Slashdot Mirror
Don't Worry, We're Not From The Government
PolarBear3 writes "It seems that MSNBC.com is reporting that the government (U.S.) is looking to the private sector to data mine against it's [citizens|terrorists] since they are prevented by law from doing so themselves. Two quotes: 'People in the government, very much so in the Justice Department, have been playing out a lust for information that is not consistent with who we have been as a nation' & 'A range of laws limits how government can collect and use information on its citizens. The private sector, by contrast, operates under fewer restrictions.' Seems to show a nation fighting itself."
Soviet Russia?
Haw haw. It's April 2nd now. No more jokes. This is a joke, right?
Hoax #101 : USA is democratic country; a land of freedom where the government respects it's citizen's privacy.
...
How do the government spell "totalitarian" ? d-e-m-o-c-r-a-c-y ???
sigh
Irrelevant news and morons using moderation to mod down what they disagree on. 2018 resolution: so long.
Is this article implying that the Americans are actually worse than Bush jr.?
Whatch out: Big brother is watching you!
The US government has been doing this for decades. It may be illegal, but they've been bypassing the law. There is the UKUSA agreement: the US and the UK spy on each others' citizens then swap the information with each other. So yes, the NSA and M16 really does filter through your email and some phone calls to boot.
Name me a corporation you would trust personal information with. Micro$oft? GE? IBM? Heck, I don't even trust my bank with my social security number!
In the process they have gathered records of people who are not suspects, he said. "Once they get it they like to keep it, because you never know when it might turn out to be useful."
So, we've got a ever growing database that's now got a HUGE budget to fuel it's growth. Anyone else scared?
Find out about my new childrens book: SS Death Camp Criminal Batallion Go To Monte Carlo For The Massacre
What will happen to me, now that John Ashcroft knows I bought a bottle of Evian water last weekend?
This is sadly VERY OLD news... a huge firm in FL doing it ages (gigantic cross referenced system, including "6 degree-of seperation telephone "buddy" connections) and addresses etc.
They first started doing it for the CIA.
They have huge amounts of hard drive storage and lots of programmers.
now they sell to all big brother agencies... to SPY on americans on a per-lookup action.
The us is just "buying access"not administering the sickeningly complete database (all utility bills, all credit card transactions, all bank accounts, all phone call records (including local, etc etc)
I told you guys on slashdot about RFID transmitters in tires a complete year ago and everyone called me a liar until finally all the truth came out (the us gov to track car movement by RFIDs in tores at canadian borders and on I-75 and in bay area california).
I will not reveal the FLA corp. BUT its a fact... semi-first hand knowledge.
We can sue the h@ll out of a private company...
Nice to see how the neo-conservatives are eroding the rights of individuals by refusing to legislate any controls over corporaions, and all in the name of freedom.
Makes me glad I live in the EU where at least the governments will take on multi-nationals if it is in the public interest. In the US it seems as though most of the Republicans are in the pockets of corporate America and cracking down on any kind of social rights where-ever it will help the multinationals.
What it really does is prevent the legislature from protecting the little guy against large and powerful organisations. Claiming that all these things are done in the name of reduced government intervention, i.e. freedom, is the master stroke though. Unfortunately a large enough proportion of the population believe this and therefore vote for what is really an erosion of their rights.
This seems to be of dubious legality.
If government is prohibited by law from gathering this sort of intelligence for itself, using information gathered by others seems a flimsy defense against the law. If an FBI agent, paid by the government, snoops around it's illegal. But if a grocery store, paid by the government, gives you the info it is legal? I don't buy it.
Every credit card application I get in the mail has a little check box and requires my signature: "I authorize ----- to check my credit record and verify the information provided on this application....." So if companies can't check my credit rating w/o my approval, how is the government going to get it, as the article suggests?
This is a weak end-run around existing legal protections. While I would like to think that when the next airplane explodes in a huge ball of flame the citizenry will say "Wait! You told us we gave up our freedoms for protection. If you can't do that, we at least want to be able to fly unmolested!" But I fear all we'll hear is a government cry of "See? We've saved you from everything up to this, but we need more information to stop these attacks in the future." and the people will say "Ok, if you say so."
The Republicans are distracting everyone from their machinations by beating up on Iraq. The Democrats are meekly going along with it in some misguided attempt to "show support for our troops" when any idiot could tell you the best way to support the troops is to send them back home where there aren't people shooting at them, and spend that war money sending their kids to better schools.
High-speed Road Trip (18.000KPH)
This sounds to me very much like what Poindexter is doing/wants to do with DARPA and their various projects. Check out the TIA (Total Information Awareness) programme in particular, if you haven't heard about it yet.
This is old news, but somehow those things manage to remain fairly hidden, and just resurface once in a while. Esp. when America is at war, and people are just focused on Iraq news.
Since conventional media wisdom indicates the terrorists hate us because they're jealous of our wonderfully capitalist way of life, it should be no problem to find them exploiting all our capitalist society has to offer. No using cash for transactions for these guys... not when they have the "Islamic Jihad Gold Visa" from BankOne!
Get that Goverment issue prick out of your ass will 'ya.
