Slashdot Mirror
USA PATRIOT Act Survives Amendment Attempt
crem_d_genes writes "A bill to modify the USA PATRIOT Act that would have blocked part of the legislation's provisions that allow for the investigation of people's reading habits was defeated by a 210-210 vote in the U.S House of Representives. The House leaders kept the roll call open for 23 minutes past the 15 minute deadline to persuade 10 Representatives to change votes. According to the article 'Rep. Zach Wamp, R-Tenn., said he switched his initial "yes" vote to "no" after being shown Justice Department documents asserting that terrorists have communicated over the Internet via public library computers.' On the other hand, 'Critics of the Patriot Act argued that even without it, investigators can get book store and other records simply by obtaining subpoenas or search warrants.'"
I cannot say that I feel very comfortable about some of the broad-based stuff that the patriot act allows governmental agencies, but this country does have a history of curtailing civil rights during a wartime footing.
The question still remains, is this really helping? and are we hurting more people than helping?
The problem with the PATRIOT act is that it directly urinates on the fourth amendment.
Perhaps you should read it... Basically, anyone doing anything "criminal" can be treated as a "terrorist" -- sounds innocuous until you realize that speeding on the highway on your way to work is considered to be "criminal."
The thing is, that you don't have to be a "paranoid governmental conspiricy theorist" to now get spied upon or worse.
I went to Washington D.C. on some business, and I had shipped my suitcase via UPS to my hotel beforehand. Since I was only traveling with my laptop, a camera, and a single change of clothing in my backpack, I was searched and double searched for over an hour.
After taking one or two pictures of monuments and such, I went to a cafe where I spoke to someone who had been "picked up" by men in black suits off the street after taking pictures of some buildings he thought looked cool. It turns out one of them was a secret government facility of some sort. The FBI raided his apartment, and took EVERYTHING photo related, held him for 48 hours in jail before deciding he was harmless. When letting him go, they warned him to "be careful" because they "can do this anytime they want"
May I suggest you try a 3rd party canadate. And if every one that ever said, "I would vote for a 3rd part canadate, but they have no chance of winning" did vote for the 3rd party canadate they would have a chance of winning, infact from all the people I hear complain about it I think they just might win. Infact I will be doing that this year for senator. I do not like Specter ( I really wish Toomey got the nomination, but), I am going to vote the constutional party this year for senator there.
And for the Recored I am a registered Republican.
THANK YOU!!
Seriously, the idea of keeping the floor open past the official time is very odd to me. I also don't know the rules about changing votes, but it seems a poor idea in some regards.
The whole idea behind a representative gov't is that those who are sent should vote the way those that they represent would. The trouble is that they don't usually know how they would really vote, and use party politics to substitute for how the citizen's in their area would vote. I suppose the logic is: I am a democrat/republican/whatever, people should know my philosophy based on this, therefor I will just vote the party line because that's what they expect. What garbage!
I would much rather that my congressman/woman actually found out how I (and those around me) feel about the issues (no, DON'T raise my taxes you moron), instead of assuming that we support the party line just because they got elected.
As far as a two party system is concerned (while we're at it), it stinks!! It tends to polarize issues that shouldn't be (although I can't think of one at the moment), and gives people another source of conflict that is unnecessary (which also has the effect of defraying any dissatisfaction that individuals may have with the gov't by allowing them to blame current problems on "the left" or "the right", when really both are guilty, and the war between them is mostly contrivance).
As far as the PATRIOT Act is concerned, I could do without it. This is the one thing that Bush has done that really bothers me (to all who might flame me for that, remember that its my personal beliefs, not yours or the media's that I'm discussing--I fully recognize that many people hate him for many other reasons). While I don't believe that he will misuse it the way that some will, the potential for abuse is so clear that I am amazed that it hasn't received more attention.
If I had my way, the PATRIOT act would be fully revoked, as would all the other weird legislation from the past ten years or so (DMCA included, which is just as bad in many ways). We have had a terrible rash of poor laws passed over the past ten years, and the PATRIOT Act is just one of many. It may be the worst (or not, you decide!), but it certainly isn't the only one.
