Slashdot Mirror


NARA Goes Online

TeachingMachines writes "NARA, the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration, has gone online. NARA's self-described mission is 'to ensure ready access to the essential evidence that documents the rights of American citizens, the actions of Federal officials, and the national experience.' A very relevant site for the times, with transcripts and images of the most politically important documents of the United States. Included are the Constitution, Declaration of Independence, and the Bill of Rights. Check out the list of available documents. The site is pretty large, with some incredible exhibits, and even an image of the original Magna Carta. Definitely worth a look."

123 comments

  1. oh great... by tadheckaman · · Score: 3, Funny

    Now that its online, we get to nuke it back off? You people are just too easily amused.
    *checks out the website thats growing slower*

    --
    My potato gun was confiscated by the United Nations. They said I wasn't allowed to have weapons of mash destruction.
  2. Re:not interested by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I take that back. This information could be used to aid terrorists. Take it down.

    dubya

  3. Fantastic! by 955301 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Folks, this is the answer to our prayers! Once the masses can get to these documents via the web, they'll actually read about the rights they have and discover that they're being taken for a ride by any number of special interest groups, politicians, media conglomerates, Attorney Generals *cough*, little ole' ladies, etc.

    Time for us to just sit back and enjoy the ride. Any moment now, the US population is going to wake up.

    --
    You are checking your backups, aren't you?
    1. Re:Fantastic! by KDan · · Score: 5, Interesting

      They have been able to get to those documents in public libraries for a while. Access is not enough, they also have to 1) know they exist, and 2) give a damn.

      Anyway, It's a shame they're not posting up all the declassified US govt documents that are coming out and linking Cheney and Rumsfeld to all sorts of evil shit... Now that would be worth having online on a reputable site, so that we don't have to go by the word of journalists anymore, but can see for ourselves all the evil shit that has been going on...

      Daniel

      --
      Carpe Diem
    2. Re:Fantastic! by 955301 · · Score: 1

      Bah, who goes to the public library?! Online is where it's at! Right from your living room. This changes everything, I'm telling ya! Any moment now... people will stand up for their.... will... uh.... *looks at watch*... well....

      --
      You are checking your backups, aren't you?
    3. Re:Fantastic! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they wont. Even if they know that this exist, and even if they can read, and even if they take the time to do so, how many will still understand? Even if they understand, how many will care? How many will feel powerless to do anything? How many will feel mocked by their government, feeling like a kid offered candy, but in the last second they take it back and say "ah, you thought you'd get this candy, didn't you? hahaha"

    4. Re:Fantastic! by edack · · Score: 1

      Ah, but now we can point out to Joe Sixpack exactly where it says "The rights of the people ....." After all if it is on the internet it must be true.

    5. Re:Fantastic! by Petronius · · Score: 1

      I just searched for: Taliban

      >Results for: taliban
      >12 results found, sorted by relevance

      I think you're right. Sadly.

      --
      there's no place like ~
    6. Re:Fantastic! by skillet-thief · · Score: 4, Interesting
      The fact that the documents in line only go up to the 1950's is a sign.

      But no! Hang on! The sixties are coming soon!

      When the 60's doc get on line, that's when the revolution is going to happen!

      --

      Congratulations! Now we are the Evil Empire

    7. Re:Fantastic! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Once the masses can get to these documents via the web, they'll actually read about the rights they have"

      And the treaty with France?

    8. Re:Fantastic! by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 1
      They have been able to get to those documents in public libraries for a while. Access is not enough, they also have to 1) know they exist, and 2) give a damn.

      Every single child going through skill gets drilled in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence article by article. We spent 6 months studying and discussing the Bill of Rights alone. Anyone that claims to have gotten out of high school without learning these concepts and our rights as US citizens must've been the most complete fucking moron on the planet and shouldn't be allowed to vote.

    9. Re:Fantastic! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      of special interest groups, politicians, media conglomerates, Attorney Generals *cough*, little ole' ladies, etc.

      I believe Attorneys General in the plural. (sniff.)

    10. Re:Fantastic! by schmink182 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Anyone that claims to have gotten out of high school without learning these concepts and our rights as US citizens must've been the most complete fucking moron on the planet

      It is just as easy to sit through an American Government class without learning anything as it is to sit through Algebra or English and not learn anything. The only precondition is that you have to not care, which is easily met.

      ...and shouldn't be allowed to vote.

      Agreed.

    11. Re:Fantastic! by shadowbearer · · Score: 1

      So we spam them

      Subject: Your Rights Online

      Your RIGHTS are being abused! Read about it here!!!

      http://www.archives.gov

      Hey, it's meant to be funny ;-(

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    12. Re:Fantastic! by BDew · · Score: 1

      hot damn! you're right! I only got 19 hits for "ufo"! Those bastards!

      --
      "Fifty million Americans can't be wrong," said Rep. Billy Tauzin. Gore - 50,999,897 Bush - 50,456,002
    13. Re:Fantastic! by Cyberdyne · · Score: 1
      ...and shouldn't be allowed to vote.

      Agreed.

      Also agreed! AIUI, immigrants have to pass tests on English and on the US before they can become US citizens (hence vote). Why couldn't the same apply to people born in the US? Better still, a simple test on issues relating to that specific election and the candidates. Even just generic things like the candidate's names, who the incumbent is, that kind of thing. 10% turnout of people who actually care and have a clue would be better [IMO] than 30% turnout of people, two thirds of whom don't care and lack clue! Granted, it would be difficult, but then so was travelling to the Moon, and the US managed that OK...

    14. Re:Fantastic! by stwrtpj · · Score: 1
      When the 60's doc get on line, that's when the revolution is going to happen!

      Either that, or people will start smoking more pot.

      --
      Karma: Frotzed (mostly due to the Frobozz Magic Karma Company)
    15. Re:Fantastic! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      most complete fucking moron on the planet and shouldn't be allowed to vote.

      The Democrats would never allow that. Everybody knows the 80% of Democrats are poor and illiterate. That's why they had such a hard time punching their votes.