If it's illegal to collect this info and use it, then why would it be more legal if they used the private sector to achieve the same goal? Why don't they just admit the truth; that democracy and freedom is gone, that the constitution and bill of rights are nothing more than meaningless words?
And why the hell is USA trying to give democracy and liberty to other nations? USA doesn't have enough of that for themselves. They should concentrate on cherishing the little democracy and liberties they have, for it may well be gone in a few years. Enjoy it while you can.
USA really does seem to thrive on paranoia, and the people with most paranoia seems to be fast-tracked to high positions in the government and assorted TLA's. USA is already very very close to the type of state described in '1984' by Orwell, and it seems to do all it can to surpass the nightmare portrayed in the book.
Hopefully the citizens of USA will realise what is happening and either overthrow the government that is doing this against them, or leave the country behind on a permanent basis.
For being a country striking its chest and proclaiming to be the only true democracy in the world, USA is one of the most un-free countries in the world considering the continuous manipulation of its citizens to ensure that no-one speaks up too loudly against what is going on.
Just my 0.02 Euro
Swedish, but resident in the UK since 1996.
You are either with us or against us.
I don't know why they don't just make up new names for things to get round silly restrictive laws. If there is a law that says government departments cannot pry into cizitens too much, why don't they just create a new department and call it, for instance "Not a Government Department". Then when lawers say "you can't do that" they can say, but it's "Not a Government Department", so your silly laws don't count! Even better, they could move "Not a Government Department" to another country with less restrictive laws.
After all, this is exactly what they've done with Guatemalan Bay and the "Unlawful Combatants".
This Florida company seems to be referenced repeatedly, so why is it such a big deal to actually cite the name of it? Black helicopters are probably unlikely to appear overhead your house ... wait no, I bet it's Disneyworld ?
Dammit ... and the whole
Disneyworld Buys MIT wasn't actually a hoax. It all makes so much sense now.
but... I like my rainbow!
Its scary how accurate data mining can be. Taking a small scale example I have a loyalty card for my local supermarket. Every 3 months they send me some vouchers for money off on certain products. First time none of the vouchers really intrested me. However each time they have been getting more and more accurate until last time I actually used all of them on things I wanted.
Now if we scale this up I can almost see the US goverment getting more accurate but not without have a lot of false positivies. Scary prospect..
Rus
Cheap UK and US VPS
What's with all the MSNBC and Slate plugs? That was a Reuters article you can pick it up from Reuters or via Clarinet.
that they're not taking any clues from spammers. Recent examples for me include mortgage offers (I rent) and breast enlargement (I'm a guy).
C|N>K
The problem is that the US govt. has too much money with an 11 tril. GDP ! they really dont have to worry about the day to day 'real problems' of life. So instead of making the entire world a better, progressive, healthy, educated place to live in, they keep spending good money on wars and such fancy idiocracies.
How about creating new schools & hospitals in afghanistan and the other really poor african countries. Nopes! Make no mistake, I'l bomb every place on earth i possibily can! Bush and gang are enimies of humanity!
Shows a nation with inconsistent data protection laws more like.
But then I in the EU where we actually have some DP laws so...
Waaahhh!!!
Freedom without guns is no freedom at all.
BOO! TERRO
I can't believe how much Americans are being dumped down, people what was hijacked in 911 was NOT your planes but your civil rights, freedom of speech..., and recently your government has been acting really really childish. wakeup before its too late, your grandsons will curse you for doing nothing about it.
Corporations should be required to conform to the Bill of Rights.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
... as Evian is actually owned by Coca-Cola...
I don't need a signature.
You're speaking of Guantanemo Bay on Cuba -- not in Guatemala. The same country that has been under a U.S. embargo since 1962.
Freedom to fear. Freedom from thought. Freedom to kill.
I guess the War on Terror really is about freedom!
Sweet!
Sorry you were modded offtopic but I diffinetly encourage everyone to submit this as a story to the slashdot editors. This is a big deal like the release of the original doom.
But since this is brand spanking new, how did anyone get this to compile under linux? There is alot of dos specific sound driver code. Maybe under dosemu( the old caldera now cursed sco dos emulator)?
To play this again on my Windows2k box or in my gentoo box would rock!
http://saveie6.com/
Mod Parent Up! That was funny!
Well, it would only be 290 billion if 10bn hadn't been given to Israel for 'defence'
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
A form of government in which the people choose between one of two candidates selected Party leaders, the real authorities. Both candidates and both parties equally suck but hardly anyone will vote outside the two parties for fear of "wasting their vote."
Each Party is controlled by one or more Corporations Blatantly obvious libertarian advertisement goes here.
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
The real problem is that there are just too many people (some one please kill me while I'm not looking).
in 1066 the population of the UK was a few million now it's 60million. if Feudal systems were required to control a UK population of a few million it's hardly surprising that the Government is greatly restricting the rights of 60million just to keep things stable.
SARS kills 4% please can we have a world wide epidemic, maybe nuke a few big cities or sterilise 99% of the population or anyone who's had more than one child.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
the company (or workers) become agents of the state.
Just like if you try to find out what a hackers done to your computer. You are an agent of the state and can be held for wire tapping.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
like this guy
R Tape loading error, 0:1
Isn't that... a French word??? Are you disrespecting our dead troops on foreign soil???