"We don't know what we are doing, but we are doing it very carefully,..." Wherry, R.J. Personnel Psychology (1995)
It is true that the general computer usability has been brought to the level of intelligence of an average religious fanatic. It is also true that the encryption and computer security are not there yet.
Seriously, go to any decent sized university in the US and walk by the CS grad offices tell me that there aren't any Islamic fundamentalists who are capable of using encryption....
Mohammed Atta had a degree in architecture
I think also Mousoui(don't know how to spell) was a doctor, though I cannot find the info.
If you stop to think for a minute, maybe there's a reason why there are no examples of secret warrants being excercised or library, etc. records being searched. Do you suppose it has anything to do with the unrestrained power the PA grants the executive to do these things SECRETLY?
"Maybe if we had some more original thought in congress, stuff like this wouldn't happen end rant"
It's not going to happen. The US system is a stable duopoly - even if a third party were to rise up, it would only displace one of the two current parties. Try looking at some basic duopoly theory - location theory with one product (i.e. the current policy) is an exact analogy between economics and politics.
Where would you place yourself? Both dead in the center. One side takes left, one side takes right. Sure, you're trying to differentiate yourself to squabble over the center, but it's all fluff. The US political system is not designed for original thought. If you want to truly change that, you need to change the election process, not either party.
Mind you, it has its strengths and weaknesses. Here we have more original thought, more parties, but also more compromises, more blameshifting, vague and shifting governments and parlamentary support. Everybody is trying to push their politics, even within their own coalition. (for you US guys: several parties working together)
However, it has also allowed you to choose a party closer to your own political view, as they differ in economic policy, social policy, district policy, crime policy, domestic and foreign policy and so on. Whereas in the US, you have the republican policy, and the democratic policy. That's it. Of course, we have the whole EU thing which complicates things a bit too...
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
I find it interesting that we are all (in the US at least) in this situation of rampant bad laws, paranoia, fear, and so forth because we have been conditioned that the gov't will take care of us. A hand full of people took over a few airliners and got away with it (at least their plans) because people are told the gov't will solve it. You mean to tell me a whole airliner full of people couldn't stop a couple of guys with razor-blades? Razor blades???? My shoes are more dangerous!
Trust the gov't, cuz after that trust fails you, they can build more despicable ways for you to trust them.
Sudan is experiencing a civil war. The situation is totally different than Iraq's. It is unlikely _any_ amount of military or political pressure could change what's going on over there.
And, every government turns a blind eye to Africa, because, well, no one cares about them outside of a strictly humanitarian ideal (an ideal which never seems to get much funding). The countries there are not strategically important to anyone, and the underlying problems are often caused by culture and corruption - how do you fix those with a political _or_ a military solution?
So, no, I disagree with your thesis entirely, because Iraq is fixable now, and Sudan is not. My opinion, anyways.
-Erwos
Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
Probably the greatest irony of the whole Terrorism War is the claim that we in the USA have never faced this type of situation before. Actually it is profoundly a normal condition for the world and our formation as a nation arose out of dealing properly with and essentially disposing of terrorism .
Short history:
The USA in its Revolutiary war faced this. It was much of the cause for the war was the state sponsored terrorism by England. To wit: " He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions." ~ US Declaration of Independence In Congress July 4 1776.
This repeated itself in the War of 1812 known in Europe variously as the 7 years war. In Alabama where I live it is known as the "Creek Indian War" and in Indiana it is famous for other reasons. The English supported a confederacy of 5 Indian Tribes to MURDER and TERRORIZE on the US Western Frontier. The Battle at Tippicanoe was the result of this. In Alabama the action progressed from Huntsville, to Horseshoe Bend. The battle was to stop the Creeks from raiding Tennesse and was supported by the Cherokee Indians. I could continue but this British supported State Sponsored Terrorism agains the USA and even against its Indian Populations went on eventually peaking in the Plains Indian wars. (Second to the US Civil War the most serious US Military actions) and finally decreasing under Hudsons Bay Company support and stopping in Norther California and Oregon in the period just before 1915.
Some other supporters of terrorism penetrated the USA at intervals with most events coming to a halt with the US Nuclear development at the end of World War II. We have had a short period without terrorism being significant since. It appears we are back into it.
