isn't Bush's fault -- but Bush is what America deserves for supporting Clinton, and Bush, and Reagan [I find no moral or constitutional fault with Carter or Ford], and Nixon, and Eisenhower,
And never once caring that the 10th Amendment, minimum government, was ignored to the demise of the other nine.
Because in order to have a government pay for what you want (Nasa, or welfare, or Social Security, or education), you've got to ignore that 10th Amendment.
So just don't blame us *fringe right* conservatives for not saying anything. We've been bound and gagged for quite a while now.
As often as not, it's been done by you, the mainstream left.
[P.S. I left, but I didn't close the door. You might want to leave before Bush closes it.]
And sorry for yelling -- but really, I've wanted to for quite a while.
Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
TCPA is going to do much more than this suggested act. And do it properly if there is such a thing, edge the younger generations into it overtime and screwing succesive generations.
+20 INSIGHTFUL!!!!
Sorry, if Lieberman is running for the democrat party it pretty much seals his defeat. Lieberman is responsible for the laws Enron, etc. and the investment bankers. Were abusing. And when the old SEC chairman was holding hearings, and complaining to congress and senate. The company's lobbied Lieberman and his cronies to force the SEC chairman retire. If you do not believe me, look it up. It is all documented. Even ABC did a story on it... its sad it this does not come out. Because it will show how the media is biased to the democrats.
If you ment something other than voting. Well your outta luck. Because the feds are wathing you already....
isnt america great
A problem with your statement is that, under the current Patriot Act, many times law enforcement no longer needs a search warrant to carry out an investigation. All they need is a adminstrative OK, which a judge has to certify. Plus, they can now go outside of the area they are investigating to get a warrant.
For example, if there is a single judge that will sign every search warrant presented in Florida, an FBI investigation in Utah could have him sign the warrant. Wonderful, isn't it?
Maybe we DID take the blue pill. You wouldn't remember anyway.
Well Assmonkey, since name calling is your best skill, do you think your vote really made the difference?
The money is what gets the votes. Take for example the fact that Bill Clinton and the DNC received the most money in his 1994 reelection campaign from the telecommunications industry. Then shortly thereafter, the passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 that scuttled most oversight of the industry. Coincidence? You just keep muttering that to yourself when you stand in that voting booth next time.
A complete listing of Salon articles on Moore, including the one I referred to above as well as another documenting a case of alleged plaigerism.
I mean, look at the source. It's a CON-spiracy site. Wait for the real deal, if it exists.
Just to tell you it's La Rochefoucauld.
Did anyone here actually think to wait until this is actually proposed before going ballistic, or are you having too much fun freaking out to think?
I do believe I hear "a revolution calling....."
// TODO: Insert Cool Sig
...isn't it funny? Hitler ascended to power by operating under the pretence of protecting the people from seditious and traitorous characters.
'He who has to break a thing to find out what it is, has left the path of wisdom.' -- Gandalf to Saruman
"Since the general civilization of mankind, I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations."
James Madison - 1788
Look to the hippies for advice.
Clinton really DID follow the peaceful adage of Make Love, Not War. Unfortunately, the Republicans decided to impeach him for the said making of love, or at least the said denial of love-like relations with Ms. Lewinsky.
make world, not war
u really r going to lose your citizenship if u r linked to terrorists groups???? :D they come in other flavours but they come :)
well if that was the case... i dont understand it, i mean u got death penalty isnt it? so they can kill u if you were a terrorist... i wonder why they would need to stole your citizenship if they can make u more harm? it seems like a way to put people "in the shadow" quickly
oh and btw legaly one of the worst things a country can do is stole citizenship to citizens... its simply stupid. If u r a citizen from a country u shouldnt be able to be ejected... the whole thing whould make the country concept illegitimate!!!
i hope im wrong with this matter and i wish u all good luck with this strange acts and bills u r suffering these days. Oh and btw on he other side of the sea we (well each country) are having our own amount of weird acts here
..but for gods sake think.
think about who benefits from such things such as terrorist attacks. do research and use as many sources as you can. program your own mind, dont let the government and major media do it for you. look at history, how wars are started, and understand how lies and deception are very important. and ill leave you with this to think about.
1. patriot act was writen with little hope of being passed
2. 9/11 happens
3. patriot act is passed due to peoples willingness to give up their freedoms because of fear
4. patriot act II is writen with little hope of being passed
5. ?
if something happens in the next few weeks i really hope you think back to what ive said.
I think that might be the single most "insightful" post I've ever read on Slashdot. Ever. Period.
// TODO: Insert Cool Sig
And somebody stupid enough to fire it.
" Won't someone please let me know how we have spun out of control.
Has the captain let go of the wheel?" -Sign of the Times
"On the Senate floor they congregate
Many pockets lined with green,
From those behind the scenes, yeah they take the bribe ( it's on the side )
A sign of the times, Sign of the times...
A sign of the times, Sign of the times... " -Sign of the Times
nuclear presidential echelon assassination encryption virulent strain
Whizzmo
Understanding how people can support this is a very simple matter, once one realizes what the American political system is really about, and how it really works.
The first part of it is understanding that there is no real difference between the two major political parties, just the flavor of the lip service they give the populace. The reason WHY this is lies in the second part.
The second part is that political parties care about only ONE thing. POWER. They are a de facto "ruling elite" in the United States. The two-party system is such that carefully woven agreements and arrangements are institutionalized between long-serving members of our legislative bodies. The power structure does not change simply because a certain set of politicians are voted in or out of office. It is the party machinery that defines the power structure. It is this same party machinery that determines what "issues" are going to be paid lip service in platforms, and the whole mechanism is designed around "who can get the ignorant and reactionary populace to swallow the bigger lie this time around?".
Neither party has ANY interest in fixing problems, unless those problems are such that they could disturb the power sharing of their ruling elite. Examples are there aplenty in history about methods which solve a great many of the problems facing American society today, yet no method that might actually CHANGE anything is ever really implemented, or attempted. Change disrupts the power structure.
Once you understand that politicians are interested in preserving their own power only, and as such, are completely reactionary to the media and opinion polls, then its easy to see why they would vote in the Patriot Act.
1) it consolidates more power in the hands of the ruling elite.
2) it makes them LOOK like they're doing something about a major problem at a casual glance. (and a casual glance is ALL the scrutiny the majority of the public ever gives them in this soundbyte society)
3) it helps them individually avoid the risks of having to think or propose real ideas or solutions, when they can simply act in a knee-jerk fashion and not be criticized for doing nothing.
Traitors? Aye.. every last rotten one of them..
But nothing will ever be done.. The govt hates to own up to its own mistakes.
Slashdot is a great way to vent, communicate, and in some cases be effective on something of public interest. Let's make this topic effective by contacting your legislator and let them know how you feel, either for or against. Here are some useful links. Try this one for effective writing tactics: http://pub70.ezboard.com/fwolftracksproductionsfrm 3.showMessage?topicID=4.topic
These for determining who to contact in your district.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/ senators_cfm.cfm
http://www.house.gov/
Bush's New Math!