    16. Re:Fantastic! by KDan · · Score: 1

      Either that, or people will start smoking more pot.

      They already do! Long Live Switzerland 8-D

      Daniel

      --
      Carpe Diem
  4. But who watches the watchers? by Spazholio · · Score: 2, Insightful

    According to the blurb, the mission of this is:

    to ensure ready access to the essential evidence that documents the rights of American citizens, the actions of Federal officials, and the national experience. (bold mine)

    Last I checked, the archive is run by the government (www.archives.gov), so how upfront are they going to be about the "actions of the Federal officials"? This seems like a good idea, but it could easily become little more than a "rah-rah-look-at-how-great-we-are" propaganda machine. I truly hope not, because it seems like a great idea.

    1. Re:But who watches the watchers? by MsGeek · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Considering the choices they have made from the National Archives so far, they are pretty much showing our history warts and all. The Dred Scott decision is there, as is the Censure of Joe McCarthy and Pres. Teddy Roosevelt's Corrolary to the Monroe Doctrine. I didn't peruse the site at length, but those certainly don't fall into the "rah rah look at how great we are" category.

      I look forward to seeing transcripts from the Nixon tapes there in the future. And transcripts from the Iran-Contra hearings. And so on. And so on.

      This is a good start. At long last I can say that the Feds got something right here.

      --
      Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
    2. Re:But who watches the watchers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NARA spans administrations, they people who work there take a deep pride in preserving the workings of the government for future generations. All the records kept there must be accurate and certifiably origional since they can be called into court at any time.

      They only archive what they get, they do not make up content. Seeing the amount of items that are there, it would be almost impossible to generate a conspiracy out of the archives.

  5. Yes, it's worth making these documents available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    after all, it's a historical archive of rights
    we used to have.

    It'll certainly be useful when kids start asking these questions:

    "Daddy, is it true you used to have the right to privacy?"

    "Daddy, is it true you used to have the right to see the evidence against you and defend against it?"

  6. Magna Carta by Talking+Goat · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I remember seeingone of the original copies of the Magna Carta when I was in the 2nd grade, while on a field trip. And now I can look at the original, online... I still like going to the museum best.

    --

    + G to tha Izzo, A to tha Tizee, Talking Giz-oat, Ya'll Bettah Feel Me... +
  7. nra by tchaikovsky1812 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    this is spam,isn't it? tell me true

  8. history by VanillaCoke420 · · Score: 1

    It is indeed a history lesson.

  9. NARA goes online by corporate+zombie · · Score: 3, Informative

    I don't know about anyone else but I've had them bookmarked for over a year. It's not like they just woke up and smelled the internet.

    -CZ

    1. Re:NARA goes online by TeachingMachines · · Score: 1

      This site may have been up for a while, although I heard through the grapevine that most of the documents available here have not been previously available online and were recently added. But I'll add that the date that this site went online is probably less important than the events surrounding it. That said, I believe that it is important to examine our actions and the actions of our leaders within the context of our historical roots. Reading the transcripts of documents such as the Bill of Rights gives one a focal point from which the actions of our leaders, past and present, may be sensibly evaluated. That's just one opinion, however, and we all have a right to our opinion, and to voice that opinion...

      --

      The Death Penalty: Killing people to show others that killing people is wrong.
    2. Re:NARA goes online by kesuki · · Score: 1

      I've had it as my slashdot url for about that long *points up* ever since they changed to the archives.gov address and I had too google for where the constitution was online.
      Of course we can now say that the NARA is offline, because they've been slashdotted. Must be a slow news day, or something.

  10. Pop Quiz: Where was the Magna Carta signed? by jo_ham · · Score: 1

    A: At the bottom of course.

    I'll be here all week folks. Please, try the fish.

  11. Magna carta? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Presumably they've blacked out all the bits about habeas corpus?

  12. until by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    to ensure ready access to the essential evidence that documents the rights of American citizens

    until it was /.`ed

  13. Excellent site by esconsult1 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    For those of us who were not born here and are behind a little bit on why we are really here.

    We leave our country and move to the United States because of the nebelous thing called "Freedom". Having all the relevant documents in one spot that can be studied is a fine thing.

    For you who were born here, perhaps the Gettysburg address has lost its thrill, but for me, when I heard it on a recent "Civil War" showing on PBS, my hair stood on end and a shiver ran down my spine.

    Especially these days, readers should re-acquaint themselves with the constitution, the bill of rights, and some of the famous speeches of past leaders. It takes a little digging to find what you need on the new site, but it's all there.

    Maybe i'm a little off topic, but just thinking about what this adopted country that I love so much stands for, and the fight that we on the home front are doing to make sure that our freedoms and rights remain intact in the face of so many obstacles -- makes it all worthwhile.

    1. Re:Excellent site by dalamcd · · Score: 2, Insightful
      For you who were born here, perhaps the Gettysburg address has lost its thrill...

      Lost its thrill? If you asked a random person on the street about the Gettysburg address they'd likely give you a blank look. If you then said, "You know, fourscore--" they would finish "and seven years ago!" and maybe give a you a great big sloppy grin, but 99 out of a hundred wouldn't be able to tell you anything beyond "our forefathers".

      dalamcd

      --
      moer liek CELtroid prime!!@1!
    2. Re:Excellent site by Amazing+Quantum+Man · · Score: 1

      "forefathers" isn't in it.

      Fourscore and seven years ago, our fathers brought forth on this continent...

      --
      Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
    3. Re:Excellent site by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

      I love reading those things...and I was born here!!! :-) it is sad that most kids and adults think that knowing how the government works and knowing the history of their own country is boring and unimportent.

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    4. Re:Excellent site by dalamcd · · Score: 1
      Heheh. Telling, isn't it? =)

      dalamcd

      --
      moer liek CELtroid prime!!@1!
  14. What are you smoking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your post was correctly modded as "funny," and I certainly hope you were trying to be funny.

    If you really think a nation of people who for the most part won't read a single sheet of illustrated directions to learn how to program their VCRs are going to dive into much longer historical documents, you are a seriously deluded individual.