There is a profound point here: The USA is no Flebe in the dealing with Terrorism. We developed our Art of Citizenship which puzzles most foreigners as a result of the continual terror attacks. It is in fact the Federal effort to destroy this art that left us volunerable to the problem at this time. The Patriot Act further diminishes the role of citizens and further endangers our people.
Yesterday the head "Patriot Act" man himself Mr. Ridge went out to warn us of the danger but left us with nothing to look for and nothing to do but cower in fear. That is not accidental. These men want us cowering in fear. It was Yesterday that they cowed our US House into without amendment continuing the US Patriot Act! They would celebrate another Al Qaeda attack as it would empower them even more at the hands of ignorant masses who think this is a new problem.
As an acid test of the facts here I provide the following question. Where is the phone number I can call to promptly and properly have Illegal or Undesirable Aliens DEPORTED? The facts show that this should have been the highest priority of the US Government on September 12, 2001. Until this exists where such persons may be promptly and properly dealt with we in the USA shall cower in fear. When it exists we may dissolve the Department of Homeland Security and live in peace and safety. There is no denying this fact! It is not opinion or rant. It is simply the proved fact of our history! We dealt with all the terrorism of the past by cooperation and support of the citizens natural right to self defense. To continue on this current course of denying such is to progress streight into the tyranny of Adolph Hitler and his Gestapo and SS.
Never Politically Correct ~ I prefer the facts If you don't like what I say, get a life, or comment yourself.
Allright, so I like "freedom of speech", and I also like "Information wants to be free".
Lets trade: The governement can know everything I do. AS long as -I- may know everything the governement knows. About everything. All.
No more dirty little secrets. No more "we cant tell for state security". Nothing. While we are at it, same goes for businesses.
Also no more privacy in the public space. But be reasonable, you dont have that already.
Remember kids; Information does not kill people. Information that -some people know and others do not- does.
Donny Rumsfelt said best: "There are known unknowns, and unknown unknowns.." etc. Well! Lets get rid of it!
"/Dread"
And trotting out that 3000 americans (and some non americans, who are still people) died on September 11th, 2001 doesn't sway me to the big brother argument. I'm not belittling the tragedy of that day, but 3725 people died in 2002 in traffic accidents in Texas alone. Why not clamor to have the government take your car away to make you safer?
So yes, I'm saying that giving the government a little more leeway is not worth it. A lot more than 3000 people have died defending the the constitution and contract we the people have with our government and eroding that contract is a dishonor to them and the foundations the United States is built on.
come for the naked robots, stay for the zombies
...that the Stalin's Soviet Union, Mao's China, Castro's Cuba, Hitler's Germany or any of those other nations thought they were going to be oppressed? "Yep, let's overthrow the current leadership and choose a leader to oppress us, put us to slave labour and deport us." Uh-huh. Their leaders built or took over a power base strong enough, that they could do so.
If you have gotten to the point where they openly "act on the information they gathered to actively suppress any non-state sponsored viewpoints" or "the (Russian) people could not approach their (Soviet) leaders for the same fear of reprisal." you're already neck-deep in a totalitarian state.
The US government is building up its power base so that if it should choose to oppress you, you would not be able to fight back, neither by soap, ballot, jury or ammo box. The government would crush any uprising before it became a threat. You're basing your whole argument on the premise that they won't - when there is plenty of historical evidence to the contrary.
You also assume that such a state must be openly doing so. Let me ask you this - if the top republicans and democrats colluded to form a "ruling party" while still retaining the illusion of democracy - do you think the US people would even notice that they're no longer living in a democracy? I doubt it. Pass leadership back and forth a bit, keep the populace entertained, discredit and ridicule those who have realized the truth - it'd work.
And if not forever, at least long enough until you'd be where you say you aren't now - where you'd have a fear of "being woken up in the middle of the night, thrown into a van, and being shipped off to some Siberian gulag just because I surfed the wrong website last night." At which point you'll look as stupid as Chamberlain proclaiming "Peace in our time", and as powerless to stop history as well.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
How many of you have actually taken the time to write or call your local representative? You would be suprised how approachable and responsive they really are. Thier districts are relatively small, and they have by far the most sensitivity to thier constituents of any branch.