Libertarians somehow believe that private businesses should be stronger than governments but weaker than individuals.
very definition of "Fascism".
A government working closely with private institutions to seek and maintain control over its populace.
That is THE basic definition of a fascist system. Just like pre-nazi germany, our leader seeks to maintain greater control over us with surveillance and fear tactics...
"Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the counrtry to danger. It works the same in any country"
-Hermann Goering. Hitler's designated successor, before being sentenced to death at the Nuremberg trials.
"A dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier--there's no question about it."
-G.W. Bush 8/6/01 (It may be out of context, but... there you go)
Sig
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars
"more anti-government crap from slashdot..."
pffhhhttt...that's rich
they're called slashcommies for a reason y'know...
pro-state commie dogma all day,every day...
nice try though,trollbreath
U.S. Eyes Personal Commercial Data in Terror Search
Sun March 30, 2003 09:43 AM ET
There are a lot of unstated assumptions in the posts here that attack the US government. One is that our everyday activities are somehow private.
What we buy, where we go, where we live, and a great many other detials about our lives are not private; they are facts that are available to anyone who might be interested, and we have no God-given right to get upset if somebody collects them. We are not private entities, we are social entities, and that means that only those things that we deliberately hide are private: if we lock our secrets away, encrypt our messages, act so as to mislead anyone who MIGHT be watching, then we have privacy. But privacy is a condition, not a right.
There is no statement in the Bill of Rights, no part of the US Constitution that deals with privacy, because the fact of privacy has always been correctly recognized to be a state that is totally up to the individual to create regarding his affairs.
Now what you do in the sanctity of your residence is something else again, as the Constituion makes very clear: you are protected against unreasonable searches, for example. This reflects the feeling that "a man's home is his castle," a very English sentiment. It also expresses a concern for property rights. The framers of the Constitution could not justify denying protection from unreasonable searches to renters, but they were not defining privacy when they limited police power by placing it under judicial control (the court, not the police agency, issues the warrant to search).
The courts have presumed an aspect of privacy in their attitude toward abortion, however, and if this is extended, we may see a judicial effort to define privacy. It really should be done by Congress, if it is to be done. There is no constitutional concept of privacy, but that could be changed through constitutional amendment.
At present, the laws restrict the government from doing some things that any private citizen is free to do legally. This is the approach found in the Constitution: it clearly states that "Congress shall make no law..." and so on. It does not say that other entities, other than Congress, shall be restricted from, for example, limiting free speech. (Only after the Civil War were the restrictions on the federal Congress extended to the state legislatures. There for a while, the federal government could not do what the states could, and did.) We are, in other words, on solid legal ground with our current attitude toward privacy. And yes, it does seem to me illegal for the government to contract for private companies to do what the government is forbidden to do! "I won't bite you, but my dog will."
As for paranoia, it seems to me that the folks who are throwing a hissy-fit about data mining are the paranoids. Much ado about darn little, as I see it. But suppose the public disagrees with me. Well, if there is to be a comprehensive definition of privacy, along with an assertion that it is a fundamental human right -- so far there really is nothing substantial in this area -- it is up to the voters to tell their government what to do. Does anyone actually think the legislators would resist such a request from the public? There are many precedents to show that they would not, Prohibition and its repeal being just one. We can and will change the Constitution as we see fit, period.
One thing seems likely, IMHO: privacy is a legal area in which we need to spend some serious thought before we act. And our first act might well be to stop the government from hiring firms to do for it what it is not allowed to do itself.
For now, however, the basic situation is very simple: if you want privacy, then take the steps necessary to get it. You are able to select those aspects of your life you wish to hide from public view, and you will be able to do a very good job indeed of misleading the "Watchers."
So go to it, you nervous conspiracy theorists: hide from Them. After all, They are listening every time you call, aren't They? They a
I don't understand why it is that when a company enters into a work contract they are not held to the same standards of the employer.
-= alphaFlight =-
There is a company in that state I live in that all they do is data mining mostly for companies to send junk mail. Yesterday I saw that their stock prices went up while everyone else prices went down. Big influx of cash from the Gov.? Could be.
In a Machivellian (sp?) way, legality applies to those whose wish to follow the law. In that way it can seem a legal and moral are linked...
Our "leaders" are showing their true motives in attempting to avoid "legalities". It's not about what is and isn't legal to them, but if and who gets caught.
"If you don't get caught, is it wrong?" Morality goes right out the window!
Sig
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars
i don't trust any news from someone who doesn't know the difference between a contraction and a possessive...
Or, how long until the country is bankrupt?
It's impossible for the country to go bankrupt. Instead, the debt will continue to grow and elected officials will pay lip-service to cutting it down. The national debt has been higher than it currently stands in the past, but this administration seems to want to set new records.
-- jimmycarter
it's always amazed me that people will complain bitterly about the us govmint collecting/extracting/stealing/whatever personal data for whatever reason *THEN* they turn around and sell it major corps for pennies (store discount cards).
there are other corp data collection systems that don't even pay, but that's another story? poeple worry about the dept of homeland defense knowing what you watch, but the satalite companies know and (i suspect) will sell it to whoever wants to be a business partner.
e
Americans selling out other Americans, but will private sector Big Brother become big business (if it isn't already)?