    The only way most people today will experience a brush with learning about the Declaration of Independence, is if they happen upon 1776 on TV and it takes them a while to realize they're not actually watching Chicago.

    ~Philly

  15. What's the point of sending these documents? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seeing as how our government does not honor a lot of the rights we have on a day to day basis. For example, if I protest the war in this post, some blind moderator will mark it as a troll. In essence, I am being punished for my right to free speech without being penalized for it. Also, these documents in no way support or show any regard for how the US has treated members of other nations. Maybe NARA should include pictures of dead Veitnamese, South Americans, Africans, Phillipinos, Afghani, Iraqis, Iranians, Syrians, Palestinians, etc. That is the legacy of the documents listed in the article above. I am afraid to think what the forefathers would be saying if they were alive today.

    1. Re:What's the point of sending these documents? by stwrtpj · · Score: 1
      Seeing as how our government does not honor a lot of the rights we have on a day to day basis. For example, if I protest the war in this post, some blind moderator will mark it as a troll. In essence, I am being punished for my right to free speech without being penalized for it.

      Trying to draw an analogy between the /. moderation system and the US Constitution is like trying to compare apples and car engines.

      The moderation system is nothing at all like the rights listed in the Bill of Rights. The moderation system, in essence, is a glorified popularity system. I try to do my part (see link in my sig if you're interested), but unfortunately that's what it turns into.

      Being moderated down is not "punishment", unless /. karma is your be-all and end-all (and if it is, get a life). The correct analogy is comparing your ability to post a dissenting opinion AT ALL and not have the /. maintainers take it down is a better comparison to the rights indicated in the Consitution.

      Maybe NARA should include pictures of dead Veitnamese, South Americans, Africans, Phillipinos, Afghani, Iraqis, Iranians, Syrians, Palestinians, etc. That is the legacy of the documents listed in the article above. I am afraid to think what the forefathers would be saying if they were alive today.

      You mean the same forefathers that, when they said "all men are created equal", defined equality to mean those that were male, white, landowners, Christian, and could pay the poll tax?

      Don't get me wrong; I agree that the US has caused terrible things to happen, or allowed terrible things to happen, but I don't think you can claim to know the minds of the founding fathers of the US. Also, in many of the cases of the US instigating these terrible acts, they were not done specifically with malice towards the people involved. In many cases, there was the overall goal of trying to stare down the Soviet Union. Given the choice between a world dominated by them, and the one that we live in now, I'll take the latter, even if that means there is blood on America's hands.

      Do I like the fact that these things happened in order to push back Soviet influence and power? Absolutely not. Only a complete sociopath likes the fact that such things happen, or want them to happen. But there's a larger picture to be considered here.

      Go ahead and flame me for my positions. That's your right, as it is my right to state such an opinion.

      --
      Karma: Frotzed (mostly due to the Frobozz Magic Karma Company)
  16. Voting Records of Reps by Speare · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Maybe this exists somewhere I've not found. I'd like to see a nice searchable voting record for Representatives, which is indexed against Presidential Vetos and Supreme Court rulings. If a bill was originally drafted by a non-legislator, I'd like to see that, too. Then on top of that, summarize certain interesting tallies.

    Rep. Harry Careless (X-SS) has sponsored 2 and voted in favor of 18 bills, subsequently Vetoed or Struck.

    --
    [ .sig file not found ]
    1. Re:Voting Records of Reps by vtechpilot · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You are on to something very important here, almost nobody know how their elected officials voted on past bills, and fewer still know how they intend to vote on upcomming bills. Personally I would like to create a service (for free hopefully) that would allow people to sign up for email based updates about their representatives. When they sign up, their email address is associated with thier officials. Then whenever a vote occurs, an email is sent out with a summary of the bill, and how their representatives voted. Hopefully the idea is that people would be better informed as to wether or not a given official is really representing their interests, and perhaps question whether or not they want to re-elect that person. Hmm, maybe I can get a grant from the government to do this....

      --
      Slashdot is an anagram for Has Dolts, and I am Dolt number 468543
    2. Re:Voting Records of Reps by mdxi · · Score: 4, Informative

      While it doesn't have the depth of analysis you desire, the raw information you want (adn much more) is available both in paper form and online at thomas.loc.gov, which is pretty much a one-stop shop for any sort of legislative information. You can even read complete transcripts of that fantastically exciting periodical "The Congressional Record".

      --
      Posted with Mozilla
    3. Re:Voting Records of Reps by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

      do it man hell, why stop there if you will get a grant, make a searchable cross refrencing DB like the parent said...if your lucky the Government will like it and mabye pay you to administrate it :-)

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    4. Re:Voting Records of Reps by Peyna · · Score: 1

      Our local newspapers publish all these statistics at election time. The information is available somewhere.

      --
      What?
    5. Re:Voting Records of Reps by dpete4552 · · Score: 1

      http://www.opensecrets.org/ shows where conidates and parties are getting money. Which these days, sadly enough, is just as good as a voting record.

      --
      http://www.archive.org/details/ThePowerOfNightmares
    6. Re:Voting Records of Reps by zulux · · Score: 1

      You are on to something very important here, almost nobody know how their elected officials voted on past bills, and fewer still know how they intend to vote on upcomming bills.

      The League of Women Voters has list like this, but the problem is that thay are all worthless: (read on)

      All bills in our congress are titled with nice names, but unfortunatly the devil is in the details - the substance of the proposed law differs drastically with the impresion you get with just reading the titles of the bills.

      Example - the 'Patriot Act' is such a complex peice of legislation that it's almost impossible to figgure out it's merits and draback without reading the entire bill itself. But by just getting the impression by it's title: it sounds quite nice! Who'd could possible be against Patriotism? (Well except for you Chomkyites out there)

      Anyways - most of us have passing familiarity with the 'Patriot Act', so we can make informed decisions about our congress-critter's voting record. Buy will you be dilligent when you see that your representitives voted against the 'Soft Furry Puppy and Cute Kitten Act Protection Act' , and not jump to conclusions?

