Slashdot Mirror
Justice Department Proud of Patriot Act Slippery Slope
frank_adrian314159 writes "Yahoo News is reporting that the DoJ has been using its increased powers under the US PATRIOT Act to pursue common criminals. DoJ Officials have been holding seminars on how to use increased wiretap powers against (non-terrorist) money launderers and drug dealers. One example in the article is the guy running a meth lab who's now up for a life sentence for 'manufacturing chemical weapons' instead of the much shorter sentence he would have been facing under the current drug laws. Wonderful, huh? Who didn't see this coming? Of course, you're a law-abiding citizen, so you have nothing to worry about, right?" Patriot Act II will allow any Federal agent to demand records from anyone who interacts with you, with no judicial oversight whatsoever.
but 1984 has finally caught up to us. Big Brother is watching you, and the people who you come in contanct with.
...and take it into the voting booth in November, 2004.
This is my post. There are many others like it. If you don't like what you read here, go try one of the others.
I hear it's nice this time of year.
Stupid people make stupid things profitable.
Prosecutor Jerry Wilson says he isn't abusing the law, which defines chemical weapons of mass destruction as "any substance that is designed or has the capability to cause death or serious injury" and contains toxic chemicals.
If I chug enough gasoline, I'll die. Let's put the Oil companies away for 12 years to life! For that matter, drink some bad water from a lake and you'll die. Put the Big Bang away for 12 - life!
On Apple Input Peripherals: They're okay, I guess, but I was really hoping for a one-key keyboard and a 109-button mouse
When did a campaign of "Compassionate Conservatism" become synonomous with "slightly to the left of Darth Vader"?
There is nothing wrong with being gay. It's getting caught where the trouble lies.
After all their definition of a chemical weapon of mass destruction is:
Prosecutor Jerry Wilson says he isn't abusing the law, which defines chemical weapons of mass destruction as "any substance that is designed or has the capability to cause death or serious injury" and contains toxic chemicals.
So why don't they go after the tobacco companies since they're manufacturing substances that meet these criteria? Oh wait, the government gets taxes from the sales of these products, nevermind.
Things you think are in the Constitution, but are not.
John Ashcroft has been touring to gain popular support for Patriot Act II. Nevermind that his speeches are invitation-only, to "safe" crowds of police officers in order to avoid inevitable protests... is anyone else creeped out that the executive branch has so many characters making such public efforts at lawmaking rather than just the execution of law?
Isn't that what people used to say. Well guess what. It is happening here. Right now before your very eyes. Remember that when 2004 rolls around and be sure to thank Dumbya and his minions by sending them packing.
1984 was never meant to be a how-to guide.
When all else fails, run.
I want to see some conservatives comment now on how Republicans are "conservative". Republicans want even bigger government than the Democrats. I am tired of this, everytime I read the news paper or watch TV George Bush is asking for more money for stupid shit. Hundreds of billions for building schools and hospitals in Iraq, Billions for Africa, Billions for this and Billions for that as if we have money to just throw into the fire, and then as our so called homeland security, we now spy on each other and use the patriot act as some kinda control against the people?!
I cant understand the logic of these Republicans, they seem to be far from conservative, Republicans seem to want Global Government which scares the shit out of me far more than the big US gov democrats.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
It seems odd to me that in one of the great democracies, individual freedoms and rights are becoming more and more compromised. The real concern for me is that American culture permeates just about every Western culture. Does this mean that the American legislative way will soon arrive here in New Zealand ? I hope not - but it's interesting to see that Australia seems to be using the USA as a role model recently.
Never, ever lose a file again. Ever.
Unfortunately, many people didn't see this coming, and I just can't understand why. History has repeatedly shown that when any authority is given powers it WILL use them whenever it feels, and it WILL eventually abuse them.
It's similar to the recent case un England where demonstrators at an arms fair were detained using anti-terrorism measures.
I find it ironic that people demonstrating against the sale of weapons, some of the same kind used by terrorists are then arrested using laws designed to reduce terrorism.