2003 = 1984
"In order to save our freedom we had to destroy it"
People that know me will tell you - I don't do bull*. Slashdotters are the most technological aware people there are. Regulars must be really pissed off with me - sorry but I really have to put this up again:
t e/stories/mai n/0,14179,2879094,00.html
Why do government have no respect for your right to privacy?
Liberty has to be one of the most important things in life. Well up there, behind health and safety of your family, must be the right to go about your daily life without being forced to live it under oppressive surveillance. For it surely is oppression - being spied upon by the authorities in all that you do. Knowing this information could be used against you, for any purpose they see fit. This is a lot better for government than having a CCTV fitted into every home. The all-seeing eye of God over you - meant to instil respect of them and fear of authority.
It can be proven they use propaganda to deceive you into believing them. How?
Ask Security Services in the US, UK, Indonesia (Bali) or anywhere for that matter, to deny this:
Internet surveillance, using Echelon, Carnivore or back doors in encryption, will not stop terrorists communicating by other means - most especially face to face or personal courier.
Terrorists will have to do that, or they will be caught!
Perhaps using mobile when absolutely essential, saying - "Meet you in the pub Monday" (meaning, human bomb to target A), or Tuesday (target B) or Sunday (abort).
The Internet has become a tool for government to snoop on their people - 24/7.
The terrorism argument is a dummy - total bull*.
INTERNET SURVEILLANCE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO STOP TERRORISTS - THAT IS SPIN AND PROPAGANDA
This propaganda is for several reasons, including: a) making you feel safer b) to say the government are doing something and c) the more malicious motive of privacy invasion.
Government say about surveillance - "you've nothing to fear - if you are not breaking the law"
This argument is made to pressure people into acquiescence - else appear guilty of hiding something illegal.
It does not address the real reason why they want this information (which they will deny) - they want a surveillance society.
They wish to invade your basic human right to privacy. This is like having somebody watching everything you do - all your personal thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them.
This is everything - including phone calls and interactive TV. Quote from ZDNET: "Whether you're just accessing a Web site, placing a phone call, watching TV or developing a Web service, sometime in the not to distant future, virtually all such transactions will converge around Internet protocols."
http://techupdate.zdnet.com/techupda
"Why should I worry? I do not care if they know what I do in my own home", you may foolishly say. Or, just as dumbly, "They will not be interested in anything I do".
This information will be held about you until the authorities need it for anything at all. Like, for example, here in UK when government looked for dirt on individuals of Paddington crash survivors group. It was led by badly injured Pam Warren. She had over 20 operations after the 1999 rail crash (which killed 31 and injured many).
This group had fought for better and safer railways - all by legal means. By all accounts a group of fine outstanding people - with good intent.
So what was their crime, to deserve this investigation?
It was just for showing up members of government to be the incompetents they are.
As usual, government tried to put a different spin on the story when they were found out. Even so, their intent was obvious - they wanted to use this information as propaganda - to smear the character of these good people.
Our honourable government would rather defile the character of its citizens - rather than address their reasonable concerns.
The government arrogantly presume this group of citizens would not worry about having their privacy invaded.
They can also check your outgoings match your income and that you are paying enough tax. What do you think all this privacy invasion is for? The War on Terrorism? You poor dupe. All your finances for them to scrutinize; heaven help you if you cannot account for every cent.
The authorities try make everything they say sound perfectly reasonable.
e.g. Officials from US Defence Department agency have said they want, quote: "the same level of accountability in cyberspace that we now have in the physical world".
Do they keep record of all the people that you send letters and faxes to (and receive from)? Worse still - record the text? Do they record your phone conversations? Do they keep a record of peoples houses, shops and establishments you visit - or the magazines and books you pick up to browse? Do they keep record of books you take out of library? Do they keep record of purchases you make from the shops?
Indeed - do government currently keep records of everything that you say, touch and do in the physical world to analyse?
No they do not. So then - is that the same level of accountability?
They wish to keep an electronic tag on you, like some kind of animal. Actually it is even worse than this - like some pervert sex offender - a child molester that they have to keep track of.
Would ANY person of intelligence call that accountability?
Do not believe the lies of Government - even more of your money spent on these measures will not protect us from terrorists. Every argument they use is subterfuge - pure spin.
In UK, the RIP Act is unjust - dim-witted ill-informed MPs believed governments 'experts'. Remember - they will get everything about you, your phone calls, emails, TV viewing - everything. It would be like having a spy living in your house.
Americans - the Total Information Awareness plan, USA Patriot act and Homeland Defence - you are generally more technologically aware, are you really that easily misled?
Quote from the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency: "The goal of the Total Information Awareness (TIA) program is to revolutionize the ability of the United States to detect, classify and identify foreign terrorists -- and decipher their plans -- and thereby enable the U.S. to take timely action to successfully preempt and defeat terrorist acts."
The declared GOAL is to, quote: "identify foreign terrorists" - what rubbish. They know you are American citizen, not even a suspect foreigner - yet want to know what you buy, where you travel - everything. They want to profile you, like a criminal. I find it hard to believe that U.S. politicians are that dumb to go along with this violation of the American Peoples Rights. Looks like TIA initials stand for Totally Ignorant Acceptance (for their propaganda).
It should be noted that the UK government will be violating the Universal Declaration of Human Rights - which we have adopted.
Article 12 states: "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks."
You may be interested in the psychology of this type of surveillance. Here is a piece of text found on the Internet:
Foucault focused on Bentham's prison model, or the Penopticon as Bentham called it - which literally means, that which sees all. The Penopticon prison, which was popular in the early nineteenth century, was designed to allow guards to see their prisons, but not allow prisoners to see guards. The building was circular, with prisoner's cells lining the outer diameter, and in the center of the circle was a large, central observational tower. At any given time, guards could be looking down into each prisoner's cells - and thereby monitor potentially unmoral behavior - but carefully-placed blinds prevented prisoners from seeing the guards, thereby leaving them to wonder if they were being monitored at any given moment. It was Bentham's belief that the "gaze" of the Panopticon would force prisoners to behave morally. Like the all-seeing eye of God, they would feel shame at their wicked ways. In effect, the coercive nature of the Panopticon was built into its very structure.
The government will be watching all you do.
You will be good people now - won't you?
Or else!
I cannot stress enough - all your personal thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them.
http://www.thbtotley.co.uk/ thering.html
- It must be demonstrably necessary in order to meet some specific need.
- It must be demonstrably likely to be effective in achieving its intended purpose. In other words, it must be likely to actually make us significantly safer, not just make us feel safer.
- The intrusion on privacy must be proportional to the security benefit to be derived.
- And it must be demonstrable that no other, less privacy-intrusive, measure would suffice to achieve the same purpose..."
Some other good excerpts (but excerpts don't do it justice- go read it(and send its arguments to our own officials)):"... The Government is, quite simply, using September 11 as an excuse for new collections and uses of personal information about all of us... that cannot be justified by the requirements of anti-terrorism and that, indeed, have no place in a free and democratic society. ... the Government has shown no willingness to modify these initiatives in response to privacy concerns. "...Now "September 11" is invoked as a kind of magic incantation to stifle debate, disparage critical analysis and persuade us that we live in a suddenly new world where the old rules cannot apply.