I recently wrote to my local rep. expressing my concerns about the DMCA, the proposed INDUCE act and copyright legislation in general. Within a week I received a nice, substantive letter with his position on the issue, a summary of all related bills currently in progress or under consideration, and his take on them. True, the letter was probably boiler-plate although considering it's substance, it's apparent he is at least informed on the issue, and cares enough about what I think to respond in a timely manner.
When the difference between getting elected or not can come down to hundreds, or sometimes dozens, of votes they tend to pay attention when people don't like what they are doing.
The President can have half the country hate him, and still get elected. A senator can have half of a state hate him (and the bigger the state, the less an individual matters), and still get elected. A rep can lose with a well-placed handful of people hating him, and they know it. And as the closeness of the vote in the article shows, getting one rep to shift closer to your ideal CAN potentially make a substantive difference in U.S. policy.
So if you have something to say about it, take the time to address it to them directly. It isn't much harder than commenting here on /., and is likely to be quite a bit more effective.
Is it a coincidence that Tom Ridge announced yesterday that terrorist are planning an attack?
Right in the middle of the vote?
I've asked dozens of my friends of family and I only found 3 people out of about 20 who are voting for Bush because he is Bush rather then because he isn't Kerry. What's scary is that out of the 40 people voting Dem this November not a single one would vote for Kerry if Bush wasn't the incumbant.
Hollow words will burn and hollow men will burn.
This is one of the reasons that I've been seriously considering changing my buying habits for books back to cash. I admit that the lure of plastic is great -- I have about a dozen books in my Amazon cart right now -- but at least if the purchase is in cash and not using a store discount card, I know that the purchase will be a lot harder to link directly to me.
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
Aside from vote, what else can be done to help repeal this law?
I thought it was refering to the Van Halen album "1984"...think about it, it was the LAST album that Diamond David Lee Roth was in the band.
I think that speaks volumes about todays world.
"Music is everybody's possession. It's only publishers who think that people own it." - John Lennon.
First, I'll point out to whoever's following the text that the section in question is part of Sec 215 of the Act. The "Sec 501" heading is part of some replacement text.
applied by a high ranking FBI official,
Asst SiC isn't particularly high-ranking.
and be approved by a judge.
They don't need probable cause. That's the big deal; they just can say "We need it for a terrorism investigation" and the judge approves it.
Also, Section 502 calls for semi-annual congressional reviews.
Which, IIRC, have met with only stonewalling by the AG.
I'm an American and I can tell you what it felt like to me:
So there you have it. Some may call me "unpatriotic". Others may even want to "detain" me so I don't "cause any harm". Thankfully, I'm not the only one in this country who feels the way I do. But it sure feels like it.
Nathan's blog
The Soviets lived in constant fear of Big Brother because unlike our government,
Not really.
You'd actually have to do something to get onto their shitlist. For most, who did not care, the led a boring but safe life.
My parents were communists in the early 60-ties, and my uncle married a girl from Eastern Germany. In fact, my mother was a Norwegian delegate to a big youth-conference in Bulgaria in 1968, but that became a big wake-up-call for her. Pretty much all the delegates were brain-dead droids, except the Czechoslovakians, who had a government heading in the right direction. That's how my parents viewed the possible future of communism, not authoratorian, more anarchistic. While they were there, the Soviets invaded Czechoslovakia. To my parents, that's the straw that broke the camels' back, and they resigned.
They also made some moves towards their Eastern German friends, which made my parents enter the STASI shitlist. It didn't really matter to them, but it has been very interesting to look in the STASI archives now. They knew pretty much everything.
To those never entering the shitlist, what made a difference was the constant pounding of head against the beaurocratic brickwall, the humiliation of "sorry, you're not allowed to enter that flight", "you're not authorized by proper authorities", always have to submit to some greater authority. Always hearing "you have nothing to fear if you have done nothing wrong". To most, that's something they could live with. And what it would take to change it had very little to do with leadership, it had to do with people getting off their asses.