An interesting Constitutional question - when Bush privatizes every government function, will the private contractors be bound by the same restrictions as is a governmental body? When private cops arrest you, do they need due cause? Do you get your rights read to you? Do you get to see a lawyer? Can they beat information out of you?
Chief Justice Thomas won't have a problem with that - it's not strictly proscribed, so let it rip!
If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
after reading this you will understand why many people block it, negates all cookie security
http://www.pc-help.org/privacy/ms_guid.htm
be afraid
. . . are people who have something to hide. And by the way, nowhere in the Constitution is there a right to privacy. No one has the right to commit a crime, be it public or private.
This kind of oppression by proxy has been going on for decades, if not since America's conception. Workers have always lost many of their rights (including free speech and privacy) when they sign an employment contract. The only new aspect of this is that information technology allows the government to collate disparate information flows smoothly, so they can assemble a complete picture of what you're doing from your employer, utility services, and credit card bills.
The only way out of this is to monitor what information goes out. Don't do business with unethical companies, pay with cash when possible, etc. This kind of monitoring won't stop smart criminals -- it just keeps the population on a leash.
Genocide Man -- Life is funny. Death is funnier. Mass murder can be hilarious.
That line has been blurring steadily since I have been alive. I think Jello Biafra said it best:
"We are living in New Corporate Feudalism."
(And just in case you have never heard of him, Jello Biafra was/is: the lead singer of The Dead kennedy's, San Francisco mayorial candidate, spoken word performer, World Trade activist and owner of Alternative Tentacles Records - the home of Noam Chomsky's recording archive)
---- The real Slashdot is still here. You just have to browse at -1 to read the comments.
That Bush quote is completely out of context. Furthermore, your date is incorrect, showing that your source is unreliable. Quick Googling gives lots more information about this quote. Bush was referring to his struggles with Congress, and that if it were a dictatorship, he would not have to deal with that; he was not implying that he would take over the government.
Unlike Hitler, Bush has personally not made any attempts to sieze power for himself, has not rallied the populace by promising expansion of American territory, has not created a youth program designed to create the Fascisti of tomorrow, has not destroyed the Reichstag, and so on. Comparing G. W. Bush to Hitler is stupid.
The funny thing is, Goering was referring to the sheepish nature and emotionally based groupthink (herd mentality) that many people fall so easily prey too. Like a college history professor through, you quote the facts without actually analyzing them.
Indeed, you see the conspiracy at hand yet we are actually under less surveilance now then before 9/11 and before dubya. More precisely those measures that many refer to now being placed (which often are not and many are being ripped up) were developed and in most cases implemented (thankfully temporarily often) before dubya. Goering was right, people are stupid. They refuse to look at the entire situation and apply consistent, critical thought. It is much easier to just use pretty words and quotes while furthering your own agenda of hate, fear and greed.Oh, and btw I think that if we had a democrat in office that was doing the exact same thing (but probably not tripping over some words quite as much) we would not hear the same level of protesting much less from the same areas of the world. We would however see a difference in support in that many supporting it now would mindlessly oppose the action due to the current political party in office. "It works both ways" is often used as a justification to continue with current stupidity when it should be used to look inside and say, "Well I'll be... we are being the same sort of pretentious, hypocritical assholes ourselves." I love being one of the few who does not fall into the pit of that hypocricy and sticks to principles over groups, organizations and movements. Yet it is depressing how so many of my fellow humans act like talking monkeys. Goering's remarks are the fearful weapon that can only be used in person with an area of effect. Such weapons kill the wielder and the target as well.
btw, about Bush's statement... I always thought that if someone is willing to joke about such a thing so openly then you can be sure it is not something they plan and secretly covet. An assassin does not mingle with the guards and target at the cocktail party and throw in jokes about killing the target.
The FBI can't spy on you, cause they're the government and that would be against the law but they can just hire someone from the private sector to do it. What's next? The FBI can't beat information out of suspects or enter your house w/o a warrant so they hire thugs to do it for you? Oh right that would be too blatantly obvious, instead they get bail bondsmen to hire Bounty Hunters to do that... I swear the government is like the frikken Mafia sometimes sticking layers and layers of henchmen between themselves and the dirty work.
Eat at Joe's.
People whine that it's a potential confilct of first ammendment rights to have the government carrying their data, but here's a perfect example why the government is the best ISP one could imagine.
icculus.org is working on a port, but it is not ready yet. I am sure they will be the first to complete it, as they have a lot of experience and completed both ROTT and BUILD ports.
...but this is NOT the way to combat terrorism. While it is important for the government to protect its citizens, it cannot violate the rights of other citizens in the process.
It makes me wonder, once again, why the original Bill of Rights didn't have 11 original amendments, The 11th Amendment should have been "The right to privacy".
Actually, no, that is not the basic definition of the fascist system, it is a piece of post-WWII propaganda. The basic definition of a fascist system is "A system of electoral government founded on right-wing, paternalistic principles and maximising attention on primary and secondary industry, with high levels of govermental social involvement". The whole totalitarian, oppressive schtick is a regime-by-regime thing, not something associated with fascism as a concept.