      --

      Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

    7. Re:Voting Records of Reps by vtechpilot · · Score: 1
      But will you be dilligent when you see that your representitives voted against the 'Soft Furry Puppy and Cute Kitten Act Protection Act' , and not jump to conclusions?

      Which is the whole point of the system I have in mind. Along with how they voted, include a small summary (if possible, given things like PATRIOT) describing just what the bill means. Its just fustrating to me when the media (generally but I know there are a few good eggs) focuses on who said what and gives almost no coverage to who voted what. I mean really when it comes to congress, what counts is how they vote and not what they say. Oh Well.
      --
      Slashdot is an anagram for Has Dolts, and I am Dolt number 468543
    8. Re:Voting Records of Reps by BVD · · Score: 1

      This is a good idea, but I would focus on the backend and skip the commentary. That way you will not dilute the service with your views. Instead, collect a group of volunteers who will add their take on each bill. Let the subscribers pick and choose which person's view they want to see.

      If you do this correctly, you can then sell the service at a very small fee to special interest groups. These groups could then offer to send emails to their followers with their slant on the votes.
      Send an email to beer at midsouth.rr.com if you decide to proceed. I would love to contribute some code to this.

  17. Good Site but It's Sad by sepluv · · Score: 5, Interesting
    First I would say this site is a very good idea. I do not think people should judge it as a "propoganda machine" yet. It certainly does not look that way to me. It uses some bad HTML and does not validate (even the homepage has invalid HTML) but it is not bad (and /. is probably worse). I have not looked at it all but it seems very comprehensive and interesting from the perspective of a non-USAn.

    I am not in the US but I must say that I think the US Constitution is very well written and a great model for any nation (even if I may not totally disagree with small parts). I just read the Constitution and Bill of Rights and it it is well-written, timeless (i.e.: still applicable) and looks like the authors really cared about democracy and wanted to start a true democratic republic where the people had the power (and were not controlled by a government but had ccontrol over a truly democratic congress).

    However, the more I read of the Constitution, the more it seems that the modern governments of the USA try to break every rule (just go through them) it sets (to the extent that I believe many countries are far more democratic). Something I did not know that is interesting is that it seems to implie that the USA government is not allowed to have a permenent army but when attacked the citizens may form one for a short period (hence the right to bear arms, I guess). Throughout it really does put the citizens control, but, I guess, it did not work...

    --
    Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
    [This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
    1. Re:Good Site but It's Sad by Acidic_Diarrhea · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's easy to lodge claims against the U.S. government when you don't actually cite an instance of the government breaking "every rule."

      --
      I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
    2. Re:Good Site but It's Sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
      First, this is an archive of historic documents, why do you worry that it will be interpeted as a "propoganda machine"?


      Also, the Constitution does not, in any way, forbid a standing military. In fact the US (under the Consitition) has always had some form of standing military and primary role of the President is to command the military. The right to bear arms is often interpted as a counter balance to the military; the idea being it is harder for the military to take over if the populace is armed.


      I do not agree that the government is trying to break the Constition. The Consitition is always being tested and reinterpeted in its application. Today there are very reasonable worries about government infringment on rights. But there have also been times in the past when the constitional rights came under great strain (such as the Civil War).

    3. Re:Good Site but It's Sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "Something I did not know that is interesting is that it seems to implie that the USA government is not allowed to have a permenent army ..."

      The U.S. Army is allowed and specified. You might have missed it as the documents are somewhat long. It's at Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, where "The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States;" This allows an Army and Navy for the U.S.(federal), and militias of the people (state).

      "... but when attacked the citizens may form one for a short period ..."

      The Army, Navy and state militias were/are standing entities that are under the command of the President when called into action in service of U.S. interests."

      "... (hence the right to bear arms, I guess)."

      At the time, males (generally speaking) of the age of majority were members of the state-run militias, and had the right to bear arms as members of the militia. The ongoing debate concerning the right to bear arms, is whether the right is conferred upon the states (Supreme Court decisions) or upon the people individually (Ashcroft, NRA).

    4. Re:Good Site but It's Sad by sepluv · · Score: 1
      this is an archive of historic documents, why do you worry that it will be interpeted as a "propoganda machine"
      I was refering to an earlier comment that described it as such and I do not think it is at all.
      Also, the Constitution does not, in any way, forbid a standing military.
      If you read the bit about the military it could be construed as saying that there should not be a permanent army (e.g: one should be created when attacked) (particularly see the 2-year rule). I am not sure if that is exactly what it means but I am not sure what else it could mean. I thought that bit was surprsing and may be topical given the current war. I may be misinterpreting.
      primary role of the President is to command the military
      Ye, I saw that too. Would that be like this? ;-)
      I do not agree that the government is trying to break the Constitution.
      But do you agree that they are (even if not trying) with the numerous invasions of privacy and removal of rights (like the DMCA) which are on /. all the time?
      But there have also been times in the past when the constitional rights came under great strain (such as the Civil War).
      I did not say that it was necessarily a recent thing. My point was that, it looks no more democratic than countries without a clear constitution (and less democratic than many). This seems to indicate that, whether the Governments powers are set in stone or not, they will be abused (or, maybe, that typical random citizens do not think that their rights are that important - at least, not until they are directly and personally affected by the removal of them).
      --
      Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
      [This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
    5. Re:Good Site but It's Sad by sepluv · · Score: 1
      It's at Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, where "The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States;" This allows an Army and Navy for the U.S.(federal), and militias of the people (state).
      Now I think about it, it may be saying that the individual states have standing armies but not the country as a whole (if it is saying what I think it is).

      Also, see my cousin (to this) reply.

      --
      Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
      [This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
    6. Re:Good Site but It's Sad by kinnell · · Score: 1
      Ye, I saw that too. Would that be like this

      That reminds me of a conversation I had with a german colleague. He suggested that the whole matter could be sorted out if Bush and Hussein had a gunfight at dawn.

      --
      If I seem short sighted, it is because I stand on the shoulders of midgets
  18. Typical Bureaucracy... by netsharc · · Score: 1

    What, April Fools was 4 days ago, typical bureaucracy always delaying things!