"I wish to emphasize at the outset that I have never once raised privacy objections against a single actual anti-terrorist security measure. Indeed, I have stated repeatedly ever since September 11 that I would never seek as Privacy Commissioner to stand in the way of any measures that might be legitimately necessary to enhance security against terrorism, even if they involved some new intrusion or limitation on privacy. I have objected only to the extension of purported anti-terrorism measures to additional purposes completely unrelated to anti-terrorism, or to intrusions on privacy whose relevance or necessity with regard to anti-terrorism has not been in any way demonstrated. ..."
"...When people are worried about their safety, when we have seen the horrors of which today's breed of terrorists are capable -- and there may be more -- it's easy to lose perspective. It's easy to fall into the trap of thinking that security is all that matters and that human rights such as privacy are a luxury. But such extremes can only reward and encourage terrorism, not diminish it. They can only devastate our lives, without commensurately safeguarding them. Of course we all want to be safe. But we could be safer from terrorism -- perhaps -- if we permanently evacuated all the high-rise office towers, if we closed down the subways, if we forever grounded all airplanes. Yet no reasonable person would be likely to argue for adopting such measures. We'd say, "We want to be safe, yes -- but not at the price of sacrificing our whole way of life. The same reasoning should apply, in my view, to arguments that privacy should indiscriminately be sacrificed on the altar of enhanced security..."
"...But if we apply the premises of war to the challenges of dealing with terrorism, we will by definition be committing ourselves to a "war" with no possible end -- because there is no single, definable enemy. Any group of individuals, or even any single individual, that is willing to commit public mayhem in support of any particular cause is thereby a terrorist. And so for every particular group or faction of terrorists that is neutralized, another one may readily spring up... This means that there can never be a moment when it will be possible to declare a definitive victory in a "war" against terrorism. We need to recognize, therefore, that any intrusions or limitations on the fundamental human right of privacy that are imposed as a purported wartime measure against terrorism will likely never be rescinded. What we are confronting is the prospect of a permanent redefinition of Canadian society. And what will this redefinition achieve in terms of protecting us? ...
"If Parliament and the public at large have been slow to react, it is probably because for most people, most of the time, privacy is a pretty abstract concept. Like our health, it's something we tend not to think about until we lose it -- and then discover that our lives have been very unpleasantly, and perhaps irretrievably, altered. ... But though we tend to take it for granted, privacy -- the right to control access to ourselves and to personal information about us -- is at the very core of our lives. It is a fundamental human right precisely because it is an innate human need, an essential condition of our freedom, our dignity and our sense of well-being."
"... A popular response is: "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." By that reasoning, of course, we shouldn't mind if the police were free to come into our homes at any time just to look around, if all our telephone conversations were monitored, if all our mail were read, if all the protections developed over centuries were swept away. It's only a difference of degree from the intrusions already being implemented or considered.
The truth is that we all do have something to hide, not because it's criminal or even shameful, but simply because it's private. We carefully calibrate what we reveal about ourselves to others. Most of us are only willing to have a few things known about us by a stranger, more by an acquaintance, and the most by a very close friend or a romantic partner. The right not to be known against our will -- indeed, the right to be anonymous except when we choose to identify ourselves -- is at the very core of human dignity, autonomy and freedom.
"If we allow the state to sweep away the normal walls of privacy that protect the details of our lives, we will consign ourselves psychologically to living in a fishbowl. Even if we suffered no other specific harm as a result, that alone would profoundly change how we feel. Anyone who has lived in a totalitarian society can attest that what often felt most oppressive was precisely the lack of privacy. But there also will be tangible, specific harm... The more information government compiles about us, the more of it will be wrong. That's simply a fact of life... The bottom line is this: If we have to live our lives weighing every action, every communication, every human contact, wondering what agents of the state might find out about it, analyze it, judge it, possibly misconstrue it, and somehow use it to our detriment, we are not truly free. That sort of life is characteristic of totalitarian countries, not a free and open society...
Does anybody consider that if we continue to fight terrorism the way Bu$h and his outlaw cowboy posse thinks we should, there will be MORE terrorism, not less. I am not saying that we sit on our ass and do nothing. But I don't understand how the 'USA PATRIOT Act' or attacking Iraq will do anything to make me safer.
"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."
"He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance."
"He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power."
"For depriving us, in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury"
It's all there in the D.O.I ladies and gents, which I consider to be a more important peice of America than the constitution. Maybe we should just change the date on it and send it right to Washington.
That quote sounds awfully Palpatinian....
nuclear presidential echelon assassination encryption virulent strain
Whizzmo
Copyright infringements and DMCA violations are not felonies.
You can find the name of your respective legislators at this helpful EFF link: http://action.eff.org/legdirectory/index.asp
Here's a starting point: Haj Amin el-Husseini.
He was convicted of war crimes for his action aiding and abetting Hitler and the Holocaust during World War II.
And no, the name "Husseini" is no accident.
PS - anyone got the nuts to state who this guy's acolyte and close relative with the real name Rahman Abdul Rauf el-Qudwa el-Husseini is known by today?
Who rewrites Venezuela's constitution to hos own benefit every time he takes a shit?
We all know that BIG BROTHER is out there. That's why Phil Zimmerman created PGP, so get over it, and start using it.
People are staying home.
Police are wearing military style uniforms (and acting like the military).
The National Guard is being deployed on a regular basis.
The public is mostly pacified with mindless teebee news and news shows.
And now the US Constitution is being used as toliet paper by the Congress.
Today Iran compared the USA to the old USSR.
I for one do not take this sitting down and hollar loudly; First to the local news opinion section. Then if bad enough I just write to the editors and let them have an ear full. Then I write Congress but a letter in the local media has much more effect than a letter to the person you didn't vote for last election.
Do something, anything would be good.
To all those who voted for Ralph Nader in the last election. Especially in Florida. Thanks A Million!
From near the end of the article:
:)
"It raises a lot of serious concerns and is troubling as a generic matter that they have gotten this far along and tell people that there is nothing in the works. What that suggests is that they're waiting for a propitious time to introduce it, which might well be when a war is begun. At that time there would be less opportunity for discussion and they'll have a much stronger hand in saying that they need these right away."
This has been the tactic of the Bush administration from the very beginning - control and timing of information to maximize spin and reduce adverse effects on the administration's goals. Yes, other administrations have done this, but this one has an incredible mastery of it. Or are we just not paying attention? The author of this article "gets it."
I've got a hundred dollar bill that says that, even though we've already seen the first drafts of what they propose, it won't be sent to lawmakers until the war starts... or ends. And there is going to be a war, Bush needs it to prop up his approval ratings. And he has to have it now, Next year will be too close to the election.
If it started next year and dragged on into the time of the elections, it could be a benefit for him as the people don't usually like to change administrations in the middle of a war. But if it went badly, there wouldn't be enough time to spin it positively before the election. But this year is perfect. If it goes well, he will be "the war-time president that kept us safe from those dirty terrorists." If it goes badly, the people will forget or at least the emotional intensity about it will fade by election time. (BTW, regards the 'dirty terrorists' issue, there was a poll conducted (not by salon, but by the Princeton Survey Research Associates) that said that 50% of the American public believed that one or more of the 9/11 hijackers was an Iraqi, 33% didn't answer and only 17% knew the truth that none were. - That's how well the spin and disinformation works.)