Read history. Stop listening to American governments, and maybe you won't look like such an idiot.
~cHris
20 bucks says this was moderated as a troll because of the sig rather than the content.
This might be redundant as I'm not going to read all the comments, but ...
Why are they operating under different laws? Because the government positions people hold can be corrupted? Why in the world did they realize that about themselves and not about the workplaces from which they all came.
I work in the IT group of a financial firm, members of our department have been tasked with running our base of clients through software that attempts to match them against known suspects wanted by various U.S. goverment departments such as the FBI and Secret Service as well as agencies of foreign government. If we find matches we are to freeze the assets of the individuals in question and notify the U.S. government. This are all to be done in accordance with the USA PATRIOT act.
The problem we ar having is that the software gives you a confidence rating of how sure it is that this person is actually the person wanted in connection with a crime. We are an IT department we have no legal powers to nor the means to investigate this individuals to insure that we are not freezing assets of innocent people. Thus far we have been holding back on actually freezing accounts until we have more information but with the specter of government fines being placed against we are eventually going to have to act.
I don't like the idea of the government having private citizens doing their dirty work. As I said earlier I have no investigative authority nor the means to perform investigations. This means that we need to make poorly educated decisions based only upon matching name(s) and addresses against those that the government is looking for. Eventually some one is going to get burned and have a potentially good name and reputation drug through the mud.
Seems like everything fun's illegal nowadays.
"Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind. And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader and gladly so. How do I know? For this is what I have done. And I am Caesar." -- Julius Caesar
I suggest you ask any number of the maimed Iraqi's (a bit too late to ask the dead ones) whether no major acts of terrorism have occured.
They might have a different perspective to you.
Nice to see how the neo-conservatives are eroding the rights of individuals by refusing to legislate any controls over corporaions, and all in the name of freedom.
... doing business with the government? This makes no sense.
Let me get this straight: the government is to blame for not putting any controls on corporations that keep them from
The knee-jerk Leftist response is, "Greedy corporations want to take over all our rights." The unsaid response is, "Don't pay any attention to that Federal Government behind the curtain." Do people not see that it is, in fact, the government that wants to complile data on everyone and intrude on everyone's rights? Do people not see that a government with an insatiable hunger for power will stop at nothing to get what they want, and that includes paying corporations (who exist to make money, and here comes a paying customer with a guaranteed* paycheck) to bypass all of those pesky laws that limit the government?
Where does this "government good, corporations bad" nonsense come from? It is the government which imprisons thousands upon thousands every year for the mere act of smoking marijuana. It is the government which forcibly takes money from citizens to blast its propaganda on the Super Bowl. It is the government which forces people to pay money into a bankrupt, guaranteed-to-lose-money income redistrubution and vote-buying scheme (yes, it's Social Security). It is governments which killed millions in Germany, Russia, China, and Cambodia.
Corporations and governments can both be evil because of the fact that they are made up of fallible humans, not infallible angels. Governments have one power that corporations don't: the legal right to use deadly force to acheive their goals. It is for this reason that the power of government should be limited, not expanded.
*Guaranteed because if the government ever wants more money, all they have to do is haul out the guns and take it. They don't have to worry about working hard for money.
I don't make the rules. I just make fun of them.
The Goering quote was: All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the counrtry to danger.
Bush has very much performed actions like this. German leaders (Hitler) yelled long and loud about how much Poland was a threat to the German nation, even though Germany had much greater military and industrial power than Poland. It would have been suicide for Poland to take any action against Germany. Germany eventually used these claims as an excuse to invade Poland.
Bush is yelling long and loud about how much of a threat Iraq is a threat even though the US has much greater military and industrial power than Iraq. It would have been suicide for Iraq to take any action against the US. The US eventually used these claims as an excuse to invade Iraq.
Now, here's where I'm expecting plenty of people to jump in and say stuff like "But Hitler was lying about poland." and "But Iraq is a REAL threat." So when you do, fill it in with:
1. Exactly what dammage could Iraq do to the US if they really tried (before the war. real weapons, not made up stuff).
2. Exactly what would happen to them if they did?
3. Would it be worth it? (Claims of insanity will not be accepted. Saddam may be truely evil, but he's not crazy. You don't get to be absolute leader for twenty years by having anything short of a solid grasp of political and military threat and consequences. Invading Kuwait? He actually received US permission for that.)
There is nothing so silly as other peoples traditions, and nothing so sacred as our own.
right this minute I am working on a program for a professor that is doing work with UNL on datamining weather and drought information. She has been contacted by the NSA, they are interested in her datamining techniques for tracking terrorist activity. Crazy stuff.
Sir Timbly of Cannatuna, offical Knight of the Heptagonal Table
Urban legend.
http://www.snopes2.com/quotes/quotes.htm
hunh? What planet?
First, congress posses the sole right to declare war... Up until Bush demanded thay give HIM the right to declare war, and they did.
The Patriot Act is also a fine example of how powers traditionally granted to the Judicial Branch have been taken into the Executive branch. Investigators of "terrorist activities" are not required to gain search warrents. They can hold people indefinitely without access to lawyers or hearings. This is only a small example of how the Patriot act consolidates power in the Executive branch.