-- MartinG To mail me: echo kewyjlcxyzvjfxbqwh | tr bcefhjklqvwxyz
Oh jesus christ..it's people like this that scare the bejesus out of me, even more so than the Patriot Act itself. Prosecutors are using the law, that's not the issue. The issue is that the law is fucked up! Expanded wire tappings not requiring a judge's signature..the ability for prosecutors to listen in on attorney-client conversations without their knowledge, the list goes on. And, for what it's worth, I sure as hell don't think someone cooking up crystal meth should be charged as a god-damn terrorist. I much prefer to sit back and allow darwinism to purge the idiots from our midst.
Don't be a zoa (zealous overbearing ass), be happy!
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin
If the federal government persists in the behaviours that it has been engaging in lately, all that they'll do is force people who care to either leave the U.S., or to engage in rebellion.
I hope that the courts start thinking with some sanity, and dismiss entirely charges against people, despite their illegal acts, because of the treatment that they're receiving at the hands of law enforcement officials in charges and the like. If someone is doing something illegal, like manufacturing an illicit substance whose creation process is relatively dangerous, they deserve the trouble that they'd get, but they do no deserve to be branded "Terrorist". The DA or police who came up with the charge deserve to be sued for libel.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
Double standards? Doesnt the US military give its soldiers Methampetamine?
Bush and Blair ate my sig!
...is there any substance not lethal in high enough doses? Btw, the "contains toxic chemicals" part merely restates the first part - the very definition of toxic is what is harmful to people.
I imagine even water is outlawed under this law, after all you can drown from it. Polluted water at least. Nevermind air, which is definately lethal if injected into the bloodstream.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
When you discover that your latest rant about your taxes in some neo-fascist political forum gets you a midnight visit from the Feds and afterwards, you are never seen or heard of again, you won't get any sympathy from anyone. You won't deserve any.
One of the few comforting things about the "criminalization of dissent" is the certainty that some people like you will get exactly what you deserve. From a government you're stupid enough to trust.
Tech Public Policy stuff
This is very much like how the Soviet's used to do it. If one read the Soviet era constitution, citizens in theory were told they had all sorts or rights and freedoms, including to due process, and that these could only be violated for the most heneous of crimes, such as treason. On the other hand, the Soviet treason laws were written so that anyone could be easily and effectivily charged under them :).
Today, in America, we now say due process and freedom is to be enjoyed by all, except those potential or suspected terrorists. Again, the problem is that our terrorist laws being so written that anyone may be charged under them.
And we now have our very own gulogs to boot. What a fitting description for both Guantanimo bay, and for the military brigg in Virginia where several actual American citizens have been held for close to a year now without any rights whatsoever.
Ding! I prefer that they legalize, homogenize, and tax the holy fark outta drugs. We can get rid of dealers, we can get rid of drugs supporting terrorism (wow!) and we can purge some of the idiot pool. Aside from that, the "War-on-Drugs" is completely unwinnable. You cannot win a war against your own tax payers.
Well said, but I don't totally agree.
I agree with you that we need to throw the book at more people (drug dealers, mafia), but I don't advocate throwing out all our old laws that dealt with it, and replacing them with one big "Evil is illegal and subject to death penalty" law.
The Patriot Act (and sequel) is too vague, gives the government powers that are too broad and have no oversight. Don't you remember how Schwarzenegger wiretapped his wife's phones and carried out full surveillance? He had no oversight in that instance. I think we should fix the numerous drug laws, not supersede them all with one vague and broad bill.
I'm worried about the idea that the government can pull up my record of video rentals, phone calls, and library books, and there not being anyone who has to approve of it (like a judge or jury).
Worse, if the FBI came to my place of employment, I would be forced to hand over my pharmacy and health records of any person over to them. They may not have or need a warrant, only a badge. Congress unanimously passed the HIPAA privacy acts for patients, and some guy with a badge can just walk in and take everything without caring about the other laws. How do I know this isnt just some cop who wants to see if his wife has VD?
Typical 'tough on crime' idiocy. You forgot to say 'Give a fair trial and hang 'em' or maybe 'It's time to clean up this town'.
The US legal system was not set up to make it easy to stamp out crime. It was set up to ensure due process, and protect the rights of the accused.