The chief architect of the administration's PR, spin and disinformation organization is Karl Rove, one of the members of Richard Nixon's dirty tricks squad and a long-time political strategist who has been a consultant on many campaigns over the years. There is a good article here that describes Rove's tactics.
The key points of this strategy are:
Use whatever excuse is available at the time to justify the administration's long-term ideological agenda. That's what we're talking about here.
Count on the American public's (and the media's) inability to remember anything from one year to the next. Ok, pop quiz. Who remembers that in the debates Bush said that the military should not be used for 'nation building'? Sort of like what we're doing in Afghanistan and about to do in Iraq?
Keep everything under wraps. J. H. Hatfield's book Fortunate Son - The Making of an American President (70,000+ copies of the uncomplimentary biography suggesting Bush's cocaine conviction were recalled by the publisher and shredded at the reqest of the Bush campaign. Hatfield himself turned up dead a few months later. I had a helluva time finding any information on that. The book is still available here but it's not on the newsstands or in bookstores.) Dick Cheney's energy task force - the court has ordered him to turn over the list of the attendees (not even the notes) and the administration is still fighting it. Not a document has been produced yet. Just the list of attendees eems sort of innocuous, doesn't it? Jose Padilla, the 'dirty bomber'? (See more below on this.)
Cut embarrassing players loose and pretend they're exceptions. Harvey Pitt resigning on the eve of the election. Trent Lott stepping down as Senate majority leader after failing to get the backing of the White House.
And as an example of the biggest threat to our hard-fought constitutional rights, does anyone remember the "dirty bomber" Jose Padilla? He had been in custody for some time before Ashcroft announced his alleged activities and his arrest. Ashcroft made the announcement on the day that FBI agent Coleen Rowley was scheduled to give a press conference to discuss her observation of failures in intelligence analysis that might have helped the FBI uncover the 9/11 hijacking plan. Without question, this was timed to steal the media attention from her press conference.
On the same day, the administration labeled Padilla an "enemy combatant" and had him moved from the civillian justice system (a New Jersey jail) to a military brig in North Carolina where he remains to this day with no contact from his attorney. His attorney has attempted to file a writ of habeus corpus on his behalf, but has been prevented from doing so because the writ must be signed by the defendent who she can't get in to see! (Sorry, it's realaudio but worth the listen) In effect, the administration has suspended habeus corpus, a 700 year legal tradition and one of the foundations (some say *the foundation*) of modern jurisprudence.
Many noble and honorable people have died to protect the freedoms that this administration is removing wholesale. The oft repeated Ben Franklin quote is right on the mark: The examples of Israel and Ireland have long proved that you can not "win a war on terrorism." And removing the very freedoms that the administration claims are the reason that the terrorists "hate us so much" results in a win for the terrorists. How about removing instead the real reasons that many in the Islamic world are opposed to the United States; forced exportation of our culture, religion and business interests to other countries through globalization and our interference in their affairs. The path we are on can only reduce our freedoms and turn more people of this Islamic world against us.
We need PATRIOT II like we need a damn hole in the head. I'm really concerned about the state of our constitutionally guaranteed freedoms in this country and I'm not sure who I should be more afraid of, George Bush, John Ashcroft or Karl Rove. I'm certainly more afraid of them than I am of terrorists.
Ok, I've got my Nomex undies on, flame away. But if you must, don't just label me a liberal, commie, pinko hippie, counter my logic or refute my facts. I'm not trying to be a troll, just covering my ass.
War is Peace. Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength. - George Orwell or George Bush?
> That's what happens when you sit idly by watch the Nine Gavelers in Black give the Ring of Power to George
Let me guess, if the Seven Gavelers in the Black robes of the land of Flor-dor had bestowed the Ring of Power to Gor the Splendid, Inventor of the Internet, you would consider it a fair and just outcome, would you not? Alas, it was not to be, for though they hold sway in Flor-dor, they are bound and limited by a superior order. The Justices of the Supreme Court of our land have final say in matters that come before them, even if it is to decide nothing, or to send the petitioners back from whence they came. In this case, 7 of the 9 found a significant problem with the procedures in Flor-dor, and 5 of 9 thought they could not be corrected. And so the ring passed to George the Wise (Styled George the Usurper by those who swore a blood-oath onto death to Sore-Loserman.) who called into his council those found among the best and brightest in the land.
But seriously, you seem to suggest a different way to resolve or remedy to this outcome. I'm curious, what are you suggesting? Revolution? Extra-constitutional measures? Assassination? That doesn't exactly fit in with our system of Government. But, if you just hold your breath for another 2 years, you will have a chance to vote for an administration more to your liking, but you probably shouldn't have too high a hope.
> only to see the eastern block fall and America gleefully embrace the oppressive Big Brother powers of a secret government.
There is no gleeful embrace of oppression here. We've been attacked and are fighting a war against terrorists who are willing to hide amongst us for years before they strike. They've already kill 3,000 in a single attack (Not counting attacks on embassies, the Cole, etc.), and they are both planning and attempting to kill more. I trust mass murder of American's doesn't meet with your approval?
> I have to wonder if some of the more ultra right-wingers like Ashcroft are arranging global annihilation so they can see their biblical end game fantasies come true.
A wonderful example of demonization of those who you consider to be your opponents. (No joke intended.) Attorney General Aschroft apparently holds strongly to Christian beliefs. As such it is very unlikely that he, or anyone like him, would feel the need to arrange "global annhilation." Humanity seems perfectly able to work its way toward that without their help. (See: Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot - examples, mass murder, millions to tens of millions killed. -- Contrast with: vast right-wing conspiracy in US - examples, war-time restraint following largest attack on homeland in a century: A few 10s of thousands questioned, a thousand jailed, hundreds deported.)
Even if they did want "the end" to come, I think that the Temple in Israel is supposed to be rebuilt first. At the moment the only place where it can be rebuilt is occupied by the Dome of the Rock (3rd most important shrine in Islam). If you see that little issue go away, be afraid. Be very afraid. You might even want to read a Bible.
One last thought: Just out of curiosity, do you have any plans for dealing with those "right-wingers" that trouble you so? Educate the belief out of their kids? Limit their political participation? Exclude them from government jobs based on their beliefs? Limit their rights to free speech? Maybe round 'em up? Hmmm? Just checking.
Well, if you consider that Haliburton and Enron, under Cheney, were pushing to remove embargos on Iraqi oil, AND invested heavily in Iraq's oil fields.
Or that during the Clinton administration, that Bush Sr. and Unocal were in negotiations with the Taliban for a gas pipeline, and failing that, after we invaded Afghanistan, the president we put in power there just happened to be (surprise surprise)a former Unocal employee. Add to that, the fact that after we got a "better deal", the plans for the gas pipeline were passed with nary a whimper late last year.
Oh, and lest we forget, the group attempting to take on Cheney for his criminal activities recently gave up, because Cheney has some 1600 pound gorillas in his pockets, and the constant state of stalemate would have bankrupted them.
Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
Now... I suspect that says something like the PATRIOT act isn't going to expire like it was supposed to. And will someone please tell me what the fuck AMBER stands for?
Cheers, Joshua
When in danger or in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout!
EFF has it as well, just in case the other sites are slow.
-- Are you an EFF member yet?
do you think your vote really made the difference?
Did I ever say that I thought my vote made a difference? No I simply said that people who argue "This is not a democracy, it is a republic" are wrong. We live in a democratic republic. The money is what gets the votes. No shit. But the fact that votes are being cast by citizens and not by the representatives of those citizens (as in my example of voting down the sports stadium initiative) shows that democracy does exist in America, maybe not so much at the national level but most certainly at the local level.
Take for example the fact that Bill Clinton and the DNC received the most money in his 1994 reelection campaign [...]
What does that have to do with anything? Did I say that I though the gubment was not corrupt? Did I say that Bill Clinton and George Bush were not corporate puppets? You seem to be reading waaay to much into a simple statement that I made.
You just keep muttering that to yourself when you stand in that voting booth next time.
Yeah. Your right. From now on I should just stay home and not get involved. I mean if voting changed anything they'd make it illegal right? Especially at all those local ballot initiatives that are sometimes decided by a few hundred votes. The kind of initiatives put forth by Christian supremacists that try to get Harry Potter books banned from school librarys. I'll just ignore that kind of stuff going on in my own backyard because my vote won't make a difference anyways.
"OOOooo, yer always complainin'... Liberal rubbish". - Monty Python
OK all you whiny civil libertarian deconstructionists... Just WHAT do you proactively propose we do with Islamist terrorists in our midst if we don't turn the screws down on the whole thing? What? Wait and see? Morons. You think they are sitting still?
It sure is easy to criticize, but what do you propose we do if we Don't do something like Patriot II? Sit and wait for some Iraqi supplied anthrax to kill a few thousand people? Wait for "evidence" these people are out to get us?!? Need more skyscrapers with people in them destroyed in front of CNN cameras? Idiots.
> We gave peace a chance
They should read up on this.
These quotes just prove how history repeats itself. My only hope is that this time, we may learn from the mistakes of the past.
"A tyrant...is always stirring up some war or other, in order that the people may require a leader."
-- Plato
"Men in authority will always think that criticism of their policies is dangerous. They will always equate their policies with patriotism, and find criticism subversive."
-- Henry Steele Commager
"'For your own good' is a persuasive argument that will eventually make a man agree to his own destruction."
-- Janet Frame
"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free."
-- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
"The evils of tyranny are rarely seen but by him who resists it."
-- John Hay
"No truly sophisticated proponent of repression would be stupid enough to shatter the façade of democratic institutions."
-- Murray B. Levin
"The worst forms of tyranny, or certainly the most successful ones, are not those we rail against but those that so insinuate themselves into the imagery of our consciousness, and the fabric of our lives, as not to be perceived as tyranny."
-- Michael Parenti
"Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victim may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."
-- C.S. Lewis
"Good intentions will always be pleaded for any assumption of power. The Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."
-- Daniel Webster
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
-- Thomas Jefferson
Tyranny Quotes
http://www.idleworm.com/nws/2002/11/iraq2.shtml
1. The government didn't leak this document. A true patriot did. And that patriot is now the #1 target for Ashcroft to crucify.
2. Bush/Cheney/Ashcroft were going to lob this firecracker in a few weeks, as the attack against the Iraqis goes into full swing. Get it? Standard Operating Procedure. Get the thing into law when no one is looking -- and Bush gets to decide when the distraction occurs.
3. Spread the word. Yell it from the highest chatrooms. Only publicity can kill this thing.
What party would I have to join if I wanted to oppose such a bill?
What party has as one of its main issues being the safeguarding of our rights and constitution?
it just legitimizes the system.
its like saying "here, i authorize you to rule over me and force your laws on me"
only person good enough to rule over you is you.
Most slashdotters seem to oppose the patriot act, and if you already oppose it, by all means stop reading this post.
If you feel that the patriot act is a step in the right direction you should consider the specific powers that the law grants to law enforcement. Imagine that you are of chinese descent. Now, imagine that the new terrorist scene is in china and involves some sort of democratic movement or another. The US is on the lookout for chinese terrorists because they recently bombed a couple buildings in Utah. You have been e-mailing your cousin in shanghai just to keep up on things, but you use encryption to do it because you're concerned with your privacy. The government knows you e-mail someone in china because they are unrestricted in monitoring your e-mail. They aren't sure if you're a terrorist, so they go ahead and tap your phone lines and your internet connection(which they've already been monitoring). While they're at it they screen your whole family(BTW you work at your dad's chinese restaurant). The find out your aunt is illegal(mental note, deport).. they also make sure the IRS audits your dad's restaurant, just in case you are laundering money for terrorists. No evidence of terrorism, but they're missing some receipts, so it costs your dad a couple grand in fines. They haven't found anything on you yet, except that you downloaded a bunch of movies and stripped them of encryption.. violation of federal law here, but they aren't going to prosecute yet because it's too small time for them to worry about. So far you don't even know you're being investigated. Just when they're about to give up your little brother downloads the terrorist cookbook. Just what they wanted.. bang, they search your house(no warrant needed). They don't find any bombs, but they do find a lot of stuff they say could be used for making bombs. They also find a ton of pirated software and an eighth of pot that isn't even yours(girlfriend). They don't think they can nail you on the pot because it's unrelated to terrorism(until the next freedom patch), but they are holding you without bail and not allowing you a phone call. You're so scared you tell them who's pot it is(she's searched and arrested because they have probable cause now). They hold you for several days during which time your family is told nothing but 'don't attempt to flee'. Eventually you are let loose because they don't have anything on you, but now everyone at your school thinks you're a criminal and they won't let you in the computer lab anymore.
That's just a small annoyance compared to what could really happen... and just because it hasn't happened to us yet, don't think it won't. Wouldn't you feel more comfortable if it couldn't happen?
My Blog
could lose their citizenship when the govt. decides to declare a group like the National Rifle Association or the Libertarian Party a "Terrorist Organization?"
Do you suppose they have any documented guidelines for deciding when to classify a group as "terrorist?" If so, are these guidelines available to the public? If not, why not? Time for an FOIA request? Is the decision made by one person (The President) or by Congress or what? Can such a decision be appealed in court? Do the "accused" get the benefit of "due process?"
Hmmm... Food for thought, isn't it?
// TODO: Insert Cool Sig
No kidding. A decade ago I was dead set on getting
out of the USA. What I came up with in the end was,
it truly isn't any better anywhere else. You end
up trading evils, depending on what's important to
you. I have certain things I need to be happy.
Fast cars and a room to drive them.
My guns, and a place to shoot them.
Some group of people I can interact with that
are intellectually stimulating.
High quality hospitals in case I wreck my cars or
shoot myself in the leg by accident.
My current girlfriend has to like the place too
so I don't have to deal with whining.
The Govt' can't have so much invasive power that
it effects my quality of life.
There has to be some sort of high bandwidth
internet so I can play first person shooters with
a low ping.
I have to have access to top quality hotwings
and pizza, or the stuff to make them.