Congress has the power of oversite into any action in the executive branch, but various departments in the executive branch have continually refused to give information to Congress when requested (Cheney on Power, Ashcroft on his held "suspects").
So, these are cases of how power has been moved from other branches of government to the Executive branch, or responsable action denied. But your claim was "sieze power for himself", not "sieze power for his office", so you probably won't count any of this.
We've seen how his elections tend to go (Brother, Florida, Supreme Court, ...). Hopefully we get a shot at another election that at least manages to look clean on the outside.
There is nothing so silly as other peoples traditions, and nothing so sacred as our own.
Why should they treat their citizens any differently than they treat their other enemies. Our government already outsources wars.
Whether or not that quote was never said by JC, it is still incredibly apt. About the only explanation for polls going from under 20% war support if without UNSC sanction to the 75% support level within a few weeks, is that the citizens blood has been made to boil to the point that they have handed their rights to their rulers.
Canada's new privacy laws are being enacted in a 2-stage process. The first stage passed at the start of 2002, governing personal health information.
The second stage comes into effect on Jan 1, 2004, affecting the collection of personal information for all commercial activities.
absolute security. Let me say that again:
/. friendly analogy, consider the copy protection/drm/fair-use struggle. Works the same way. If someone wants a copy of your work and they are willing to work at it, they are going to get it, unless you simply don't produce the work in the first place.
There is no absolute security.
What does that mean?
It means that no matter what precautions you take, an entity interested in doing you harm is going to be able to do so.
To say it again by way of
The last part of that analogy is worth noting. Relating it to the security problem suggests that our only total solution is to have:
NOTHING TO SECURE!
If you don't have anything then you are safe!
Security is about intimidation. Basically, you have to work hard at making any breech in your security not worth it to others.
I agree with the whole war on terrorism thing because of this. Don't like it, but understand it. As a nation we need to do it.
However, I can't seem to reconsile the need for intimidation with the current trends forming in our government right now.
Think about that for a moment in light of the copy analogy again.
What if there is nothing left to fight over? Will we be more safe?
I am talking about the basic freedoms this nation worked very hard to get for all of us. You see them eroding? I sure do.
Isn't this just like burning your money so nobody can steal it?
This whole information awareness business is unAmerican at best, a severe slap in the face to everyone who has ever fought for their freedom at worst.
Our system of government is based on a set of check and balances. The primary one being the power of the people and the power of the government.
To me, this continuing erosion of our freedoms, is a clear indication that we (the citizens) are not being anywhere near vigilant enough when it comes to our government.
Let me say it one more time as a whole:
There is no absolute security, unless you have nothing to secure.
Think about that one more time in the context of freedom. What is is worth? Is it worth a phone call or two? A letter? How about discussion with a few friends?
Maybe it is worth a careful check on your wallet each day. Where is the money going? Are you getting value for your dollar? I don't mean material value, but social and political value as well. Maybe the balance right now is tipped just a bit far toward the material side.
Why not fix that? Skip that next movie and put a little money in the hands of those willing to make some real effort in your best interests instead of their shareholders? You can always catch it later on DVD. If you really want to make a difference pay twice and buy it used! You can poke at the MPAA while feeling good at the same time because you...
DID SOMETHING!
Want some real security in your life? Start intimidating in a big way.
Get a dog.
Make sure all the lights on your house work well.
Buy a few ADT stickers. (Heh.)
Let people know how their actions affect you and why. Do it often and with candor.
Remember to vote with your feet.
Remember to vote period. It is worth it.
Encourage others to do the same. I know the latest ball game or video is a much easier topic, but that's the point isn't it?
Real security takes work.
We are not working very hard dammit!
Sorry to rant, but Jesus! I look back on my childhood and want that for my kids. Don't you?
Blogging because I can...
You're nuts. If I violate the TOS with my current ISP, I go get another one. If I violate the TOS with the government, I'm ostracized and have nowhere else to turn.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
The same company that brought you the Florida's presidential election fraud.
Does anybody read Greg Palast's articles or books?
(site currently down. Hmmm.....)
They already did this. "There's No Such Agency!"
Alright, I should have been more specific, the issue at hand is not like a national ID with the feds giving you a number for life that tracks you and holds you accountable for every little thing you do. Rather, it's about whether LOCAL, this is the key point here, utilities could be allowed to use their existing wire infrastructures to which they already own the right-of-way to offer broadband services.
In that case, then if your electricity utility kicked you for sending spam you could hook up with the water utilities. And the cable and DSL and satellite ISPs would still be there too. It's just another option. It's not less options, it's more options.
another goober who doesn't know the difference between "it's" and "its". Could someone who has passed the third grade submit stories for awhile?
This was presumably to give the horse a sense that the car was no danger, time to calm down and be on his way before you got going again and scared him again.
So, count yourself lucky that they don't enforce this still legal consequences...
Any sufficiently well-organized Government is indistinguishable from bullshit.
Someone's not really believing this.
O.K. I'm about to do something that's foolhearty at best, something I curse when I see others doing it. I'm going to ask for a legal opinion on /.