My cousin (the son of the Eastern German), studied three years in Jacksonville. He happened to be just a couple of blocks away from Bush when the planes hit on 911. Because of family that was still in Eastern Germany, they had been there a lot, even though STASI made sure they were thoroughly examined on every visit. He knew what that was about. The privatized US beaurocracy (especially in banks and insurance companies) is not very different from the Eastern German beaurocracy according to him. The three months that he spent in the US after 911, he felt that the US had lost most of its lead on Soviet-era Eastern Germany.
That includes freedom from reprisal from government. Look here to know what happens if you try to say that abstinence only is wrong
Now, the hard part in Eastern Germany was to get on the shitlist. You would actually have to do something. They did in fact not have the resources to keep a tab on everyone.
With Echelon, they can.
Kudos to the bookstore owner Joyce Meskis, who not only refused, but took the case to the Colorado Supreme Court and won.
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/05/0 6/1410206
I shop at that store and buy anything from cookbooks to leftist political works to sci-fi/fantasy. And I'll keep shopping there not only cause it's a great place, but b/c they are on the right side of the issue in my book
So there's your example for you. You can Google for a lot more examples of bookstores and libraries having to fight against these intrusions in your private reading habits. What you read is your business, and I'm d*mn happy there's a lot of bookstore owners and librarians willing to stand up for my (and your) 1st Ammendment rights.
'The unexamined life is not worth living' - Socrates
Think a moment about the Constitution, and then since this is /. think about computer and network security.
The Constitution was written the way it was because the Founding Fathers didn't trust Governemt, including the one they were creating. Therefore they created a Government with three independent branches, each with checks and balances on the other two branches, in an attempt to create a trustworthy system. In security-speak, they attempted to create an open, trustworthy system so that it would function correctly even if some particular untrustworty components were incorporated. (elected or appointed)
It's ALL about trust, plain and simple.
The President is head of the Executive Branch, and Commander In Chief, but only Congress can declare War. Of course, leading up to the Gulf War II, Congress gave the President a blank check to make War. The only control they appeared to put on it was 'payable to Iraq', but the amount, date, and decision whether or not to exercise were not filled in.
The Legislative Branch makes laws, and the Executive Branch enforces them, but since enforcement of the law essentially deprives the accused/convicted of Constitutional Rights, the Judicial Branch is involved in the process, both in warrants and in judging and sentencing. The Patriot Act significantly weakens the Judicial Branch's participation in the warrant process. (This sentence keeps the post on-topic)
Back to transparency, for a moment. Transparency allows us to see the checks and balances in action, so that we can see that our government is functioning as designed.
OTOH, when the Government begins to operate in an opaque fashion, it doesn't matter whether or not we trust the Man at the Top. Opacity shrouds downward from the starting point, so it requires that you trust the start point, *and everyone from there on down*. This has particular relevance with respect to Abu Graib. Even if it were just 'a few bad eggs,' the cloak of secrecy gave them the space to operate. Keep in mind that Abu Graib techniques were imported from Guantanamo, another 'cloaked' installation, and we've heard next to *nothing* from there, other than they're being kept in what sounds like dog kennels. Eventually this will come out, too.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
I don't think Slashdot has a unified conscience or intellect to reply to your challenge.
For myself I can say I don't care if they keep the vote open an extra 15 minutes. But I do care if they keep the vote open for as long as is necessary to coerce just enough people to get the outcome they want.
If I recall the Medicare vote was kept open half the night while lobbyists for the drug and healthcare industry worked the Capitol building lobby bribing and threatening representatives. A famous case was a politician who was retiring so he couldn't be easily pressured so instead they offered him big contributions for his son's campaign instead.
I can say for myself that if the Democrats did this same BS yes I would care just as much. Perhaps they did do it but I didn't have CSPAN when the Democrats had power. I've watched the Senate and House proceedings, off and on, in the last year or two and what is happening today is deeply, deeply disturbing to anyone who thinks the U.S. is a representative democracy, because it isn't. If you haven't watched CSPAN you should during debate on one of these especially controversial bills. It is an eye opener.
You can ask most of the people in Congress and they will tell you its turned in to a bitter, rancorous, partisan, uncivilized body, that is bending every rule to the breaking point, to an extent no one would have dreamed possible a few years ago.
@de_machina
Asst SiC isn't particularly high-ranking.