Sentences for the guilty aren't intended to match with your naive and/or hyper-literal application of a legal definition.
As for raising kids...irrelevent.
Lastly, it's every citizen's DUTY to be aware of what government does with regard civil and legal rights. It is also every citizen's duty to challenge any abridgement of those rights.
Home of the Not So Free....
A morning without coffee is like something without something else.
Where do you draw the line? Do you count petrol or sawdust as a "chemical weapon of mass destruction" because it is a substance which has the capability to cause death or serious injury"? Of course not, but it's a badly drafted law that seems to imply otherwise. I suspect the only reason you'd say methamphetamine is more of a "chemical weapon of mass destruction" than petrol or sawdust is because you disagree morally with its production.
There's two problems with vague, stretchy laws like this. First, it makes the law much less transparent - nobody quite knows what crimes they're committing, because it depends hugely on who's stretching the law and what political posture they're taking today. Second, if the public, through Congress, passes a law prohibiting chemical weapons, and it gets "extended" into an anti-drugs law without democratic debate, that's bad for democracy.
This is a separate question from whether there should be laws to lock up drug dealers for life. This is about having a society where criminal laws are plain for everyone to see.
In the part of the country where I live meth labs are a major problem in many counties. Prosecutors using these new procedures are seeing their arrest, conviction, and imprisonment rates increase.
That all sounds pretty wonderful to me. If you're making meth, you're dealing in death and ruined lives.
If you think the laws banning the manufacture of certain drugs are inadequate, then ammend them. Make them more serious than murder and rape... oh wait, they already are... The drug dealers and manufacturers are supplying an existing demand in a blackmarket that was created and is maintained by your government's disfunctional prohibition laws. If you are going to mandate what people can and cannot put into their own bodies, what they can and cannot buy and sell, then you are going to have a blackmarket for those things.
This has absolutely nothing at all to do with "terrorism" or "chemical weapons". Permitting the abuse of these laws is the first step down a steep and dangerous slippery slope of corruption and oppression. Wake up, you fools!
unless the suit actually holds up in court,
Well I don't know about all the anti-terror laws in the US, but here in the UK people can now be held without charge indefinitely if they are terror suspects. There may not be a test "in court" because it may not even get there for an "indefinitely" long time.
That is why these so called anti-terrorism measures that give special powers such as holding without charge must not be used for "normal" crimes. The usual safeguards such as courts may not even be in place.
-- MartinG To mail me: echo kewyjlcxyzvjfxbqwh | tr bcefhjklqvwxyz
It is a known fact that one full cup of regular table salt is a lethal dose. And those terrorists at Morton crank out hundreds of tons of this "weapon" every year.
Sue them!
1) I fail to have any sympathy for a guy who runs a meth lab.
2) The sad fact is, Patriot Act or no, in the US and most "civilized" countries there are so many laws that the police can pick you up anytime they want for breaking the law. They just have to care enough to target you and figure out which of the gazilla laws you inadvertently broke.
The "if you're a law abiding citizen" comment, misses the mark. There are so many laws, none of us can go through life without breaking some law. None of us are law abiding anymore, regardless of our intentions.
Also, the sentencing is so Draconian nowadays that the penalty for fighting the arrest and losing makes a plea bargain much more attractive. Given the choice between a 20 years minimum sentence and a 2 year plea bargain, most people take the plea bargain. The 20 years just scares them too much.
The problem isn't "those damn Republicans." Remember many Democrats voted for the Patriot Act. The problem is the political system. Rarely does a politician get elected because they voted to repeal a criminal law. Rarely does a politician get elected for being "soft on crime." Willie Horton anyone? Left or Right, you get votes by promising to protect "the public" and their children. That means you pass MORE laws, even if the existing laws are adequate, because that shows you did something. You pass TOUGHER penalties, because that shows you did something.
That is why we end up with drunk driving laws that set the blood alcohol level at a value lower than the margin of error on the testing devices. And, when this is pointed out to the legislature they just change the margin of error on the test. Not by changing the test, but by changing the definition of margin of error. (Next up, Congress sets the acceleration due to gravity at 11m/s^2.) Because, we HAVE to be tough on drunk drivers "for the children."
