Slashdot Mirror
Total Information Awareness, Disguised And Alive
unassimilatible writes "According to the AP, aspects of the controversial Total Information Awareness DARPA program, officially shut down by the U.S. Congress in September 2003 after a public outcry, seem to have survived. The article reports, 'Some projects from retired Adm. John Poindexter's Total Information Awareness effort were transferred to U.S. intelligence offices, congressional, federal and research officials told The Associated Press. In addition, Congress left undisturbed a separate but similar $64 million research program run by a little-known office called the Advanced Research and Development Activity, or ARDA, that has used some of the same researchers as Poindexter's program.'"
Now your on the right track. Thats why the Supreme Court is getting involved and I believe they should. It's all about the constitution.
But this still has nothing to do with the Patriot Act.
People who bite the hand that feeds them usually lick the boot that kicks them
So basically what you're saying is, it's not at all like East Germany because the technology hasn't been deployed yet.
Don't be a fucking retard. You think picking a bunch of random email addresses like these are going to have any effect? These people are a bunch of researchers. Send your mail to John Ashcroft. Twit.
I've had relatives of mine bombed by japanese pilots.
Fuck you.
-- You see, there would be these conclusions that you could jump to
I'll get the shock of my life the day that any of my posts aren't taken literally.
You should probably resist the temptation to take literally those posts which ridicule the banality of your non-sequiturs.
Regarding Guantanamo, I have no problem with the US holding combatant terrorists for as long as they deem necessary. These terrorists were not fighting under the accord of any acknowledged UN/Geneva conventions of war, thus they are not privy to the protections of said conventions.
That Australia is none too desirous of having the combatant terrorists repatriated to Australia where they cannot be prosecuted under laws passed post Afghanistan-conflict, is not surprising. They'll let the US mete out whatever punishment they are due and then take them back at the appropiate time. Australia has not sold out its citizens. They have sold out their Australian citizenship by engaging in illegal conflict.
If you send your name and address to the US Military, I'm sure they'll be sure to send them directly to your residence when they are released. Perhaps you can pick up some Pashtun and learn how to make bombs.
-- You see, there would be these conclusions that you could jump to
Americans may soon be NOT free to leave.
Soon we will have biometric passports. If I refuse to give up my retinal patterns and fingerprints, and soon my DNA info, I will be refused a pssport.
I will not be free to leave.
If I try to leave without a passport, or try to fake my way out of the U.S., I go to prison.
If I try to escape from prison, I may be shot dead.
Conclusion: if I refuse to give up all pretensions to my privacy, and refuse to be tracked for the rest of my life, I cannot leave the country. If I do try to leave, ultimately I will be shot dead.
Right, I am hiding my email because other people will abuse that information.
I am not afraid of the government abusing that information. A big difference.
But of course you guys will construe anything to suit your purposes.
Whatever.
-- You see, there would be these conclusions that you could jump to
Case 1:
He is a U.S. citizen. Yet he's being detained by the military -- indefinitely, without seeing an attorney, even though he hasn't been charged with any crime.
Case 2:
Meanwhile, Zacarias Moussaoui, purportedly the 20th hijacker, is not a U.S. citizen. Neither is Richard Reid, the alleged shoe bomber. Both have attorneys. Both have been charged before federal civilian courts.
What is the difference between these two cases?
Is it citizenship? Doubtful. There would be much less outcry if the non-citizens were held without due process and the citizens were given due process. Indeed, we may never have heard of Guantanamo at all. Instead we have the opposite.
The difference is evidence. If the government had any evidence that Padilla or Hamdi were actually guilty of being terrorists, then that evidence would have been presented at a Grand Jury. Justice would be served, the Government could put a tick mark in their column that'd look good come Novermber, and everyone would be happy (who wasn't an unfortunate non-citizen held without due process).
The only reason the government would not do this is because they have no evidence. After eighteen months they have no evidence that would stand up in court. After eighteen months, they have nothing that would convince a judge that Jose Padilla should continue to be held. Eighteen months, and the government can't do anything to justify his incarceration other than declare it their right by Executive Fiat.
Which perhaps is the point -- to see if the Executive Fiat thing flies. So far so good -- the ability of the President (or any person who he appoints to such a task) to remove a citizen's rights at will with no explanation whatsoever has been upheld.
Do I need to say that again for the slow-of-thinking?
The ability of the President (or any person who he appoints to such a task) to remove a citizen's rights at will with no explanation whatsoever has been upheld.
Congratulations, my comrades! You're living in a dictatorship!
The enemies of Democracy are