I have to be able to at least order and have
delivered new computer hardware, dvds, etc.
I have to be able to get employment that provides
me with the standard of living I'm used too.
And that's the reality of the situation. In the
end, my selfish needs will keep me here despite
how horribly messed up things are and how much
I disagree with what my elected representatives
do with my country. When that list of things I
enjoy above starts disappearing in this country,
I can start looking elsewhere again. If everything
goes completely to shit everywhere, I'll grab an
axe and head off to the deepest darkest woods I
can find. I'll chop down some trees, make a house,
build a chimney out of rocks, and plant a garden.
It's good to know how to survive in the woods.
I'd seriously miss my cars, guns, computers,
hospitals, etc. My girlfriend would probably be
pissy for a few months also.
The most important thing any republican needs to know.
When will the Far Right people realize that the religous zelotry is just as bad for America as the push for accepting immorality from Far Left! Far Righters believe in their rights to spank their kids, live off their land, and own their own protection, mostly to keep the govenment off their land. Far Lefters believe in the right to Love anyone, Consume anything they want, and posess their own bodies, again without the goverment's intervention. There would be no Far Left without the hundred years of abuse of the Far Right... See Prohibition, Segregation Laws, Drug laws, and Abortion laws. Prior to 1900 most of these things were considered immoral, but "overlooked" by the government at large because it wasn't their business. The Right tried to push its morality on the country. Then the Left came back to fight aginst this stuff, but of course once you have publicly humiliated a group they demand to be publicly acknowlaged! The Left got power from the Right's abuses, and didn't stop at Civil Rights, but extended to Environment, Gun Laws, and Welfare! Get a clue People! You both want the same thing. To be left alone!!! Work together and realize that using the government to further your own goals is just as wrong on both sides.
I happened to read some archived Slashdot articles from the time period immediately following 911.
I find it highly ironic that they were full of nonsensical posts saying things like "Oh, they just hate us because we are so free!" Well, I guess we don't have to worry about that any more, do we?
When men used to be men
Yes this is bad. Is it law yet? NO! Will it be passed? I don't know. Knowing about it now does help. Labeling Bush as bad isn't fair. Things are different now. When things are like the are now (Orage alert and all) things should be tight. When things relax a bit, things change. My last flight I made last month they did not do any random searches at the gate. I personally am among the few that don't necessarily feel safer because of the additional security. Over all I approve of Bush's actions. BUSH'S actions, not that of our congressmen. I don't think that Ashcroft is fully to blame here either. All we can do now is our duty as citizens. Contact your congressmen. Let them know we don't like the proposed bill. Things change becuase we don't do OUR duty. We can't fully blame the president and congress because the ones who are being heard are the ones that are FOR this type of BS and they are just giving their constituents what they want. If enough people say hey this is going too far, well, then things will change. If we sit on our hands and do nothing, well, we deserve what we get. Again, I would like to see the relevant laws regarding non citzens. I believe the constituion protects CITIZENS and not those form other countries. We SHOULD be suspicious of those from suspect countries. These people do not have as many rights as we do and are treated accordingly.
Gorkman
But the problem in this situation is you need standing to bring a case before the supreme court. You have to get detained to gain standing. If you get detained, they're NOT going to let you go any time soon. What happened to those guys in the resturant in florida? All they said was "And if they thought sept 11 was bad, just wait to hear what they have to say about [I forget the date]". And they're gone. Disappeared. Only they call it "detained for questioning". Congratulations, Bush, you've succeeded in circumventing judicial review. And I've got more news for you. The only reason they're looking to get rid of your citizenship is so they can be certain that you have no rights here. You won't get deported, no. You'll be detained, again. I wonder how all of this will sit with the international community.
The previous has been a secret message to my comrades.
The continuing erosion of civil liberties betrays the spirit of the US constitution. This is nothing more then a gross betrayal by the elected representitives that should be defending civil rights, not reducing them in the name of national security.
And as much as it might seem to be a marginal difference in the greater scheme of things, there is only one thing that I feel must be said.
I am Canadian. Ha ha, sucks to be american.
On the bright side as bad as it may become to be an american, there is a solution. If you dont like it, emigrate.
END COMMUNICATION
1. Something happens, people revolt.
2. A new government is started. At that point things are as good as they're gonna get in that country (freedom wise).
3. From that point on, the government gets more and more corrupt until
4.Go to 1.
Push the button Max!!!!
Edward R. Murrow (1908 - 1965)
See It Now broadcast, March 9, 1954
And don't write down your key.
"That encrypted document had nothing to do with my drug smuggling and I dare you to prove it did."
Unfortunately the majority of people dont want privacy except _maybe_ in the bedroom.
Maybe is right. Here in Texas, we don't care about privacy in the bedroom either. Thanks to sodomy laws, it's important for our government to know what we do in bed. After all, the Lord knows those we need to prosecute those homos.. and the funny thing is, homosexuality is legal in Iraq. Not to say that I agree with some of the iraqi laws regarding theft, but it makes you go hmmm...
ukvisas.gov.uk: Sorry, the web server is too busy to display the page you requested at the moment. Please try again later. I guess I'm not the only one that wants to get out.
Are you pondering what I'm pondering?
(repeat post - original disappeared) Does anyone here know whether PGP 8.x is any good? (7 doesn't work on Mac X/Classic). I'm asking because there was something funny about how they eased Zimmernam out of control over his software and the nature of the outfit that took it over.
Yeah, but could you imagine the damage he'd do to the domestic policy? Shudder.
Perhaps the Inquisition Part II, might be a better analogy;-) As long as you worship our leaders and our rules to "protect" you, you may perhaps escape some Alan Dershowitz type torture.
Who better to know of a "loving God" but those who preach, "grab their nuts make em' squeel",{Revelations 2:8_&9}
And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.
-Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials
I say, so what??!! If these kooks want to waste their lives paying attention to what I do...whatever. anyone who hasnt done anything has nothing to hide. If someone wants to shadow you and watch your every step, that takes a tremendous amount of effort, so more than likely, with or without an official act of congress, they will probably do it anyway. If someone wants to barge my house so bad, I'll just invite em in and fix em a drink. The people who care most about having their privacy lost will make themselves known and can take the proper avenues to roll the act right back by electing people who will do just that.
The Staue of Liberty is closed. Independence Hall will be enclosed by an 8' high fence.
I always thought conservatives wanted to go back in time but now I know it's just getting everything backwards.
I've read this `equation' that makes this very clear:
Deutschland 1933 + Oceania 1984 == USA 2001
Nuff said :-(
``L'imagination au povoir.''
"Those that blindly repeat slogans without GETTING OFF THEIR BUTT AND WRITING THEIR REPRESENTITIVES deserve what they get!!"
-A.C.
"They tell me we get the government we deserve. I don't remember raping any nuns!"
The FBI was abused for decades under Hoover. People were followed, phones were tapped, meetings were disrupted, letters were forged, people were blackmailed all due to that pervert's paranoia. He is much of the reason that there are limits on things like wiretaps. Now that most of those limits gone (with the rest to follow soon) and the new technical abilities of the government (the NSA's monitoring of International communications, databases, GPS, cell phone tracking, DNA, online credit queries, electronic banking, etc.) we can fully expect these abuses to come back with a vengence. Now they can just call the next political group they don't like terrorists. Deport them! Freeze their assets! Strip their citizenship! Throw them in jail and don't bother telling anyone!