That is just one example of the stupid and unreasonable results of the "democractic" political system. I am sure you have your own examples.
I am not supporting the Patriot Act. I wish it and the system that created it wasn't so. But, don't act like this is new. Don't act like the Patriot Act is an exception. And, don't act like the US and only one party is the US plays this horrible game. It is played by both sides, all over the world, all the time.
"Compassionate Conservatism" become synonomous with "slightly to the left of Darth Vader" on 9/11/1, when Bush could get away with his normal political positions instead of having to pretend to be compassionate.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
Remember when Dubya said that he was a compassionate conservative who wanted to teach little kids to read, and get our manufacturing jobs back from those 'filthy' Mexicans. Remember when the man could barely speak the english language and was just a jolly little fool who did absolutely nothing besides oversee a sudden plunge in the economy and then came up with the brain dead idea that giving tax money to people who traditionally don't spend money?
I really miss those days. When That's My Bush was on television, it was okay to question the government and even though lots of people were unemployed it was still a pretty good time.
In case you didn't note, this is going to be a rant. Two years and three days ago, a bunch of Religious Conservatives hijacked a couple of plains and showed the US (Succesfully this time) that crazy people mean buisness. The largest terrorist attack on US soil was no longer in the hands of a crazed American, but in the hands of a bunch in another country, and thus things became scary.
The World Trade Towers were chosen because not only did a great number of people work there, and that their destruction would be economically crippling for the area and damaging to the US, but because they were symbols of what the United States stood for.
In reaction to these attacks Americans suddenly took up and saw that all of these freedoms which we enjoy and espouse (but don't abide by in countries where we pick up cheap goods from, like China and the Middle East {that's right, gas is cheap in America, come on Europeans, stand up tell everyone how much taxes impat your gas prices}), allow people easy access to pretty much whatever they want. Yup, apparently the fundamental principles of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness were total anathema to the dogma of security. Benjamin Franklin pointed out that fact and the converse, that a society cannot have both freedom and absolute security.
Esentially, 9-11 has been used to pass a Neo-Conservative agenda of global tyranny and domestic oppression. I emphasize the Neo part, because I know many conservatives, they are wonderful and nice people who have many good ideas. These people, a mixed coalition of reps and dems, are responsible for a campaign of silencing all opposition and enriching themselves and their allies upon the spoils of wars.
It is intersting to note how someone brought up 1984 earlier, it is mentioned in that book how war or the idea of such activity is wonderful at putting large populations into subservient moods. Notice how we have gone from a War on Terror (where we didn't find Osama or even put an end to the Taliban, or stop terror), to a War on Iraq (where we didn't find Sadaam and are busy ruling it like fuedal lords and expending 150+ billion on what was supposed to be a short and sweet little engagement). The American people are being manipulated in a very base manner into thinking that anything but pure agression will get us killed, and that if we vote for anyone but this psychotic faction that we will all die in some sort of hellish confligaration of biological, nuclear and chemical weapons.
I for one see that pretty much everything this administration has done has a negative value. They have done much to obfuscate their agenda and to make them appear to be 'compassionate' but those agendas were never pursued, the heavily pushed "No Child Left Behind act" has absolutely no funding and even if implemented it was only going to require more idiotic tests and dropping out of school. Where is the Aid to Africa? Where are the morals and where is the trust that we were promised in 2000? We have simply replaced blow-jobs and S&L scandals, for corporate patronage, more S&L scandals, financial mismanagement, and corruption. And Ari Fleischer and the rest of the crew lies to us as much as the Iraqi information minister lied to the people of Iraq.
Next year, when the fields narrow we need to get out there and force a change or else things will start to head from bad to worse and we will see freedoms and liberties that we once took for granted picked off one by one all in the name of some kind of security that we will never attain as long as our country remains self-centered and militaristic.