    Yeah right it's not an April Fools, the government really wants to make sure the rights of American citizens and the actions of the government are well documented?

    Oh shit, when it's not an April Fools Joke then it's your Ministry of Information. Its name almost sounds like it too.

    "I did not have sexual relations with that woman. I really never did. What woman are you even talking about?"

    --
    What time is it/will be over there? Check with my iPhone app!
  19. The correct answer: by phillymjs · · Score: 1

    "In 1215 at Runnymede, doo-dah, doo-dah..."

    Which sort of proves the point that things are more easily remembered when put in a catchy song.

    ~Philly

  20. Re:not interested by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    fucking loser American

  21. Oops by arvindn · · Score: 1

    NARA goes online, is welcomed with a hearty slashdotting and goes down in a heap of flames... what an eventful start!

  22. Re:Yes, it's worth making these documents availabl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Just rewrite the history books so there never was any of your so called, "right to privacy."

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

  23. fristy pr0st by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    COCK

  24. Re:Huh? NARA's been online for a long time by ctwxman · · Score: 1

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but this order relates to their not being able to go on strike... not their ability to strike airplanes.

  25. Solaris? by mao+che+minh · · Score: 1

    According to nmap, the government decided that it is best to use Solaris 8 to run the site. Hmmm...good choice I guess. I was really hoping that it would be BSD, but I guess it really is dead at 4.8. =)

    1. Re:Solaris? by SiMac · · Score: 2, Funny

      I hope you used a scan you can't detect...It's never good to nmap the government.

  26. Federal Register could use some updating by mikey573 · · Score: 1

    That's nice and all, but it would be nice if they massively improved access to the Federal Register. As an environmental engineer dealing with air quality issues, I have to look up regs all the time for changes, so I can atest it is terribly slow. So slow, EPA took all the effort to put the environmental portion of the Federal Register on their own website.

    1. Re:Federal Register could use some updating by dmeranda · · Score: 3, Informative

      It is interesting that you link to the GPO website for the FR rather than the NARA site. The official record keeper and editor of the FR is NARA, wheras the GPO is just responsible for the physicial reproduction and publication. Both run websites, but I find the NARA site to be much better. Also don't forget their joint website Regulations.Gov which went online earlier this year to try to better track proposed regulations still in their comment period and keep the US public better informed.

      For those who don't know, the Federal Register is perhaps the most important function of the US National Archives, and most relevent to US citizens' day-to-day activities. I especially like the fact the that NARA FR website is updated daily with each new issue, including a very well organized table of contents. Furthermore each "publication" within the FR is available in both text and PDF format (no proprietary MS formats here!).

      Perhaps of the few things which I would like to see improved are: (1) online avilability of FR issues prior to 1998, (2) more frequent revision of the CFR, (3) easier cross reference between issues, dates, and page numbers, (4) an RSS feed of the daily table of contents, (5) FTP access to the FR, and (6) digitally signed (GPG?) issues.

      As far as the functional duties of the NARA, keeping the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and so forth are incredibly important, but usually don't affect the citizen directly...those historic documents' power really is expressed indirectly by governing what Congress can do and how the Justice department works...they are just the framework on which the bulk of the legislation and regulations hang. Please don't get me wrong, those foundational documents are what defines the US and and our freedoms, and as such are the most important documents we have. But seriously those documents are very stable and unchanging and don't require much action on the part of the NARA to maintain beyond being just a glorified museum.

      But the NARA is right at the center of the US government and has duties way more important than playing museum.

      The Federal Register is where the many thousands and thousands of highly detailed regulations, notices, presidental orders and so forth are recorded. It is the very presence of these writings in the Federal Register which makes them official and binding on the US citizens. The Federal Register is the primary means by which the government informs the country about what it expects us to do and not do. And it is the NARA which has the ultimately important responsibility of recording what's official and what's not. That's an incredibly powerful position if you think about it.

  27. Evidence? by Hiigara · · Score: 1

    Seems to me like this site is gathering evidence for U.S. Crimes against the people that is sure to becoming in a couple of years. Oh well, try not to completely Slashdot it, I want a look into the past, maybe I'll learn when we went wrong.

  28. loc.gov by Anderlan · · Score: 2, Informative

    Has the US Code, the above important documents, and thomas.loc.gov has current and past legislation; all this was up in 94.
    What's new here?

    --
    KLAATU, BORADA, NIh*ahem*
    1. Re:loc.gov by Anderlan · · Score: 1

      ok, ic, nm, this is another gov site. I should have looked closer. Viva redundancy.

      --
      KLAATU, BORADA, NIh*ahem*
  29. Help us build our data base by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's great!, Now the FBI can track all those pesky citizens that actually care about their rights. Thank god they passed the Patriot Act!

  30. Perhaps I'm just an eternal optimist... by Lordfly · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    But I think this shows that certain parts of the US government isn't all bad. Sure, there are some rotten apples, and quite a few of them are leading these 4 years (*coughAshcroftcough*), but at least the ENTIRE beaucracy isn't totally corrupt as to believe the US Constitution is moot. Which you might believe if you read all the latest comments on Slashdot.

    Maybe this just shows that an entire beauracracy cannot become totally evil, or totally good.

    But that's just me rambling, I guess.

    josh

    --
    hookers and grits.
  31. it doesn't matter by zogger · · Score: 2, Interesting

    --those documents have no relevance to reality anymore. The executive, judicial and legislative branches ignore them, they are almost completely corrupt and compromised now, the cops and military just take and follow orders, any orders. We have a theoretical constitutionally based representative republic, in reality, we have a totalitarian technofuedalistic autoaucracy that is a blend of socialism and corporatism, that runs on crimes, bribery, blackmail, state organized "terror" and massive bureaucratic malfeasance and indifference.

    There are so many examples it's a waste of time to list them. We have millions of people who already can read, they are fully aware of the concepts contained,they even go so far as to get arested to challenge laws, and it's a complete dismal failure for the most part. We don't have the critical mass numbers of those sorts of people. When the "fix is in" to the extent it is now,and with the levels of apathy we have and the obvious demonization efforts and mass psyops being used, there's nothing short of using number 4 in the list of "boxes" we have to effect any meaningful change. I'm sure you know which that "box" is, the list that starts with "the soapbox".