Yes, you're correct.
They don't need probable cause. That's the big deal; they just can say "We need it for a terrorism investigation" and the judge approves it.
I suppose that since PC isn't explicitly in the text, it could be interpreted that way, but my assumption would be that the 4th ammendment still applies. Do other statutes regarding the issuance of warrants explicitly address PC?
> Also, Section 502 calls for semi-annual congressional reviews.
Which, IIRC, have met with only stonewalling by the AG.
I haven't heard this. In fact, the only thing I've heard about this process have been statements from Ashcroft himself, where he rebuts criticisms that the PATRIOT Act allows DoJ to run around without any oversight.
JOIN US FOR PONG!
How do you know the g'ummint has not implemented a LIA program.
Remember you can get 10 in Gitmo if you disclose that the g'ummint has quried the reading habits of your patrons.
Why would Bin Laden not like having Bush in power? That bumbling idiot is doing EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE of what classical military history says you have to do to put down terrorism. He uses conventional warfare against governments when Roman tactics were to choose genocide against important groups, and surrender against unimportant ones. If you leave even one remote relative or friend of a terrorist alive, you're going to lose the war against terrorism in the long run. So to save human life- surrender now or nuke Mecca- but make the choice, damnit.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
I want others to know what I read and think when I choose to tell them. Anonymity has value.
Example: Take the DEA looking into purchases made at grocery stores with loyalty cards ( see story here ). Buy too many plastic bags, or too much cold medicine or too much engine starter fluid? Must be a dope dealer. What's too much? Who knows.
Now extend the example to any subject. Buy a book on urban gardening? Must be growing weed. Book on Islam? Terrorist. Book on Secular Humanism? Abortionist. Book by Pat Robertson? Christian anti-abortion sniper.
You point out that right acting people know that just because a person has read Mein Kampf that doesn't mean that person is a supporter of the books ideals. True as far as it goes, but we don't place limits on Governmental power to inconvenience right acting civil servants. We place limits on the Government to prevent abuses.
Give any group unlimited, unchecked authority and someone in that group will abuse that authority.
A Human Right
The republican party of today will do whatever is necessary to get what they want! Bush didn't carry Florida? We'll fix that...just give us a few days. Want an oppressive law passed? No problem - just print it out in the middle of the night. Want to invade a country? No problem - just make claims that they sponsor terrorism.
In fact...let's use people's FEARS against them! After all, if you make people scared, you can control them!
The republican party of today makes me want to puke! Even their own conservative members are sick of them!Did any of you notice how they began trashing Edwards mere minutes after Kerry asked him to be VP? Their campaign has been 100% negative. What really made me laugh though was two things that Bush said: The first one was to chide Edwards about his lack of International experience. Seems to me that he has more then BUSH HAD when he was running for President! The second thing was about his comments comparing Edwards with Cheney. Bush said Cheney was ready to be "a heartbeat away from the Presidency". If I had been THAT reporter, I would have followed up with: "Well, at least Edwards' heart BEATS properly"!! Seriously though, shouldn't Cheney's constant heart problems, angioplasties, etc. be an issue?
Finally, let's not forget about yesterday's unspecific terrorism warning du jour, where Al Quaida is going to try and svcrew up our election. I see it as more fear mongering by the incumbents. Am I wrong?Consumers (aka citizens) in Brave New World allow their government to rule over them absolutely because the government has trained them to do so. From a young age, consumers are taught to keep their minds on pleasure rather than politics. The basic necessities of life (food, shelter) are provided and drugs, entertainment and sex are so wildly abundant that no one would ever care about whatever the government might be doing. [This introduction alone should be sickeningly familiar to anyone who has ever tried to have a philosophical discussion with average Americans. (I don't mean to single out Americans, but they are the only people I've ever met, so I use them as examples
Only the absolute cream of the crop ever rise above this to become World Controllers. The few others who actually try to grow a political conscience and push for social change are sent away to isolated areas like remote islands where they are free to live their lives without "disturbing" the populace. On the surface, the world in Brave New World seems like a "nice" place to live but it is in fact one of the most horrible places I could imagine because not only is no one there truly free, but they have all forgotten even the meaning of freedom.