Geez.. you guys are right... It sucks that GWB is oppressing free speech and stuff. I mean, nobody can complain about the Patriot Act, Ashcroft, or the Administration without getting charged as a terrorist or getting arrested or just disappearing. I mean, there has to be hundreds of former slashdotters, indymedia types, and the like at the Death Camp in Guantanemo. My eyes have been opened to the truth. Bush and Co. are the Third Reich. Heil Ashcroft. And the media. Don't get me started about the neofascist government control of the media. Obviously, Al Franken's number one book slipped through all the government censors, but I bet they won't that happen again!
P.S. That was sarcasm.
P.P.S. I don't like the Patriot Act(s) either. I don't think its the end of life as we know it. Get a grip. Please. Leftists are so pathetically terrified of Bush and his administration its almost amusing. The amount of paranoia and blind hatred way surpasses the paranoia and blind hatred the right had with Clinton.
Trolls: The high-tech version of those morons that scrawl obscenities in public bathrooms.
Who are you going to vote for? I don't remember many Democrats being opposed to the USA PATRIOT Act when it was voted on. I think you will be hard pressed to find anyone to vote for who wants it repealed. The only time the "democractic" process will actually deliver change is where you can find some very rich people who are affected by a particular issue. In this case I think you are out of luck. Laws like this are ment for ordinary people only.
No.. youve had them roughly since 1931.
x es .htm
Its called a Social Security number.
You have just been branded for the Feds meat coral.
Reclaim your US Nationalism title and live as United States Americans were suppose to live.
And does anyone else see the IRS as another "King" that we should revolt against?
I am sure most will completly disagree with all of this, but before you do, just do some research.
One thing you should be worried about is the fact that the Federal Reserve Bank is a privately owned bank.. hmmm my constitution says thats a big no no...
go ahead.. look it up..
have fun earning you freedom.
http://familyguardian.tzo.com/Subjects/Taxes/ta
It has been a much abused word here in Europe where rightwing parties have been accused for being fascist - however, it seems the current American administration is getting close.
From Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary:
An extreme rightwing political system or attitude, which favours strong central authority and does not allow freedom of speech.
Patriot I and II pretty much goes for the strong central authority and DMCA + some patriot goes for freedom of speech. Perhaps not a perfect fit - but it's still quite sad.
Don't get me wrong. I love americans and their country - it's just that the slope is rather slippery post 9/11 - and it really seems to be going down hill at a very fast pace. I have no idea what this will eventually lead to - and hopefully the people will stand up and demand their freedom be given back. Otherwise we in Europe are probably screwed as well - events in America often forebode what is going to happen here.
No. Don't vote Independent; Green; Libertarian. That will only weaken the one party left that can help STOP this madness!
Regime change doesn't happen over one (election) night.. if people voting for third party candidates weakens the democratic candidate and causes a republican to win, who cares? If republicans are all that bad, then being under republican leadership for another four years would only strengthen the backlash against them. I think it's more important to increase the percentage of third party votes more than anything. The politicians will get the message.
4 more years and we'll be living in Soviet Russia.
You know how Teddy Roosevelt was so against the trusts (megacorps that were above the law and beyond mere monopoly, a la Standard Oil) because they were more powerful than the government in so many ways, hence offending his own megalomaniacal sensibilities? Apparently, the U.S. Government today is disappointed about the fact that modern megacorps had taken on the role of Big Brother via image recognition, data mining, and monopolistic practices. In the face of such competition, they apparently feel the need to get their anti-Constitution on. Pull out the big guns!
I'm done debating the competency of our current Presidential administration or the legitimacy of the Presidential office. In the face of this perpetually double edged sword, I just want to keep both the terrorists and the government in check.
No! The republicans and the democrats is one party with two names! Voting for one is just as bad as the other.
You know, Microsoft's street address also says a lot about their mentality.
Simply amazing, how the same slashbots decrying "CENSORSHIP!!" at every turn have no problem doing it to others where it suits them.
I don't see a single person crying censorship. Please cut and paste an example. Just because someone moderated it as a troll doesn't mean it's censored. I mean, you could read it... right?
The fact that this shift has happened will catch up to us when we realize we don't have any public schools, or any public services for that matter. Hey, would you like to burn your trash rather than have the city pick it up? You too can be like rural americans! Well, services might still exist, but they'll be run by corporations, and we'll have to pay out the ass for 'em. Maybe people will like it better that way though. Maybe the constitution and democracy is just outdated.