    I am cynical and pessimistic of this nation changing to anything but "more" big brotherism. If there was even a 10% drop in the amount of money, time and effort put into entertainments like fictional TV, movies, music, sports, videogames, etc and put into honest awareness rising and activism,and if millions of people would just shun either working for "the man" or would engage in a universal massive "no" saying to illegal and unethical orders and edicts when they are given, then maybe, perhaps, but I have seen no reductions in that after watching and being a political activst for just at 4 decades now. Next year I'll hit my 4th decade exactly from when I started actually working politics and various issues as a major part of my life. In fact I'd say there's LESS activism and awareness now then back then, even with the tremendously easy ways we have to communicate and get information now. And the various so called laws passed recently, based on extremely coincidental reichstagg events timing? And the level of intrusive and manipulative technology available to governments,with any numbers of intelligent people perfectly willing to sell, maintain and profit from them, and their accumulated and planned accumulations of advanced and exotic weaponry along with just a massiveincrease in conventional weaponry they have spread out to police departments all over, and their obvious perfect willingness to use these devices and their human mercenary "assets"? Nope, I'm extremely pessimistic.

    I'm not saying I have personally given up, but I will say I am heavy into what is in essence a plan B now, just personal survival basically, and I have been for around 6 years even moreso than in the years previous to that,and have been waiting for the second shoe to drop. We are one major so called "foreign terrorist" attack away from it being all over when it comes to ANY so-called born-with personal soverign freedoms or ANY honesty in government. And that second shoe drop could come this very year in my estimation.

    1. Re:it doesn't matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are so many examples it's a waste of time to list them.

      I have lots of counter arguments but I am too lazy to list them, too. Do you have any original thoughts or do you just spew the same old anti-American, anti-establishment, anti-government bullshit that every freak like you has said 100 times before.

      The truth is that people like only contribute to the problem. You'd rather rant and rave and spew propoganda then actually accomplish something. If you want to change the world get a job teaching in the inner city instead of marching around with your "Fuck Bush" signs.

    2. Re:it doesn't matter by Iguanaphobic · · Score: 1

      At least he's got the balls to post using an ID.

      --
      Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power.
  32. Strange Typo by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If the National Archives and Records Administration keeps the US Constitution, it's a museum, not an archive.

    With the way things are going, they may as well put all of the federal government's documents and operations online, since there will be no practical way for any alleged citizen to get into the soon-to-be-made W3S (Washington DC Special Security Sector).

    You can pick any event in American history to show the downfall starting (my favorite is Shay's Rebellion), but after the events of 1913 (Federal Reserve and income tax), 1933 (overblown socialism and anti-gun law), 1945 (atomic/nuclear bombs and OSS/CIA), the Cold War, the War on Poverty, the War on Drugs, and now the War on Anything Islamic ... well, it's time to say that the Republic is long dead.

    Get over it. Adapt and survive. Buy weapons, ammunition, reloading equipment, tools, books ... I know I am. As Bruce Sterling has implied, life moves in clades, and if we need something solid and dependable around, we'll have it orbit ourselves.

    --
    [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
  33. Woohoo! by dacarr · · Score: 1

    Of all the things to be archived on the 'net, this is probably one of the best to find.

    --
    This sig no verb.
  34. This is nothing... by CoderByBirth · · Score: 1

    ... In Sweden we have something called "Offentlighetsprincipen". This means that all documents used in federal administration (except those specifically tagged as "confidential") are publically available.

    You can walk into any business governed by the state and ask to see any document.

    1. Re:This is nothing... by c.emmertfoster · · Score: 1

      ...In America we have something called "modified-laissez-faire-capitalism," where we get to keep most of the money we make, you seal eating socialist.

      --
      We can neither love nor pity nor forgive. If you make a slip in handling us you die!
    2. Re:This is nothing... by odin53 · · Score: 1

      The US has the same principle. NARA is for archives and records (hence the name); as you might expect, the US government has a LOT of archives and records, and it's good to have an agency that has as its sole mission to preserve everything for posterity.

      You can get any federal documents that aren't classified (as in, "confidential" or "secret"), and the US government produces A LOT of documents. Also, laws like FOIA set general limits to how long classified documents can stay classified.

  35. Poll topic? by eswan · · Score: 1

    Has there been a slashdot poll on one's favorite of the bill of rights?
    <1> freedom of religion, press, speech
    <2> freedom to bear arms
    <3> no quartering of soldiers
    <4> no unreasonable search and seizure
    <5> due process of law
    <6> right to speedy trial
    <7> right to jury trial
    <8> no excessive bail
    <9> bill of rights doesn't deny rights not enumerated
    <10> powers not enumerated in constitution reserved for states, people
    <X> right of cowboy neal to bare ???

    How many of these rights that haven't been infringed on in the past 12 months?

    1. Re:Poll topic? by stwrtpj · · Score: 1
      powers not enumerated in constitution reserved for states, people

      To be a proper /. poll, this should read:

      powers not enumerated in constitution reserved for states, you insensitive clod.

      right of cowboy neal to bare ???

      I dearly hope this right has been infringed on.

      --
      Karma: Frotzed (mostly due to the Frobozz Magic Karma Company)
  36. This is good.... by miketang16 · · Score: 1

    But how long before the easily accessible records of the past become the easily alterable records of the past... I can just see people going, "Well it's NARA, it has to be true."

    --
    -------
    "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
    -- George Orwell
  37. Your questions show how much is already lost. by Erris · · Score: 3, Interesting
    "Daddy, is it true you used to have the right to privacy?"

    First the question won't be asked because the meaning of the word privacy will have been altered beyond recognition. You child will think they have a "right to privacy" and that it's worth dying for, but they will have no clue to what this means:

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

    The "right to privacy" is a diluted positively asserted thing which can and does allow unreasonable searches without warrent specified by the much more powerful limit on government action above.