Huxley wrote Brave New World Revisited 25 years after BNW (1957 I think). It is a non-fictional work that explores the concepts underlying the tyrannies of both BNW and Orwell's 1984. For a book written almost 50 years ago, there are some startlingly prescient predictions. For example, here is a prediction he wrote about overpopulation and totalitarian rule. In this quote I am substituting only one word: "Russia" becomes "terrorists".
I hope the applicability of that example is obvious. Tyrrany by intimidation will always fail because eventually people will determine that fighting is no worse than being pushed around. The longest lived dictatorships (called scientific dictatorships by Huxley for their application of the scientific method in determining how to rule) are those that rule the people by convincing the people that it is in their best interests to be so ruled.
I would highly recommend both Brave New World and Brave New World Revisited. Together they are only about 300 pages long (and can often be found published in the same volume) and are an extremely quick but worthwhile read.
The preceding comments reflect the author's personal opinion and are public domain, unless explicitly stated otherwise.
And where is the FBI actually using this to spy on 'average people'?
I am so sick and tired of seeing people try to brush this nonsense off like that. Use some critical thinking for god's sake.
First of all, what is the problem that's being solved here? That people are reading subversive material they checked out at the library? So, is the problem that there's material out there that the government doesn't want you to read, and therefore they need to know if you are reading it? Well, hoooowwwdy. Bring out the gas-o-line and matches, we got some book burnin' t'do!
Or, are we solving the problem of "terrorists" reading subversive material? Since terrorism indicates criminal intent, it seems logical to label terrorists as criminals. Then, we're making sure that criminals dont' get subversive materials? So, why does the FBI have the power to view EVERYONE's reading materials? Why can they go get a subpeona to see what *I* check out of the library. I'm not a terrorist, I'm just an average citizen. If they don't need to know what I'm reading, why can they find out?
You can't just brush off abusive investigative powers by saying they're not using it because that means they don't need it and shouldn't have it. You can't just brush them off by saying that if you're a law abiding citizen you have nothing to worry about either because that means that the power is too broad and they don't need all of it.
Ignoring all that, there's also the fact that if the government wants a power, they ought to be proving that they need it. Since they haven't had a need for it once in three years, I'd say that's a pretty good indication that they DON'T need it and it's time they lose it, wouldn't you?
Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
I just got back from watching Fahrenheit 9/11 where the congressman says to the effect of "Do you seriously think we read all the bills? Can you imagine how much work that would be?" we discover that most politicians haven't actually read the PATRIOT Act (so Moore goes around in an ice-cream van reading it to them) even though they voted on it. I know thats just one politicians' opinion chosen out of hundreds but it really seems to explain allot about government and makes allot of sense - with all these stupid bills flying around, who actually has time to read them all and even if you read an abridged version, can you really be expected to understand what it means on both sides of the debate within the time given? It doesn't take an expert to conclude (unless someone cares to give some evidence of congress being a super-efficient organised system) that the government has a crappy environment to work in and coupled with dick-head corrupt politicians nothing useful or meaningful beyond utter bureaucracy can ever get done there, people just sit, look bored and vote the way they're told.
Oddly there were many extra things in the film I saw (in the uk) that i didn't see in the cam-divx version from the us - anyone?
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
Let's see here... Coal Creek, Tn. Striking coal miners staged a rebellion (now known as Coal Creek Rebellion) against the mine owners who were using convict labor as "strike breakers", Federal and state troops were used to try and quell the miners. While the 27 miners were killed, the losses incurred by the militias and local law enforcement raised such an outcry, that the federal law that made it legal to transport "strikebreakers" across state lines and use convict labor to break strikes was repealed.
The entire history of the industrial revolution is littered with mini armed rebellions against the government. In each case brought before the courts, the 2nd amendment was used successfully to defend the striking/rebelling laborers for the use of violence.
Oh and a certain Founding Father (Thomas Jefferson) said it himself.... "a little rebellion now and then is a good thing". This in reference to the Shay Rebellion.
Perhaps now more than ever it is important for each and every one of us who debate these things (which, at least at the moment) I still have the ability to do and you do to as evidenced by each and every one of our posts, to really read and know our Constitution and our history and to not lie down and accept ANY intrusion upon your rights.