Specifically, doesn't any evidence handed over to a court have to meet the same standards for it's collection before being used in legal procedings? Wouldn't this apply whether collected directly by a police officer (i.e. physical evidence at a crime scene), forwarded under subpoena (cops show up at my ISP with a warrant), or volunteered by a private citizen (my soon to be ex-wife's private investigator handing over a videotape to a judge)? Why would private citizens under contract to the authorities be any different: either they're deputized (and thus actually police officers and subject to the same rules) or they're just private citizens (who can't use subpoenas, warrants, etc. like cops can).
Just wondering.
"Prepare for the worst - hope for the best."
Are they hiring?
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
Ben
"TSA officials have declined to say how they will determine whether a subject should be allowed on an airplane or singled out for arrest, saying that would allow extremists to alter their behavior to avoid detection."
The airlines should not recieve any tax money to survive, they should be allowed to go into bankruptcy, just like any stupid business should! It is not only interesting to note that intercept jets were delayed on 9/11, and that the sec's redflag software failed to account for the lopsided options placed on American and United stocks, but how immediate the airline ceo's lined up at the troft(congress), immediately following 9/11. The airlines were hurting prior to 9/11 and now they had their hands out on event that yielded them millions of taxpayers dollars. The notion that "democracies" eliminate "terrorism" is similar to the notion that "automobiles" are good for the "environment". What are they implying, you stand here to be arrested, and you may board the plane?
Blood money.
Where's John Galt when you need him?
I'm in the mountains actually doing things, not wasting my time bitching about it to a bunch of big talkers on Slashdot!
Is anybody else reminded of how back during the Inquisition the actual torture was done on the Church's behalf by princes and other subcontractors?
This is not my sandwich.
I see lots of complaints because the U.S. government is supposedly doing data mining looking for terrorists but no one complaining that the data is available for anyone to mine if they have the time, money and expertise (as long as they're not the government). A huge amount of data about what we each buy, owe on, how timely we pay our bills, own vs. rent, who we talk to (phone), interests (magazine subscriptions plus those little "tell about yourself" cards), etc. is floating around in and between various private databases that are sold to whoever wants to buy them.
I somehow have trouble getting all excited because the U.S. governement has become yet another one of the customers for this information. I'm more ticked off that the data is out there about me and I don't own it or control it, may not even know if it exists and, at best, just get to be annoyed at yet another batch of junk mail I don't want killing trees and stuffing my mailbox because someone else bought information about me.
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
Ben
from here.
there's your link, gentlemen.
Until people start looking to alternatives to the two parties we have in place today.
Republicans and Democrats will keep increasing the size of Government, and it will intrude more and more into your daily lives. Does stuff like this really surprise anyone?
The Government has grown out of control, but no one does anything about it, too afraid they may "waste their vote".
You're wasting your votes anyway, quit voting for the two major parties and at least you'll be doing it on principle!
who do you think is Lexis Nexis's biggest customer? Yup... the feds are....
The Iraqi government is not building weapons of mass destruction - they have their private sector working on that.
You are watching your government using terrorism FUD to cicumvent and take away your civil rights, step by step and day by day, and still believe this war against Iraq is a war for democracy? Wake up America, wake up!
He saw some dirty arabs and fired. Too bad it was just some friendly kurds, BBC reporters and his fellow cowboys.
I think we can all agree that this s a biparsn problem. they all want to spy on you. pubs might be more in favor of the "private sector" doing it, and dems may be more in favor of the gov doing it, but it's all the same.
because I have been enjoined by this Holy Office to abandon the false opinion which maintains that the Sun is the centre
Each Party is controlled by one or more Corporations Blatantly obvious libertarian advertisement goes here.
Jeez, here I was thinking you were a Green, what with the wasting-your-vote thing. Who'd have thunk?
"Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
The real kicker, for me, is that my government is going about this the wrong way. There will be more terrorist attacks, and one will be successful, eventually. In all of history, there has never been such a thing as perfect defense.
No thought will be given to the motivations of the terrorists. Even thinking such things is enough to brand one as a hippy-liberal (at best).
When the next attack eventually occurs, American society will be locked down even more, and then even further after the following attack......I do not believe it will end until everyone that hates America is dead (HAR!), or when our great nation ends it's filthy addiction to oil.
----------
Together, we will drive the rats from the tundra.
This is also how my great nation is dealing with the touchy subject of interrogation. As long as it is not an American official who, say, connects a man's testicles to a car battery, then it's perfectly legal. The foreign interrogator simply reports his findings to his US associates.
By that logic, Dr. Evil is not, in fact, evil, because his minions do all the bad stuff for him.
----------
Together, we will drive the rats from the tundra.
"Naive!"
The USA, we have a Constitutional Democracy, is better know as a Capitalist Republic.
... all other religions are anachronistic jokes (Europe Agrees with US on that!).
It is in the public interest to accept corporate interest as best.
It is in the corporate interest to continue to support "?free?" elections that involve 25% of the public supporting capitalist interest to provide governing interest in business. Business is our only patriotic religion
OldHawk777
Reality is a self-induced hallucination.
Unaccountable leaders are masters, and unrepresented people are slaves. How do US and EU fare?