    "Daddy, is it true you used to have the right to see the evidence against you and defend against it?"

    "Amendment V

    No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

    Your child won't know what a Grand Jury is and due process of law has already been perverted so no such thing is needed. The secret court says you are a terrorist, knowing how they know would alowy you to hurt more people off to jail you go.

    What's all this fuss over anyway? We stared at the Soviets and global destruction for 50 years without becoming a police state. China is still around. Now, becase some jackass in Afganistan manages to kill a few thousand people we panic?

    What do we think we are going to stop? Terrorists WILL get their hands on nukes, they will take out cities and nothing can be done about it anymore than Israel can keep people from pipe bombing cafes. The world will go on.

    The only thing we can assure is what kind of world that will be. We can become another slave state or we continue to offer hope to the world for a better tomorrow. If we get lazy and turn on each other not only will the terrorist have won, they will have been right.

    --
    DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
    1. Re:Your questions show how much is already lost. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do we think we are going to stop? Terrorists WILL get their hands on nukes, they will take out cities and nothing can be done about it anymore than Israel can keep people from pipe bombing cafes. The world will go on.

      What a great defeatist attitude. It's a little like saying "we're all going to die anyway so why not kill ourselves now?" Terrorism is not a forgone conclusion and there will not be a better world until you eradicate terrorism and all religous funatics. The question is whether you are willing to lessen some of your civil liberties now or wait until things get so bad that they have to declare martial law?

    2. Re:Your questions show how much is already lost. by d34thm0nk3y · · Score: 1

      Wow....does this mean we get to take out that crazy christian tv channel? They all look like fanatics to me.

  38. So will they... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    tell everyone who really shot JFK ? Probably not... this site will likely be a waste of time and even if they have important information, Americans won't read it. They get all the information they need to make judgments on US/World affairs from the last bastions of journalist integrity ... CNN and FOX.

    !!! ROLF !!!

  39. Public docs... It's already been done. by Flabio · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm involved in a project called bluemud.org, and we already have most of these documents available. Plus on bluemud.org they're searchable by topic, keyword, and publication date.

    We have over a quarter million documents waiting to get filtered into the directory, of which about 1100 have already been processed and are available to the general public. The rest of them are being filtered as quickly as possible and for impatient people, they can be viewed by registering on the site.

    1. Re:Public docs... It's already been done. by sekspissedol · · Score: 1

      Great project, but you need WAY more librarian folk. It looks like it WILL BE the place to go for all things ascii eventually. I pledge to process 1 file a day. If you could just get 1000 people to do the same, bluemud would be the total flippin' bomb! Good luck, and can you post more "sex with horse"-files and BeeGees lyrics?

      seks pissed ol

  40. wow by pahpabut · · Score: 0
    I gotta say it again.
    WOW. /. discovers Administrations and Archives.

    It's not like NARA hasn't existed before. Every public document has been accessible for quite some time, paper, pergament or digitalized.

    /. discovers Government Records. How neat. Welcome to the Information Age SupaHighway.

  41. Good luck finding JFK's brain matter... by Sarcasmooo! · · Score: 1

    ...they did a bang-up job of ensuring ready access to that fairly essential evidence.

  42. Re:Huh? NARA's been online for a long time by corebreech · · Score: 1

    OK.

    This order applies only to the NAVAL SPECIAL WARFARE DEVELOPMENT GROUP, and it was signed the day after the French periodical Paris Match published radar tapes showing something sharing the sky with TWA-800.

    It's too bad the shitheads here at /. can't accept anything that doesn't come dripping out of CmdrTaco's hemarrhoid-infested anus, because if they bothered to actually look into why TWA-800 was felled they'd be amazed to discover that it fits right in with all the other uber-geek material posted here.

  43. How Ironic... by terraformer · · Score: 1
    it is that McCarthy's censure is featured.
    Senate Resolution 301: Censure of Senator Joseph McCarthy (1954)
    On December 2, 1954, the Senate voted to censure Senator Joseph McCarthy, who had led the fight in Congress to root out suspected Communists from the Federal Government. The censure described his behavior as "contrary to senatorial traditions."
    --
    Who are you? The new #2 Who is #1? You are #617565. I am not a number, I am a free man! Muhahaha.
    1. Re:How Ironic... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Either you don't know the meaning of irony (very likely) or you don't know anything about McCarthyism (also very likely).

  44. Not the Original Magna Carta... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Of course, it is way too late for anyone to read this, but this is not the original Magna Carta, signed by King John at Runnymede in 1215. All of the copies of that are in the UK. One is at the British Library


    This is a copy, confirmed by Edward I in 1297, and on display at the National Archives in DC.

  45. Baldrick: I thought they came in packs of ten by cryptogryphon · · Score: 1
  46. Can someone point me towards the new stuff? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The NARA has been online for a few years now, and this website doesn't look any different from what I was browsing through for WWII photos several months ago. It's a pretty great site, but this isn't new folks.

  47. "Goes Online?" by MarsCtrl · · Score: 1

    Besides the more mainstream stuff, there are also some really interesting oddball things hanging around. For instance, John F. Kennedy's Favorite Waffle Recipe. Or a letter from a 12-year-old Fidel Castro to Franklin D. Roosevelt. Or, most essential of all, When Nixon met Elvis.

    Although I'm a little confused about what exactly the big news is...I've been browsing the NARA website for about 5 years now.

    --

    I was going to put a sig here, but I had already submitted the message.
  48. Old News by sco08y · · Score: 1

    NARA.gov has been online for at least two years, and now simply links to archives.gov.

  49. Privacy, accountability, and so forth by anarchivist · · Score: 1

    As an archivist-in-training (currently on leave from a grad program), I couldn't but help comment on this discussion. Archivists, as a whole - even those who work for NARA - are mostly a progressive bunch, who seek to ensure access to information rather than restrict it. We have our own set of professional ethics, namely the Code of Ethics for Archivists published by the Society of American Archivists. Archives do not fundamentally exist to be hidden - they are a source of information to be preserved and to be accessed. However, in certain cases, restrictions on records exist to protect the creators. For example, medical records, if cited by a scholar, must often not name the patient in any identifiable way. However, we often ask donors to think about the restrictions they place on their records so that the records will, eventually, be available. I suggest that you look at the position statements made by the SAA and judge for yourself. Granted, not all archivists agree on them, but the SAA is a fairly tight knit organization and the position it sets forth often represent the majority of its members.

