Bruce Sterling On Total Information Awareness

securitas writes "Declan McCullagh interviews Bruce Sterling about Total Information Awareness (renamed Terrorist Information Awareness and raising concerns) or 'Poindexter's nutty scheme' as Sterling thinks of it. He predicts TIA will destabilize the government and lead to internal KGB-style coups. Whether you agree with him or not it makes for thought-provoking reading."

Comments

Read the constitution for your answer

[nurb432]

A militia is constituted of *private citizens*, so *I* am part of the militia, as defined and intended by the founders of this country. It is the rights of the individual that the constitution is deigned to protect, not the 'professional military' or the 'government' in general. So yes, I do understand the *entire* amendment, and am curious of your point.

Related to your first comment, isn't that what I said.. that we re heading to the arena of socialism?

Re:Read the constitution for your answer

[Ken@WearableTech]

I'm not worried about the counterexamples(which are poor because you don't think about fear. Iraq and Afghanistan had people ready to be controlled with fear. American's do not fear our government, as the people of other nations have had cause to fear their governments).

I was just thinking about what you and Hitler have in common. You should read more about him, I bet we have just scratched the surface!

*sigh* Taking the flame bait....

[RLiegh]

To all appearences, you're full of shit, and probably trolling.

A socialist country has state health care, our health care system is generally regarded as being the worst in the western world, mostly due to the LACK of government intervention and funding.

Ditto for education, wich the neoconservatives are trying to eradacate as fast as they can.

So, what are traits of a socialist country is it you beleive that we have? Point by point, if you would, starting with a CLEAR definition of what you consider socialist.

If you can think that much for yourself, that is [unless G Gordon Liddy is due to come on, in which case I can understand that you would bail out of the conversation].

Thank you for your time and prompt consideration of this matter.

Re:relieving

[Malcontent]

The paralells are spooky. There is no denying that. Hell we even have concentration camps set up for muslims.

Re:Well

[slashdot_commentator]

Its an irrelevant point in debate camp or a court of law. Its irrelevant if you're a Republican worshipping fascist who believes its okay to subvert the US Constitution if a Republican administration deems the action to be in the Nation's (i.e. its) best interest.

Sammy "the Bull" Gravano is a murderer. That fact that he isn't a "convicted" murderer doesn't change that fact. The fact that Poindexter deliberately lied under oath to cover up Irangate means he's guilty of treason. That he wasn't "convicted" of it doesn't change that fact either.

Its this miserable spindoctor dissembling by Conservative scum that allow crap like the Patriot Act to become law and invasions of countries over WMD that never existed. (Its also the fault of people who don't call them out on it.)

Re:relieving

[kcbrown]

Look, as much as I think the Bush administration is a threat to civil liberties and is terrible in all sorts of other ways, to compare them generally to Nazis is an insult to all the sacrifices billions of people made in the war that destroyed German fascism. We may not have a perfect (or even good) government, but to suggest it's a goverment that will make genocide a household word or start a war that will leave upwards of 50 million people dead is a bit of a stretch, don't you think?

In 1933, or even 1937 (4 years after the Nazis gained power, which is roughly the same amount of time that the Bush administration has been in office), few people thought that Germany would start a war that would engulf the world, and nobody thought that it would be the nation to make genocide a household word. So I wouldn't be comforted by the fact that the same is true of the U.S. at the moment, if I were you.

The U.S. has already invaded and conquered its first country under the Bush administration, and it's unclear at this point how long it will be before it does so again. But I, for one, have little reason to believe that Iraq will be the only one that undergoes a "regime change" at the hands of the Bush administration before all is said and done. I don't think we'll see World War III, but that's only because the situation is different: in WW2, Germany was a militarily powerful nation but it wasn't the most powerful by any means -- and it still came reasonably close to winning. Today, the U.S. is the most militarily powerful nation on the planet and everyone knows it. I don't think WW3 will happen because I don't think anyone is stupid enough to go up against the U.S. that way.

Even so, the slide towards fascism in the U.S. is very apparent to me, and the biggest thing I haven't figured out is how Bush will remain in power beyond his allowed two terms. I'm quite certain that he will try, I just don't yet have an idea of what he's likely to do to make it happen. But I have a strong suspicion that it will involve something like declaring a national state of emergency.