Anyway, it'll be a sad day when the public school system is eliminated. Then you can say goodbye to racial equality and equal opportunity. Oh wait, we don't care about those things anymore...
> I try not to be/think "partisan". But the truth is, the best possible chance Liberty has of making a comeback is (just about) anything non-Republican. The best possible chance of getting any non-Republican power back is in the hands of the Democrats! No. Don't vote Independent; Green; Libertarian. That will only weaken the one party left that can help STOP this madness!
I agree with your sentiment, but only reservedly: if you think back to the congressional votes on the "patriot" act and the war, you have to conclude that the Democrats - with a few noble exceptions - are only going to stand up to what's going on if there's a political advantage to doing so, or a political cost to not doing so. Most of them, I suspect, would be all to happy to have these same tools in their hands.
If you vote in the Democratic primary for this kind of reason, make sure you vote for someone who spoke out against things when it was a political liability to do so, not one of the windsocks that changes with the weather.
Sadly, some of the far-right nutcases have a better track record on this than the crowds of Democrats do.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
You know what people are going to vote for? The guy who says 'I will tax you less', 'I will give you more money'.
He could also want to bring back segregation and most voters wouldn't care because he's not going to take their money.
The USA's culture has changed considerably since the 70's. Greed is now God. All anyone cares about is themselves and their possesions. Hell that's what's killing the American Family. Let's see, why do mommy and daddy work 80 hours a week each? That's right so he can afford an upper-middle class life.
Man that's so worth it isn't it? I mean you get to have your kids driven to school by the nanny in the new Lexus. Isn't that the American Dream?
20 years, that's how long I give this society before it collapses on itself. Civilization won't end, but you won't recognize the USA that's for sure. A lot of people aren't going to want to be part of the rat race any more.
-- taking over the world, we are.
"I would enjoy moving to a country where the politicians have their heads on straight."
Still easily still better than the US, Canada is definitely not a land where the politicians have their heads on straight.
Cigarettes are designed to be addictive.
Meth (as in this case) are designed to be addictive. Dead people don't pay money for drugs. I fail to see the difference...
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
The more you keep calling it the 'Patriot Act', the more people who don't know better, and yourselves subconsciously to a point, will think this thing has some relation to patriotism. Stop being two-faced. Practise what you're preaching and call it what it is - the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act.
After 4 more years under a Republican it's the backlash again the entire USA that will be the problem. It only took Bush 2 years to turn near-universal sympathy for the United States into near-universal fear and/or hatred. Just imagine all the damage he could do with 4 more...
End of lesson. You may press the button.
Ah, but you miss the sexy, sexy point about the Federal Reserve. It's not privately owned, it's a corporation, which up until the mid-19th century, were chartered organizations created by a government to perform a strictly limited function that was necessary for the public good. There wasn't any point in forming a federal agency to run a bank back then, since the government was still allowed to regulate anti-capitalist collusions like corporations.
Instead of appointing an "Electrical Engineering Czar", they used to offer a charter to some investors so they could start a university. Instead of Social Security, they would've offered a charter to some insurance guys to start a retirement fund that was controlled enough to ensure that it wouldn't collapse and the guys wouldn't steal the cash and run to Mexico.
Ah, back in the day we just contracted out for what we needed. If we wanted to find out how bad the air was at the WTC, we'd call up NYU and have them write up a report. But I'm sure that'd never work.
but this is different...you can make any choice you want, but if not enough people make the same choice as you, then none of you get to keep it. Your analogy is flawed, but what if there was a big software vote, and everybody had to use the winners system. Then would you vote beos, or would you vote for the only candidate at the time that stands a chance
Bottles.
It goes to show just how socialist certain sections of the Australian public have gotten when a government that pays people unemployment benefits (so long as they continue to seek work) and operates universal health care (so long as they don't take out private insurance) can be called "ultra conservative"
"Cursed is he who rises early in the morning..." Isiah 5:11
I think we're well on our way on both counts. The increasing intolerance for any public display of religion, and the increasingly large entitlement programs would, I think, prove that.