Even assuming this article to be true, and not an april fools joke, this sort of wrangling would not help the government get around the Constitution. Just because they go to a private individual does not preclude the court from holding those private individuals as "state actors", and therefore subject to the same restrictions, ie 4th Amendment, as the federal government. On its face it would seem plausible enough, but when you get down to it, it's not going to work.
danoatvulaw
It would be great to reign in the government in a big way, but to be quite honest, corporations are capable of causing major harm (cigarette companies, Exxon Valdez, Bhopal).
First, you're playing the "Yes, but" game.
Second, I never argued that corporations weren't capable of causing major harm, so you're beating up a strawman.
Third, I notice that you fail to mention any of the points that I raised.
Don't you think somebody should have at least gone to *jail* for covering up the problems with Firestone tires to delay a recall by a year, causing dozens of preventable deaths?
Yes.
Only dozens of preventable deaths? What about Pol Pot, who managed to kill half the population of Cambodia. Was he ever punished for his ideas and actions? No. What about Stalin, who killed more people than Hitler did. Was he held accountable? No. What about the thousands that our own government (assuming you're a USAian, or a citizen of a country with a "cooperative" government) kills and imprisons every year fighting the irrational, futile War on Some Drugs? Are they going to see justice?
The fact that you focus on an corporation and the dozens of deaths that it was responsible for while ignoring governments and the millons that they've killed shows your unfortunate bias. You believe that government is good while corporations are bad. Am I correct?
I don't make the rules. I just make fun of them.
It makes me wonder, once again, why the original Bill of Rights didn't have 11 original amendments, The 11th Amendment should have been "The right to privacy".
Because it was unnecessary as were all the others with the exception of the 10th.
Is your right to privacy specifically forbidden by the constitution?
No.
Then you *do* have this right.
The fact that the current administration (and to a lesser degree the previous too many administrations) has completely raped the constitution doesn't change what it says.
Yo, Big Brother!
FuCK U AsSHOLE BITCH!!!
Privacy actually is an explicit constitutional right. I'm not going to point to a line in the Constitution that gives you that right, though, because the Supreme Court Justices did a much better job than I could when they penned Griswold v. Connecticut.
That someone would claim privacy is not a right is surprising in that it redefines what I think of as common knowledge; it is, after all, the justification for Roe v. Wade, and I hope we've all heard of that.
No, it's no joke. In fact, 2 years ago, there were some companies that were looking to mine passenger lists for "Red Flag" people ... e.g. Arabic, Male, Single, One-Way ticket, etc... (PS: this was officially shot down as "racial profiling", so this never went forward ... at least not where I was)
Oh, and if this is the case, don't use Center for Data |nsight, in Flagstaff, Arizona. They "have no need for network security". So any and all personal & propietary information is at risk. Meh.
"Facism should rightly be called 'corporatism' as it is the merger between the State and corporate power" - Benito Mussolini
Debunking the "59 Deceits"
They collect all this information, and if questioned about it, they would say, "It's to protect us from terrorism."
That's all well and good, but if in the process we lose our liberty and freedom that makes this country so wonderfull, then I'd just assume be dead.
"Any people that would give up liberty for a little temporary safety deserves neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin
"Much work is lost, for the lack of a little more." -Edward H. Harriman
I've discovered a few years back there is (by random luck) a larg number of people with my name. :)
I get spam for those "you've got money comming" things becouse somebody who lives in Florida has insurence money coming and a few others elsewhere also have money comming. I've been cloned
Ok more sereously the governments colating this information by name. So now not only do they have every traffic ticking ever gotten by one of my clones but they have the shopping habbits of my clones as well.
It's just a matter of time before somebody knocks on my door becose my Colorado clone bought a bunch of Anarcist books or one clone changed his name to Ofta Bin Boofy..
Or maybe I could get one of them arrested for driving with out a liccens (becouse I have no drivers liccens... and I don't drive)
I don't actually exist.
> to find out more grabb your fave p2p client search
> for bbc bush documentary
> 15 min rush
Can't find any mention of the documentary on the BBC website. What format should I be searching for it in? What is its full title?
I was very disappointed to find out that my favorite store had just started a card program. After one of the checkout clerks stuffed a flyer into my bag, I read that although they'd like you to provide information, you're not in any way required to. So, I put this to a test, and sure enough, I now have a discount card that does not indentify me in any way. I pay cash, so there's no way (that I know of), to establish a persistent record outside the store chain (as with what might exist with a credit card).
When they start telling me that I can't make anonymous purchases using cash, there will be something very wrong. But even then, there's no reason that groups of individuals can't set up purchasing 'clubs' that work much like net proxies.
It's only a recent anomaly that shops became so large and impersonal that you dealt with a different person each time; 50 years ago, you would buy your meat from a butcher, who would simply remember what meat you bought last time.
I believe there is a world of difference between this scenario, and what we see now. We we see now is a machine that feeds on personal information, purchasing profiles, and other personal information in order to sell us more. There is no person behind it, only a formula and an endless trail of entities that want my money. When I move away from the town with the butcher shop, I wouldn't expect to see the fact that I purchased 1 lb of ground beef every week to show up unexpectedly somewhere else. The reason for this is clear...with the butcher, I'm a valued customer - a person - a fellow human...with the machine, I'm a nothing more than a revenue node, with my personal information pimped to as many commercial entities that care to try and get me to spend my money.