Hmmm... so maybe former president Regan should hbe deported for supporting terrorists in Iran and central America.
I am really starting to think the US is going to destroy itself. Congress is becoming a terrorist organization. I wonder if the supporters (taxpayers and voters) will be stripped of citizenship? Maybe that wouldn't be so bad.
That's what the fuckers at CNN said about USA-PATRIOT. I don't want a water-down dictatorship. I don't want it at all. In fact, not passing this legislation wouldn't be enough. We need to repeal the first abomination. Yeah, it may expire on its own or the courts may throw it out. I don't want to wait for justice and freedom. If we can't have that in this country, I fear for the future of feedom all over the world.
If you aren't a citizen they don't have to do anything anymore. The first PATRIOT act got rid of due process for non-citizens. Of course Bush had already ignored it, but now he can do so legally. You can expect indefinite secret detainment with, uh, "interesting" interrogation techniques. Maybe you will get sent to Cuba? It's hard to say.
Of course they will strip you of assets and loot your bank accounts. And probably search your family's houses and put your friends on watch lists. And of course they would all be put into the national suspected-terrorist-registry.
If you just get deported I would say you were lucky.
Many are experiencing difficulty accessing the DSEA document at the Center for Public Integrity due to high traffic volume. We have made a mirror available here, with a HTML version.
Funny you should mention Cuba, since four Cuban Coast Guardsmen just defected. What makes these defectors so special? They sailed right into a Florida harbor and had to go find an officer to surrender to. They were armed.
Way to protect the "homeland" guys.
Of course these were just guys who wanted good jobs and cable TV. What if it had been a boatload of Qs? Better yet, they docked at a MOTEL--a building fitting the exact profile described in yesterday's "code orange" alert upgrade.
The sad thing is, anybody who thinks Gore would have been any less of a lunkhead is just engaging in wishful thinking.
Come on, Democrats. Roosevelt? Court packing? Japanese internment? You know it's true.
Where to put your faith? God and the general public. We ended slavery. We ended Jim Crow. We ended McCarthyism. We stopped the Vietnam war. This too shall pass.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
I don't believe you. Could you post some links to reputable sources?
A legparnasom tele van angolnaval.
Don't you want to prosecute these evil-doers? What are you going to do... just send them home?
No, of course not. The reason to expatriate is that once you are no longer a citizen they can do whatever the fuck they want. You are left with no recourse, and are subject to the will of the secret police.
Its the whole "us and them" mentality that allows rulers to push such warped logic on their citizens.
Excuse the pun, but your country is becoming more and more like the Soviet Union was. I am sure that eventually you will have practically no rights whatsoever and it will take many years of future governments to unravel this mess. I think you should all compain and above all do something before it's too late.
Isn't this what the present US gov is doing.
Brave, scared, safe or free?
The clever people in USA that is recognizing that this is happening do have a choice, informing people that it is happening and then leaving the country. There is already discussions here in UK about what the government is doing and I have a close friend that has declared he is going to leave UK to go to Switzerland.
All I can say is, do not support a government that is actively trying to create WWIII.
I find it so strange that Bush and co. have come this far. I remember after the 9/11 thing some frenchman publishing a book disputing the terrorists origions. He was ridiculed across the globe.
Now I wonder how wrong he actually was.
Some things that continue to make me wonder:
1.The only recorded biowarfare attack on Americans were the Anthrax letter attacks shortly after 9/11 in the US in which 5 died and some 20 people became ill. Even though there was the whole might of the FBI behind this no perpetrator has ever been found. It seemed during the investigation that some US scientist , Dr. Stephan Hatfield, who had been working at Fort Detrick in Maryland, was the chief suspect. Nothing ever came of that. The investigation was, as claimed by the FBI, blocked by the CIA, who refused to divulge information on that laboratory. As per usual, most have forgotten this incident. What really happened there??
2.A day or two after the 9/11 attacks a passport belonging to one of the highjackers turned up in the rubble in NYC. I still find it preposterous that a passport, made of paper, is found so quickly in a mountain of rubble from the WTC and that the investigators determined as quickly as they did who the perpetrators were, as oppposed to the investigation on the Anthrax attacks where nothing has ever happened.
I think, what is happaning in the US now is very reminiscent of what happened in Nazi Germany prior to world war two. in 1938, I think it was, a Jew assasinated a German Diplomat in Paris. This gave the Nazis the fodder they were waiting for and it triggered the Reichs Kristalnacht in which hundreds of synagogues were burnt and mayn jews lynched. Around that time is also the time the Nazis introduced compulsory registration of all jews.
I think you have a particularly corrupt government that is laying the foundation for an authoritarian empire building government. I am very worried that the fallout from the coming war in Iraq will trigger world war three, in whatever form it happens. The North Koreans seem to think that their backs are against the wall and might very well take every one with them they can if they feel they have no way out. India and Pakistan may well go to war as a result of all of this and I don't expect China to sit idly as it all goes to hell.
May God help us all.
... the Bush administration operates on the following principle of negotiation:
If you want 5, make a lot of noise and ask for 20. After meeting with fierce resistance, slowly tone down and start negotiating towards 10. As a sign of good faith, settle for something like 7. Your adversaries will be happy to know they kept you in control and breathe with relief. You will actually get more than you bargained for.
You want examples?
Iraq: Make a lot of noise about nothing, support it with "evidence" stretched way out of proportion and threaten unilateral action. You will achieve multilateralism and the competition will at most shrug and surrender to the idea. You'll get to topple Saddam, and still keep your friends.
I hate it when folks plagarize material and post it as their own. Case in point, you plagarized This one.
You're building up some bad karma, and I'm not talking about the Slashdot kind. What comes around, goes around. Bad karma will catch up with you, boy, and you won't even know why.
why it is scary being of a foreign decent ie... middle east or indian?
You're wrong. I won't bother telling you why your arguments are flawed because you're far too excited about thinking you are right. Obviously anything I will say to you will not have an effect so I will save my time. Do me a favor though, choose a year by which the great America will have toppled and write it down, hang this somewhere in your living quarters, and then wait. If the year comes and goes without the fall of America, apologize to me through an e-mail. You can see my address attached to my info.
I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
Generalizing about an entire nation of people is akin to racism. If you had posted a comment about France being a nation of pussies, it would have been moderated as flamebait. But since bashing America is okay to you liberals, no one mods your post at all. Well, let me tell you - fuck you. You and the people you know may be pussies, but I'm not you fucking jackass. Go to Israel now.
I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
At some point, Slashdot is going to have to get rid of the "Your Rights Online" topic since we won't have any left...or change the name to something like "The rights you used to have", or "Your rights, NOT", or "Don't read this when they are watching".
While our whole country is focused on the huge tragedy of Sept 11, there is an even bigger tragedy unfolding right in front of everyone but as long as they have their Starbucks and TV, noone gives a shit. I'm not afraid of Terrorist. They can kiss my ass. I'm more afraid of having to live out the rest of my life in a communist country.