You do realize that:
a) Democrat senators voted FOR the Patriot Act 48-1,
b) Reno & Freeh tried to obtain the SAME POWERS, without a Nine-Eleven pretext,
don't you? So, I think I'll just forego your advice & continue to vote Libertarian.
No. Don't vote Independent; Green; Libertarian. That will only weaken the one party left that can help STOP this madness!
Yes, don't vote for who you think would best represent your views. Instead, vote for who everyone else is voting for.
At the risk of sounding off-topic, let me point out that the idea of a third-party "weakening" the first two is a self-fulfilling prophesy. Maybe, just maybe, if everyone developed an informed opinion by doing a little research on all the possible candidates, then voted for who they wanted, ignoring fear-mongers like the parent, our political system could have a positive impact.
No. Don't vote Independent; Green; Libertarian. That will only weaken the one party left that can help STOP this madness!
Yes, voting for the guy you figure is "slightly" less of an ass has gotten us so far already how could it fail us now?
Double standards? Doesnt the US military give its soldiers Methampetamine?
At one time they did on a widespread basis. I suppose that it's possible that some elite black ops type units are still issued them.
But on the grand scheme of things. When falling asleep WILL be fatal, and taking some meth might be addictive the choice is easy. They can send you to rehab for meth addiction, they can't rehab you from a 7.62x39mm bullet hole in your face.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
Wait a minute! We're supposed to "Take back our freedom!" by voting Democrat??
Who was in office when the DMCA was signed? Bill Clinton. Umm, what party was he a member of again?
Here's the frustrating thing. I've talked to so many self-proclaimed "Democrats" who have plenty of good ideas, but don't seem to cohesively and logically put all of it together. They'll make statements I completely agree with, but then turn around and claim that members of their beloved party are all for those statements - when they're clearly (and publically) opposed to them!
Meanwhile, yes, Republicans are really screwing up the country too, in the name of "freedom and democracy", no less.
THIS is why the Libertarian party exists! Right now, nobody who can do basic math would sanely argue that a Libertarian candidate has good odds of getting elected next term. Still, what you CAN do is research the candidates on the major 2 platforms and pick out the ones who side with Libertarian beliefs. Next election, whatever you do - DON'T just pull that lever to vote for everyone on one party! Pick and choose the people who are doing the right things, no matter what title they run under. These days, you have "Republicrats" and "Demicans", and lots of people in between.
So, basically, Ashcroft and friends want to build a government where those with power can look ingo anything they want, imprision anybody they want...
Wait a second, that's exactly what the Taliban had in Afganistan and Saddam had in Iraq. It's starting to blur the line between who's friend and foe here...
Luckily, the legislative and executive branches can't take away all our liberties alone. The judicial branch still has the chance to strike down any law that goes too far accross the lines of the Constitutional protections. I mean, a court can still order that "the Feds" an give accused terrorist access to question another accused terrorist for evidence to be used in his defense... rule of law hasn't broken down totally around here.
Or has it?
I would enjoy moving to a country where the politicians have their heads on straight. The for the sake of all you hold dear, don't move to Canada. The only reason Mr. Bush's accusedly-authoritarian government isn't deemed second rate to Mr. Chretien's de facto dictatorship is that the USA is much bigger and more noteworthy and we keep our aspirations to quash the voter and free thought at home, and don't export them quite the same way. The Canadian Prime Minister has been gobbling up powers to make himself more potent for the last several years (or at least, the rate of gobbling has accelerated). Media concentration, underfunding of any kind of watchdogs, using the Courts as an excuse, etc.... and we've never had the underlying strength in our Constitution that the US has to begin with. Canada is a place for the thoughtless masses. In the USA, you may think you've got a tough choice for who to vote for. Up here, we might as well not bother as the new de-facto King shall cruise into his new appointment sometime in November... or February... or maybe we'll have two leaders (eh? how does that work?) for a few months.... I really hate the feeling the next election is going to be the first one in which I take the 'refused ballot' option to register a protest. I'm used to voting fot the least of the evils, but it is getting so bad that the least is still almost unconscionable....