    --
    -- anarchivist@noise.annNOSPAMarbor.mi.us s/NOSPAM/-
  50. How about the proper weblink?! by Phantom_24 · · Score: 1

    I don't get 404'd....i get a stinkin' MS website asking if I'd like to search for something else and that they can't find what I'm looking for!

    1. Re:How about the proper weblink?! by stwrtpj · · Score: 1
      I don't get 404'd....i get a stinkin' MS website asking if I'd like to search for something else and that they can't find what I'm looking for!

      In other news, citing the rising tide of civil unrest among programmers and the radical open source movement, George W. Bush appointed Bill Gates of Microsoft Chancellor of the United States. The Chancellor promptly issued emergency powers for himself to better disseminate MS products throughout the US in an attempt to stablize the country.

      --
      Karma: Frotzed (mostly due to the Frobozz Magic Karma Company)
  51. Jesus Christ please help us! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did anyone see the transcript of the "Constitution"?

    I read it and it is Treason! It is not transcripts of the original "Constitution"; it is the transcripts of the "Constitution" after it has been ammended by all ammendments after the 10th!

    ABSOLUTELY FUCKING MARVELOUS! When they said they were providing the transcripts of the "Constitution", they didn't provide just the original "Constitution, but all the construed articles and and effects after it was ammended.

    TREASON! Show the original CONSTITUTION, you fucking assholes!

  52. Hello? Revolution already started by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you remember somthing called the GATT treaty? That's the *thing* that said everyone must be assigned a Mark Of The Beast^H^H^H^H^HSocial Security. The GATT is completly unconstitutional because it attempts to force everyone into a contract with the Social Security Administration. Read the United Nation's constitution and you'll know that it is responsible for "social security" and it does this by working through the IMF to make the U.S. Trasury send off all those pesky SS-5 forms to thet hospitals/calfing_institutions and other places.

    Where's the revolution? There can't be one when there are no Common Law courts. Goto http://chansen.tzo.com and read-up.

  53. Cuba by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I found this criticism of Cuba in the US State Department Country Reports on Human Rights Practices :

    "On June 2, the National Office for the Receipt of Information on Human Rights Violations in Cuba reported that workers at a popular cyber cafe had been instructed to review all outgoing e-mails and to track websites viewed by individual patrons. "

    Of course you don't hear about that sort of thing happening in "The Land of the Free".

    :^)

  54. A Modest Proposal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why don't we all email the hi-res versions of the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights to all our government officials - Bush, Cheney, Ashcroft, and your Senators, and Congressperson.

  55. Slave. by Erris · · Score: 1
    A coward, anonymous for good reasons writes:

    What a great defeatist attitude. It's a little like saying "we're all going to die anyway so why not kill ourselves now?"

    No, I say we are going to live so let's live well.

    Terrorism is not a forgone conclusion and there will not be a better world until you eradicate terrorism and all religous funatics. The question is whether you are willing to lessen some of your civil liberties now or wait until things get so bad that they have to declare martial law?

    Eradicate all religous fanatics? Hmmmm, sounds bad. Don't need to violate anyone's rights to do that, no sir-ree. There's a nice place for you just off the coat of Florida. It's a big sunny island where everyone gets along because they have eradicated all the fanatics and their rights. I've never heard of any plane hijacking there. Why don't you go hang out there for a while, I'm sure you will be happy.

    --
    DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
  56. Whoa..was punctuation by obnoximoron · · Score: 1

    invented after the Magna Carta?

  57. This news is 10 years old by FreekyGeek · · Score: 1

    Uhhhh... this news is at least ten years old. I know this because I was the system administrator who helped put up NARA's first web site back in the early 90's, and NARA's first webmaster. I remember putting the Constitution and Declaration exhibits online (though I didn't make the actual web pages).

    NARA was one of the first government agencies on the web, primarily at first to provide access to genealogical research.

    1. Re:This news is 10 years old by naramule · · Score: 1

      As an employee of the National Archives I was surprised to see this site as a *new* thing also. It's been up in its present form for at least a year and under the nara.gov flag before that.

      My job involves declassifying all those juicy records everyone wants to see. After many years of doing this I can assure you there precious few things the US government CAN keep secret. It really gives me a good laugh to see all the conspiracy types out there saying the government is covering something up - UFO's, JFK, NWO types - scholars all. The best success the US government ever had with covering something up was when Nixon tried it. Let's face it folks, the *gubbament* just isn't that smart.

      He who has an ear, let him hear.

  58. byte me... by zogger · · Score: 1

    ... byte me anonymous dough boy. Yes, I DO a lot more than "just rant", and have done so for years. In fact, marching in demos is something I DON'T do, and haven't since a long time ago. I quit marching when I witnessed a group of cops kill someone, a kid they pulled at random out of the crowd, they gang stomped him to death by kicking in his body until he was a mass of blood and gore. They got completely away with it. They were laughing when they did it. I went as far as a personal interview with the lieutenant governor of my state over that one, the end result was nothing happened about it.

    And yes, you can say I am "anti" that sort of "government".

  59. Re:Yes, it's worth making these documents availabl by Jonathan+the+Nerd · · Score: 1

    Who modded this "funny?" There should be a "Score +1, depressingly true" mod.

    --
    Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are not necessarily my own, as I've not yet had my medication today.
  60. Common Cause Megavote by Sarcasmooo! · · Score: 1

    Go here and sign up at the bottom of the page.

  61. Last Post! by alpg · · Score: 0

    There is a good deal of solemn cant about the common interests of capital
    and labour. As matters stand, their only common interest is that of cutting
    each other's throat.
    -- Brooks Atkinson, "Once Around the Sun"

    - this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...