And one last quote, "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." The esteemed Ben Franklin
I'll say this again. I am not a Democrat, this is not a Democrat or Republican issue. Its a democracy issue with a little 'd'.
Anytime the Republicans do something bad it is lame beyond belief and not a valid argument to just say "if the democrats had done it" I wouldn't be complaining, so it must OK for the Republican's to do it. When the Democrats have done the same thing in the past it is equally wrong and if they do it again I'll complain just as loud.
Lobbyists and campaign contributors bribe all politicians. It is never right. The U.S. desperately needs to shorten its campaign cycle and dramatically reduce the money being spent on TV ads. When the presidential candidates are spending a half a billion dollars on one election there is massive room for corruption.
Its also never right to use patriotism as a weapons and fear mongering to coerce people in to doing things that are fundamentally unwise which is what's happening here.
@de_machina
is to "educate" (brainwash) students, not increase their intelligence.
While one can be educated and intelligent, education tends to stunt many areas of intellectual growth. Here are a few things that school does teach:
1. Endurance - The ability to tolerate tedious and boring environments, rote tasks, institutional structures, and rigid guidelines.
2. Assignable Curiosity - The ability to fall in line and become interested in whatever subject matter is being taught at the time.
3. Ideological Discipline - This requires an uncritical approval of institutional structures. Those that believe school is organized in an inefficient manner, or that it's a waste of time, tend not to do well. Those who embrace the institutional hierarchy respond very well.
4. Respond well to Fascism - Does the student embrace authority, even rather dim-witted authority figures? If yes, then we have a great student.
5. Elitism - Does the student believe that school is a measure of intelligence, and that therefore, the huge difference in grades is caused by the fact that there is a huge variety in intelligence? Does the student believe that the reason the majority don't make it through the educational system is because they are dumb sheep? If so, the student will do well. Or, instead does the student (rightly) believe that the true sheep are the ones that make it through the nightmare process of 20 years of schooling required to get a Phd? If this is the case, the student isn't likely to be able to tolerate the process.
6. Uncritical Thinking - The student must memorize whatever facts that are presented uncritically. The student must be uncritical in his or her service to the system. If the student goes to a poor school, then he or she must uncritically learn the skills that employers require. If the student goes to a wealthy school, then he or she must learn uncritically how to be a manger, doctor, lawyer, etc.
Of course a student at a poor school can go to a better school if he works much harder, but this requires that the student embrace the system even more so than his wealthier peers.
A good book to read about this is "Disciplined Minds" by Jeff Schmidt. It's an excellent critique of the educational system.
Looking at my undergraduate book collection, I am struck by just how few books one is required to read in order to get a degree. I can fit them on a single shelf. Half are for core cirriculum requirements(a fancy word for remedial education) that most US colleges require, the other half are for my two degrees, a BS in Comp Sci and a BA in Music. Of that, about 10 are books directly related to computer science. That's it, just 10 books. I bought over twice that many CS books on my own during the same two year period that I majored in CS. Obviously, ten books isn't much, so the real learning is happening elsewhere. The things being taught are the 6 things I mentioned above, not the material in the books. This is why degrees are considered important despite the fact that most of the books and material don't come close to covering everything a student needs to know.
I'm sure you're probably non-Arab, and most likely white, which is why you don't perceive this as a threat to your liberty.
I have a good friend who still has a close relationship with her ex-husband, who happens to be of Arab descent, but who is a French-born citizen. He is routinely harrassed when entering the country (from France), meaning poor treatment by customs, made to wait while all of his effects are searched, while I have French friends who are not of Arab descent that have never had any problems coming into the country. My friend's ex-husband has just come to understand he will always be targeted.
When will they find something that on you are I is deemed "normal/harmless" but on him is a terrorist weapon?
We have legislated big brother. Read the novel. As pointed out before, these are things we demonized Soviet Russia for doing to their people.
We have civil rights laws not to protect the people that aren't affected, they are there for those who are. Do not think just because MTV isn't telling you it's a problem that it's not a problem.
Not since Marie-Antoinette played milkmaid has looking simple and honest been so fake and complicated.