-- Mal: "Well they tell you: never hit a man with a closed fist. But it is, on occasion, hilarious."
near-universal sympathy for the United States
Travel much? Anti-Americanism isn't new. The US was already feared and hated. Also, this isn't the first Republican president. Or weren't you keeping track? Other countries have been getting away with the same stuff we pulled in Iraq for centuries. Crack a history book sometime.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
I wonder if the poster read the article where it said that the guy with the meth lab was charged under a new NC state law and not under the Patriot Act? So that really has nothing to do with the justice dept. or anybody outside of NC (although obviously it sucks for NC citizens running meth labs).
//m
> No! The republicans and the democrats is one party with two names!
That sounded plausible until W took office and we learned just how quickly a bunch of idealogues can plow this country into the ground. Borrowing a metaphor, W is so far to the right he's in the break-down lane. If you can't tell him from Clinton, you are in a bad way.
It's time for anyone who believes in freedom and representative government to get involved in the Democratic Party. Really. Go to the meetings. Volunteer. It's your responsibility.
If you really want to vote Green, work inside the Democratic Party in support of instant run-off or Condorcet voting, and vote Green after it passes. We have to pull together NOW. The alternative is to lose your country.
Yes, but September 11 generated an amazing amount of goodwill towards the US. Not from the Middle East (and parts of Africa and Asia) but from Europe and from countries the US hadn't screwed with much more than economically.
That is almost all gone now.
Europeans have not only lost the goodwill they had, but ended up with more "hate" then they had prior to those events.
They don't give a damn, because we never hold them to account. What, really, should we expect?
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Yes I do
A bunch of Iraqis ar doing it right now without much problem.
It's OK to lie if you are a liberal left wing Demokrat.
As you can see I don't care about my karma.
Bush also said he could win the war against terrorism, and that it's completely unlike the war against drugs...
It's not really lieing as such, because he believes what he says... but just because someone says something, doesn't make it true.
All I hear on this thread is "Bush sux0rz - vote Democrat" or "Dems are just as bad - vote Libertarian/Green"
What I want to know is if anyone has any solutions to the problems at hand?
Democrats, what is YOUR plan to fight the war on terror? How do YOU plan to keep another 9/11 from happening? If the PATRIOT Act was so bad, then why did the majority of Democrats vote for it?
While I'm at it, what is YOUR plan to stimulate the economy? What is YOUR plan to rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan?
Quit complaining and start coming up with solutions.
I do see shades of 1984 in recent events. If the Democrats can't come up with anything more than complaining, Bush will beat Dean (or whoever else gets the nomination) in 2004 like Reagan crushed Mondale in 1984.
One of the things you seem to be missing in these arguments is the right to due process. It sucks being arrested for one crime when you committed another (less serious) crime.
The meth lab is not a terrorist unit. It just isn't. It is against the law, but not a terrorist activity to make drugs. Now, using the patriot act to convict the guy for terrorism when he was cooking up drugs is wrong. Two wrongs don't make a right.
Once any means justifies the end of putting criminals in jail, the whole judicial system crumbles, because we have to try to avoid putting innocent people in jail. The whole legal system is skewed toward this goal. Move away from that, and we haven't really won anything.
Languages aren't inherently fast -- implementations are efficient
you can make any choice you want, but if not enough people make the same choice as you, then none of you get to keep it.
My answer to this arguement (and to people who don't vote because "it makes no difference") is: What if everyone who thought like you do actually voted according to their real beliefs?
Even if the candidate you vote for doesn't win, you're still sending a message to the winner (assuming he's smart enough to realize it, which rules out the current administration) that somebody believed in what he was saying and maybe that needs to be looked at a little closer and given some consideration.
Politics in this country is determined by the voters, and currently that seems to mean the elderly and religious. That's hardly a representative cross-section of the America I know. If everyone who was elligable actually got off their asses and voted I think the political landscape would change dramaticly, and even more so if they voted for what they really believed in rather than just the next best thing that has a real chance of winning.
What that means is: the only reason we have a 2 party system is because we keep voting for them.
Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.