I think you miss the point. If NAMBLA's speech can be restricted then the next group in from the fringe can have their speech restricted and so on until it is you and I who are censored.
Besides, the best way to defeat the enemy is to understand him. Let NAMBLA and the Nazis speak, let them make fools of themselves in public, let South Park poke fun at them... Restricting their speech will only force them underground, is that what you want?
"I'll have a Guinness, no wait, make that a Coors Light" -Grad student I work with, who shall remain anonymous...
Useful link page from the 'Now with Bill Moyers' site, including interview transcripts, DOJ response, etc. I'm sure a lot of people saw the show Friday and tried to submit it (I did), but didn't bother to read deeper for the encryption stuff (me again) that would make it 'News for Nerds'.
http://serendipity.magnet.ch/cda/niemoll.html
According to Harry W. Mazal, the exact text of what Martin Niemöller said, and which appears in the Congressional Record, 14, October 1968, page 31636, is:
When Hitler attacked the Jews I was not a Jew, therefore I was not concerned.
And when Hitler attacked the Catholics, I was not a Catholic, and therefore, I was not concerned.
And when Hitler attacked the unions and the industrialists, I was not a member of the unions and I was not concerned.
Then Hitler attacked me and the Protestant church -- and there was nobody left to be concerned.
Whether one likes it or not, the words "congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" in the Constitution did not and do not mean that the Federal Government could not support the Christian religion. Examination of the Founders' deeds when they held office is clearly inconsistent with today's prevailing opinion of the First Amendment. They clearly supported Christianity.
The intent of the First Amendment was to prohibit the federal government from establishing an official denomination of Christianity in the United States so as not to repeat the mistakes of the old world where the King decided the religion. As you read the original documents, try to determine what the original problem was that was trying to be solved. A cursory examination of the Founders' writings plus commentaries of the time clearly reveal that the problem being solved was not public religious expression. Either that, or one must conclude that the writers of the First Amendment did not understand it themselves -- an absurd proposition.
One of the original proposals for the amendment, by George Mason, who was also a member of the Constitutional Convention and is known as the "Father of the Bill of Rights" was:
Here are some quotes from the Annals of Congress, June 8, 1798 during the drafting of the First Amendment:
This referred to Peter Sylvester of New York. He was concerned that if not worded carefully, people may believe the intent to abolish religion.
The more one reads of the original documents, the clearer it becomes. Jefferson's letter is very often misunderstood and misrepresented. For a quick discussion of this, see http://www.wallbuilders.com/resources/search/detai l.php?ResourceID=9
If you disagree with any of these assertions or wish to know more about them, I would do as the previous poster suggested -- read original documents for yourself. This reading should include more than just Jefferson's letter, though. His writings are worthy of respect, but no more so than the other founders. Do not forget that Thomas Jefferson was not even present when the Constition was created (he was in France), so he can hardly be the only authority on the First Amendment.
Incidentally, those who promote Jefferson's letter rarely point out that he also wrote:
(Note that the "government of the United States" refers to the federal government, often known as the "General Government" in that time.)
States were not to be prohibited from establishing their own denominations, etc. The current rage over religious expression in any state institution is without merit. The Federal Government cannot constitutionally strike down laws that are religious in nature just because the Federal government cannot establish an official Church of the United States.
I will probably not see any replies, but before replying, please check your facts. Myths such as the founders were all deists, agnostics, atheists, etc. have no basis. Read the writings of all of the Founding Fathers. Look into intellectually honest works such as the book Original Intent by David Barton. One can order his book, and read articles by him at his website: www.wallbuilders.com. Check out his articles at http://www.wallbuilders.com/resources/search/issue s.php
Whether one likes it or not, the Founding Fathers were Christian and believed the Christian religion was more than just acceptable in the forum of government, it was essential. If we do not like that, there is a proper remedy: further amending of the Constitution. Historical revisionism is simply a polite term for deception and lying. If you have been taught otherwise, read the letters of the Founding Fathers and the congressional debates yourselves.
Slashdot could do with more facts and less opinions.
[nytimes.com] Here is a list of all sorts of articles that describe absolutely nothing. I mean come on... at least post a link.
BTW, plagarism is a copyright violation... not lies. It means he stole the writings from someone else.
It is so weird to see one of the most down to earth comments and only see two reactions. Where are peoples heads in the first place. Have they no sense of context?
Funny to see an USian post this, good for you but I tend to think you are alone in the wild west.
anonymous because I already voted... cbravo
A text HTML version wtih OCR document processing courtesy of Soylent Communications is now mirrored by EFF:
http://eff.org/Censorship/Terrorism_militias/son-o f-patriot.php
--Neal
Go IETF!
IMO, it's time to get everyone who still cares together, take advantage of conservative sympathies by buying some high-powered assault rifles and start protesting the same way we did back in 1776.
Sure !
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
You can have mine !!
I leave 12 feb 2003 if the war is not under way.
I am here on the Navy base, oh wait, you hate
the government , LOL
Yeah, you might not wanna work here, it requires
a security clearance
As a sidenote, this place is hot and humid,
and damn ugly
Internet access is horrible here
dial up service is worse than AOL, and that is
saying alot, I worked for them a long time ago
LOL
cable modem is capped at 300 meg a month, and
the entry rate is $79/month I think , it's
latency is so high it is unreal
Housing, as a sub contractor you will get to
live in formerly condemned houses like the
one I live in at grandillo circle
If you think you might feel lonely, don't !!
They will happily provide 2 other roommates
you will most likely not get along with and
will happily alienate you
At least they fired the one that was eating all
our food , LOL . He also did not know what
he was doing and was poster child for WHY the
DOT BOMB bust happened
But I digress...
Tech jobs sure !!! join NMCI or contact
general dynamics they are down here too and
are looking for suckers like you
You will love the ratio of men to women too,
hehehe , favorite topic among men here
I am going back to my lady, my land, and
never coming back here
Ex_MislTech
Tech Support ( for 2 more days )
Guantanamo Bay Cuba
google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
Absolutely true.
Nope, they don't believe everything written in the Bible. They only believe things that support their fanatical beliefs. They ignore or explain away anything else. For instance:
The "convenient" (and dangerous) thing about fanaticism is that it's self-reinforcing. A fanatic's world-view will only allow them to accept things that support or extend that current world-view. Anything else is considered heresy, no matter its source.
Chretien's a bit annoying... although not as much so as Bush... because... well... Chretien was actually elected.
Problem is, while I agree with about half of his politic (thus making him the lesser of a few evils... Yay 5-party system!) I disagree heartily with the other half... but he seems to think "I got elected" equates to "I can't do wrong".
Oh well. I voted for who I voted for (NDP) and my candidate got elected, so I still have at least _some_ belief in democracy.
Yeah... come up here... but start early with writing "favourite" and "colour".
Karma: Non-Heinous
Your right, your not just talking about Bush...in fact your not talking about Bush at all when you say the majority of Americans elected the government. Only 57% of americans voted last election and half went to dems and half went to reps. In actuality, only about 29% of Americans voted for this government.
Is there even such a concept possible in today's world in the US?
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin