Slashdot Mirror
Secret Service Seeks Indymedia Logs
sunbird writes "The Justice Department has issued a subpoena seeking IP logs from Calyx, the ISP for nyc.indymedia.org, after individuals posted [1 | 2 | 3] the names, addresses, and phone numbers of some of the RNC delegates. The subpoena was issued as part of an ongoing investigation of voter intimidation. As reported earlier in this Slashdot article, the Justice Department tried this before. Calyx, represented by the ACLU, responded, claiming that '[t]he only intimidation taking place here is the Secret Service intimidating people who speak out against the government.' [Full text of the letter available here] Read more: Indymedia.org | NYT"
NYC protest radio http://radio.socialtechnology.net/listen.html
Hey, you aren't too far off. ;-)
Do you like German cars?
john young, doing what he does best:
http://cryptome.org
this line is just filler
as is this one.
This guy hacked the ProtestWarrior website and stole the info. It wasn't just delagets it was people registered at PW. Private emails, phone numbers, names addresses. Furthermore posted that information to the world on IndyMedia with the full aproval of it's editing staff. Then suggested that people call and harrass everyone on the list.
I don't give a @#$% what your political offiliation is that is wrong. It is violation of PW servers with intent to do harm. It is violation of their covenant of privacey with their members. It is harasment of people because of their beliefs.
It's one thing to protest, it's another to make personal attacks.
We have secret ballot in America for a reason!
I'll see you all at the polls Nov 2nd!
I would rather be ashes than dust!
If you had bothered to read the ACLU page linked, you would have seen that the information that was posted is publicly available.
"The market alone cannot provide sufficient constraints on corporation's penchant to cause harm." -- Joel Bakan
Not solely by virtue of being delegates, anyway. The only definitive statement you can make is that these people were selected by (generally) the members of a political party to participate in ITS process for choosing a presidential election nominee, and that can be as private a process as the party wants it to be. The public gets its say in the general election (yes, I know there are exceptions, notably Louisiana and Virginia).
Some of them probably are public officials (it's reasonably likely that if your Senator or Congressman is a Republican, s/he is there; some delegates also may be local office holders), but many others are like this girl, private, politically interested, citizens who do not hold elected office.
The posting of their personal info is an invasion of privacy, but that's not why the DoJ is involved. They're involved because of the threats to the safety of these individuals just a few clicks away on the site in question.
"Republicans in charge of all three branches of government"
You're joking, right?
First, the judicial branch. That should be enough, despite how hard certain politicians try and make it partisan (filibustering any nomination from an opposing party is just dirty), it should be separate.
As for the legislature, the numbers are close, and always switching around. And besides, look at the number that actually vote purely on party (a bad stance anyways). Claiming any party actually owns is a joke.
Executive. So the Republicans are in right now. The democrats were in last time. It switches around a lot, and if you for some reason think there is a massive conspiracy keeping any single party in power, you really need a dose of reality.
This was NOT a questionable thing to do. The information is already freely and easily available. Just go to rncdelegates.com, click on any state in the picture and see the list of information, including address, phone numbers, email and hotel information posted there. Apparently the "crime" that occured was copying the information from rncdelegates.com to indymedia.org.
when they publish it themselves?
Someone Really Needs To Do This
This New York Times story is really interesting:
The story goes on to point out that the ACLU is upset about the investigation, and that the federal courts have taken a very narrow view of what is not protected speech in similar cases:
The obvious although not perfect analogy is the anti-abortion activist web site controversy of a few years ago, that the article also mentions:
The ACLU in that case took the position that this was not constitutionally protected free speech:
To their credit, the ACLU also argued that "that the defendants' intent to threaten the abortion providers must also be proven...."
The "Nuremberg Files" site
Please google on "keating five"
..... Click the link for more information. 's administration's attempt to continue deregulation, in the face of the worsening crisis in the Savings and Loan industries.
..... Click the link for more information.
..... Click the link for more information.
..... Click the link for more information.
..... Click the link for more information.
The Keating Five (or Keating Five Scandal) refers to a banking scandal in the 1980s which involved Savings and Loans institutions. It resulted from President Reagan Ronald Reagan
Order: 40th President
Term of Office: January 20, 1981-January 20, 1989
Predecessor: Jimmy Carter
Successor: George H. W. Bush
Date of Birth: Monday, February 6, 1911
Place of Birth: Tampico, Illinois
Date of Death: Saturday, June 5, 2004
Place of Death: Bel Air]], Los Angeles, California
First Lady: Nancy Reagan
Profession: Actor and labor union leader
Political Party: Republican]]
Vice President: George H. W. Bush
Charles Keating Alternative meaning: Charles Keating (actor)
Charles H. Keating Jr. (born 1923 in Cincinnati, Ohio) is an American lawyer and banker convicted of fraud in the Savings and Loan scandal of 1989. A conservative Catholic active in the Republican Party, he was formerly involved in anti-pornography efforts.
Anti-pornography efforts
In the late 1950s, Keating founded the Cincinnati anti-pornography organization
was the president of the Lincoln Savings and Loan, which when it failed (1989) took around $2 billion dollars worth of investors' money with it.
Edwin J. Gray, the head of the Federal Home Loan Bank Board, had been approached by three senators to discontinue investigation of the Lincoln S&L. It turned out that those senators had been given combined donations of $1.3 million to their campaign funds from the Lincoln S&L.
The Senate ethics committee concentrated on the five senators involved: Alan Cranston
Alan MacGregor Cranston (June 19, 1914-December 31, 2000) was a U.S. journalist and politician. He was born in Palo Alto, California and attended Pomona College and the University of Mexico before graduating from Stanford University in 1936.
He was a correspondent for the International News Service for two years preceding World War II. When an abridged English-language translation of Adolf Hitler's Mein Kampf was released, sanitized to exclude some of Hitler's anti-semitism and militancy, Cranston published an abridged and annotated translation which he believed more accurately reflected the contents of the book. In 1934, Hitler sued him for copyright violation in the state of Connecticut; a judge ruled in Hitler's favour and publication of the book was halted.
(D, CA); Dennis DeConcini Dennis Webster DeConcini (born May 8, 1937) is a former Democratic Senator from the state of Arizona in the United States, serving from 1977 to 1995.
Primarily remembered as a member of the Keating Five, a banking and political contribution scandal in the 1980s which involved Savings and Loans institutions.
(D, AZ); John Glenn This is about the astronaut and senator. Perhaps you sought the English film director John Glen (with one 'N')? John Herschel Glenn Jr. (born July 18, 1921) is a former American fighter pilot, astronaut, and politician. He was the third American astronaut to travel in space and the first American to complete an orbit of the earth.
Born in Cambridge, Ohio, he obtained a Bachelor
(D, OH); John McCain John Sidney McCain III (born August 29, 1936) is an American politician. Considered a moderate Republican and maverick, McCain has been a U.S. Senator from Arizona since 1987. He was a presidential candidate in the 2000 election, but was defeated in the Republican primaries by George W. Bush.
Early life
McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone, the son and grandson of prominent Navy admirals (John S.
Just to help out a bit:
s /nuremberg-files/
http://www-cse.stanford.edu/classes/cs201/project
Admins, here's a few tweaks you can make to your configs to protect the privacy of your users.
/var/log/httpd/access_log noip
./configure using --without-iplogging
Apache
======
In httpd.conf:
LogFormat "noip - - %t \"%r\" %>s %b \"%{Referer}i\" \"%{User-Agent}i\" %T %V" noip
CustomLog
This will keep the format of the logs the same as the default, but instead of
having an IP in the logs it will read "noip". The logs can still be processed by
programs such as webalizer.
Squid
=====
In squid.conf add:
client_netmask 0.0.0.0
pure-ftpd
=========
When compiling, run
I see several posts here saying Indymedia did this, Indymedia posted the names. Indymedia did NOT post the names. Indymedia is like Slashdot, ANYONE can post. Blaming Indymedia for something a poster said would be like saying CmdrTaco was supporting what some anonymous Slashdot poster said, or blaming the Usenet cabal for a posting by some anonymous Usenet poster. I just wanted to make this clear as several people have said here that Indymedia took this position. I don't think they understand what Indymedia is. Yesterday I read through a dozen posts by people who hate the protestors on the nyc.indymedia.org site. nyc.indymedia.org is in many ways just like Slashdot in terms of anonymous posters and so forth. They can't be blamed for every bozo that comes along.
Wrong.
Thanks for playing.
The people getting attacked in the protests are those who dare to disagree with the party line of the "Peace" and "Anti-War" crowd.
I am talking about the Protest Warrior people that were attacked by "Patriots" in NYC.
Link goes to video of the attack.
The brave reader can also google for the urine filled balloons that "Peace Loving" protesters threw at police.
Yuck.
Who will also strip you of your citizenship if you're not christian (Pres. G Bush Sr claimed that atheists weren't actually citizens). And given the choice between having my truck burned by democrats or having my books burned by republicans, well, I can always take the bus to work. And given the choice between getting too much information about my government and being told "You little people don't need to know that", I'll take too much (who is it that's been trying to 'reclassify' public information?). Given the choice between high taxes and no freedom, I'll keep my freedom (which party started the War on Drugs? which one is still its biggest supporter today? which country has the highest incarceration rate in the world as a result?)
'[t]he only intimidation taking place here is the Secret Service intimidating people who speak out against the government.'
As a truly impartial observer (Libertarian) the Republicans are not that intimidating. What is intimidating is the leftwingers who are on the verge of losing it. Never have I seen so much ANGER in my life.
It is to the point that people are afraid of them. I am not afraid of the Secret Service, I am afraid of the leftwing wackos and anarchists who see nothing wrong with screaming, yelling, shouting obscenities, and generally being a nuisance. That is okay i guess, since it is LEFTWINGERS doing it.
I think it is funny that the Left wingers cannot handle it when given a taste of their own medicine. http//www.protestwarrior.com
And where where the complaints from these people when FBI files of REPUBLICANS showed up on Hillaries Table? Where, where, where? Must be the old (D) good (R) bad binary logic.
There is enough Hypocricy on BOTH sides, though only the hypocricy of the right ever gets reported.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
"This amounts to nothing more than bully tactics that I might expect from other Political Parties, but not from mine."
And I think this is exactly why democrats will end up being losers. The republicans know that you are not willing to get down into the slime with them so they smack you with everything they have while you sit there with a shit eating grin congratulating yourself on how you are not as bad as they are.
Until you guys are willing to become as loathsome and downright evil as David Horowitz, Ann Coulter, BIll Oreilly or Rush Limbaugh you will continue to get spanked and humiliated in public.
evil is as evil does
The party national committees have members, not delegates, and (if you RTFA) there aren't 1600 of them. You're right that they generally set the agendas for the parties. But that's not what this is about. Pay better attention next time.
And the brethren went away edified.
Yes:
Bush Events:
Kerry Events
I think you'd have no touble getting into a public Kerry event wearing that T-Shirt. --M
"All are encouraged to help out this campaign in any way they can. Deface websites, flood email servers, cause financial disruption, change electronic billboards. Turn the system over and put the people on top. Hacktivists of the world, unite!
What will be happening?
August 22nd - Day of online direct action a week before the convention begins. All are encouraged to attack as many right-wing, corporate, government or military sites as possible. Web defacements, email attacks, financial disruption, anything and everything. These attacks will be used to stir discussion of the RNC, encourage people to participate in the protests in NYC itself, and to build for the mainstream electronic sit-in on the 29th.
August 29 - September 2nd - Mainstream electronic sit-in while the RNC is in session. The actions will commence on noon of each day. The protests will utilize a wide diversity of tactics including email, web, fax and phone disruption. The logistical details of this campaign are included in this document below.
Who are we flooding?
The email addresses, fax numbers, and phone numbers listed below are various contacts of the Republican National Committee and the official George W. Bush re-election staff."
Then they provided the urls to websites to get dos tools, and lists of websites, fax and phone numbers, and the names and emails of Republican delegates and the hotels where they will be staying.
There are dozens of Indymedias - in South America, in Asia, in Europe, in the US. Each site can use whatever software it wants, with many using one of three popular software kits they developed. Each has its own policies as well. I can't recall nyc.indymedia.org deleting any messages. They do hide messages sometimes, but in that respect it is like Slashdot, you can view the -1 trolls if you wish. Of course, some other Indymedia locals have more draconian rules with deletions, banning and so forth. Each local is autonomous.
As far as illegal info on Slashdot, please. Like there weren't 1,000,000 links on Slashdot to how to get Windows source code when that was illegally released. And that is similar to Indymedia - the information was not released from Indymedia from what I understand, it was on various places on the net so someone posted it to Indymedia. It might not have even been the person who originally had gotten their hands on the data.
I'm just trying to separate the facts from the opinions. I don't want people who know nothing of Indymedia thinking the people who run it are the ones who decided to post this info of their own volition. They did not have a meeting and say lets post this info, it was just put up there. You can have an opinion on what they should do at that point, but they are coming in at step 2, they were not the protagonist at step 1.
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
The sysadmin from the NYC Indymedia site is the one who's under investigation for hacking the Protest Warrior site and disseminating their full mailing list.
In this case, NYC Indy is neck-deep in it, and it's getting deeper.
RNC = Republican National Convention. They will offically choose George W. Bush as canidate for president, give speechs on national television, and try to encourage people to vote for their canidates. It's all cermonial, for the most part. Both Democrats and Republicans knew the major nomations well beforehand. Lots of people on the internet feel lots of hatred towards the republican party in general, (It's a miracle no one has tried to kill Bush) so they've posted all the people who get to attend the convention.
SAILING MISHAP
Discredit the sacrifices of our soldiers?
l =C&cycle=2004
Uhmm the whole point of the swift vets is to point out that Kerry did this when he came back. He backstabbed his fellow soldiers by saying they committed war crimes, when Kerry had no such evidence. How is this not discrediting the sacrifices of the soldiers during the Vietnam era? On top of that Kerry now uses his service of 4 months as a reason to vote for him, yet since he came back he said he was against his service and the war. If anyone has issues it is your misunderstanding of the facts.
Secondly its convenient to try and say BUSH is connected to this group but where is the evidence. One lawyer is not a smoking gun. On top of that what about Kerry's involvement with moveon.org and all the other 527 groups which his election committee was actively involved with for setting up concerts etc.
The hypocrisy runs thick. It's hard for most people to admit both of these candidates have less than a stellar record to vote for them. The sad part is most people are voting for Kerry only because they hate Bush, so I ask you this one question. What does Kerry stand for? I bet you will be unable to find out because of his unbelievable ability to change his stance on an issue based upon what is appeared to be hot at the time. Frankly I do not want a president who will change his mind because of pressure.
One more thing, I remember so many people saying how great the new campaign finance reform would be and how we needed it to clean up our elections. Why aren't their cries of injustice for the 527 groups? Why hasn't the media made a big deal about this? The intent of the reform law was not so groups, implied to be working with both parties, can spend unlimited money to get the candidates message across. You should also note the rather obvious imbalance between one political party verses another. Wonder if that has anything to do with it.
http://www.opensecrets.org/527s/527cmtes.asp?leve
This of course doesn't even address the power that has been given to the media due to these laws.
"Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance" -Confucius
So you're saying they're hiding from the secret service? If so, that's just silly because one court order could open up the records of the registrar as to who purchased the domain. The implication of my post was that they hide who they are from the general public while publishing personal contact information for individual citizens under the context of free speech and that our society is under Uncle Sam's boot when it comes to privacy. That what's good for the goose isn't good for the gander. If they published other peoples home contact information, why won't the publish their own?
Because they know what they did was wrong, that they are criminals, and they violated peoples privacy. Because they know those people will be pissed. Because they know that they are intellectually dishonest.
Give tax breaks to the rich?
n ce =0
When are you guys going to stop sprouting this nonsense? This is a complete lie and it's not going to work to continue to try and lie. All the media knows this is true, but they sensationalize to get money. Here is the truth from the CBO report itself.
Let's take a look at how the 'transfer' is going.
The Richest Americans
According to the CBO report, the top 20 percent of income earners would have paid 64.0 percent of federal taxes in 2004 without the Bush tax cuts. As it is, with the Bush cuts, they will pay 'only' 63.5 percent. And what happens in 2005? The top earners would have paid 64.0 percent of federal taxes but now, because of this egregious 'transfer,' will pay only 64.3 percent (no sic!), which to our reading looks like an increase in tax burden.
The proportion of federal taxes that will be paid by the top 20 percent of earners is higher under the Bush tax cuts from 2005 through 2010, according to the CBO report that Reuters purportedly cites. From 2011 through 2014, as far into the future as the report projects, the top 20 percent of earners will pay, under the Bush tax cuts, the same proportion of federal taxes that they would have without the Bush tax cuts.
Middle Class Families
Now let's look at the middle 20 percent of earners. In 2004, they would have paid 10.4 percent of federal taxes without the Bush cuts. With the cuts, they will pay 10.5 percent of federal taxes. Note, however, that because of the cuts, the federal tax burden for the middle 20 percent of earners dropped from 16.5 percent to 14.6 percent. In other words, these earners are paying a slight bit more of federal taxes, but a lot less in federal taxes. In other words, their taxes were cut.
The proportion of federal taxes that will be paid by the middle 20 percent of earners is slightly higher (one-tenth of a percent) in 2004 and 2006. The proportion of federal taxes that will be paid by the middle 20 percent of earners is lower in 2005, 2008, 2009, and 2012. It is unchanged in the other years through 2014, as far into the future as the CBO report projects.
To Summarize
From 2005 to 2010, the tax cuts that Reuters reports have "transferred the federal tax burden from the richest Americans to middle-class families" raise the comparative tax burden for the richest Americans and lower the burden, a bit, for middle-class families.
You want to check the information, here is the link:
http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=5746&seque
Please stop with this lying it only makes you look stupid.
As for the civil liberties, I would argue both sides do an equally well job on that issue.
"Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance" -Confucius
The people doing this are almost certainly not supporters of the "Democrats". If you read their own post then you'll see the following statement:
(But do not misinterpret us, we do not view the Democratic Party as an opposition party, but rather as another side of the same coin.)There is good reason behind this sentiment. Kerry is on his own admission pro-War, pro-tax cuts, anti-gay marriage. He's a fellow Skull&Bones member like George W. Bush. Basically he's a right-wing candidate wearing the friendly clown-face as opposed to G.W.B. who wears the sad clown face.
I can't possibly sum up the disgusting history of the Democratic Party (and hence the hypocrisy, blindness and ignorance of anyone that posits them as an alternative to the Republicans), but if you're actually interested (instead of wanting a yes-it-is-no-it-isn't exchange) then I recommend reading _Dime's Worth of Difference_ by Jeffrey St.Clair and Alexander Cockburn. Here are a couple of tastes of it.
By the way, what's the name of that "hackers and hippies" party? I want to vote for them!
Just an FYI, the Secret Service is under the Department of the Treasury, not the Department of Justice. I didn't read every reply so this might have been posted before.
In any case, the aforementioned 'missing' records would quiet a lot of screaming howls from the rabid-left.
About a month ago, the pentagon admitted they had the records. There is no recordof Bush being paid during that time, there is no record of him showing up for duty for a year.
There are no more "missing" records.
Unprecedented Corruption: A guide to conflict of interest in the U.S. government
It's illogical to vote Republican in 2004.
Bush's education improvements were fraud. (my sig)
I had a situation that pounded home how this isn't a case for the Secret Service. I had a person calling me at work and home harrassing me. It sucked big time and drive my wife crazy. So we called the police and they told us that unless a phiysical threat was made, there was NOTHING they could do. The person calling had the right to call me as much as they wanted so long as there was no physical threat.
Seems that if your name and number is in the public record (phone book), then that is an invitation to call. We got an unlisted number after moving. So no, these guys are still available to be called until their numbers are actually listed as restricted. That's how the police explained it to me.
------------
Huh?
"I get the impression McCain is about as impressed with John Kerry as he is with a pile of old dogshit in the road."
Your impression would be wrong. McCain and Kerry have been good friends, and have worked together, for years. Note that McCain didn't say _anything_ negative about Kerry in his speec at the RNC convention (unlike all of the other flaming Kerry-bashing).
"As for the accusations about Kerry in Vietnam, if he would talk about a reason to elect him OTHER than the 4 months he spent there, then maybe other people would dwell less on it as well."
Actually, Kerry was in the Navy for four years. He was on combat duty (which he volunteered for) for four months, which is, I guess I have to point out, much MORE than the average; most soldiers never see active combat duty at all.
And he's explained in quite a bit of detail what he would do if elected. There's plenty of detail on http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/. Admittedly the press would rather play "gotcha" than communicate anything of substance, but voters can educate themselves fairly easily. Heck, you're posting on Slashdot, so I _know_ that you could go read Kerry's position papers.
Enable 3D printed prosthetics!
You want to talk about "First Amendment zones"? You obviously have a short memory. Do you not remember the caged protesters in Boston at the Democratic convention?? Or did you already forget the people freely walking on the street during the protest at the Republican convention on Sunday???
It seems your attacks are better targeted at Democrats.
According to humans or natural trends? Let's try both. In Ohio youll find in some burgeoning populations of deer (which end up in large numbers dismembered on the side of the highway) in the spring but by winter you see massive starvation. So. Discounting those that die by car accidents and hunting, there are still enough to cause starvation on a large scale. Sounds like there are too many fucking deer now that they have no natural predators besides us.
--Kevin
Bush is known world wide and Kerry not near as much. Which is the bigger target? A Senator or the President? THAT'S why everyone needs to be scrutinized who come with in sight of the guy not because he wants to be secretive.
Your primary argument is that Bush must stifle dissent when he speaks in public (really private events, but I digress), in order to protect him against potential violence. Further, Candidate Kerry doesn't need this level of "protection" because he isn't the president and is thus not a likely target. You forget Robert F. Kennedy, killed by an assassin's bullet to the head after having given his California primary victory speech in Los Angeles prior to the 1968 Democratic convention. He likely would have beat Hubert Humphrey, the eventual Democratic nominee.
All candidates face serious danger from lunatics and political extremists on the campaign trail. That Kerry chooses to keep his events open to the public in the face of open dissent and polarized discourse would seem to show real COURAGE. Or possibly recklessness. But I seriously doubt stifling political dissent -- free speech -- would protect either President Bush or Candidate Kerry from a real assassin. The Secret Service should have more serious concerns than running around directing local police to arrest dissenters with unfavorable T-Shirts and signs so the President won't feel embarrassed in public. IMO their primary and only concern should be to protect the President, his family, and other critical executive officials from physical danger. Whatever security checks they need do to meet that goal is fine by me.
--Maynard
The Free Speech Zones were created by Clinton. So hey.
From http://home.comcast.net/~sharonday7/Presidents/AP0 603.htm
***********************
20. Presidents who are related to other presidents. [genealogy]
Presidents known to be related to other presidents (updated for 2001) [BPL 7]:
George W. Bush - 16 at least
Franklin Roosevelt - 16 other presidents
William Howard Taft -14
Calvin Coolidge -14
Gerald Ford -14
Millard Fillmore -11
Richard Nixon -10
Grover Cleveland -9
Herbert Hoover -9
Benjamin Harrison -8
John Quincy Adams -7
Rutherford Hayes -7
Ulysses Grant -6
Franklin Pierce -5
James Garfield -5
Warren Harding -5
John Adams -4
William Henry Harrison -4
Theodore Roosevelt -4
Jimmy Carter -4
George Washington -3
James Madison -2
Martin Van Buren -2
John Tyler -2
Zachary Taylor -2
Abraham Lincoln -2
The close relatives were:
John Adams, father of John Quincy Adams
George Bush, father of George W. Bush
William Henry Harrison, grandfather of Benjamin Harrison
James Madison, second cousin to Zachary Taylor
Theodore Roosevelt 5th cousin to Franklin D. Roosevelt
****************
The fact is that people in power tend to be related to other people in power, regardless of the era. Congressional genealogies are doubtless even more fun...
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
Just to be fair here, it doesn't look like Sen. Kennedy is the only senator who wasn't too keen on this bill. It failed to pass with 8 yeas and 90 nays. Point fingers at Kerry and Kennedy all you want, but please don't stop pointing them at the other 88 senators who voted this bill down.
Additionally, the bill you are referencing, Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, is described by Thomas as I'm not sure what bill you are referring to when you say This bill would have essentially given the Attorney General the power to ban any ammunition that was capable of penetrating police soft body armor. It doesn't seem to be this one that you've attributed the Kennedy quote to and that a near unanimous number of senators opposed.
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
Worse, at the conventions they are quarantining people with differing opinions in a "Free Speech Zone" that is away from the convention, away from cameras and the eyes of delegates.
Make no mastake, America is not the bastion of freedom and democracy that we claim to be. And by claiming to be such, George W. Bush is a rather large hypocrite.
-- Bob
1^2=1; (-1)^2=1; 1^2=(-1)^2; 1=-1; 1=0.
If you look at the EPIC site you can see some of the letters from the people being harrassed, including senior citizens who have never had so much as a traffic ticket.
... We don't ask how they decide who to list. Each agency decides on
How many, its impossible to tell, its secret. The no fly list has actually existed since 1990, formed under George W.'s dad. It was a tiny list of terrorists managed by the FBI until 9/11. It then was turned over to the TSA, its length exploded and the people run it are either incompetent or malevolent to blacklist "names" with no other identifying data so everyone with that name is harrassed.
Who is being put on the list, by how and by whom is secret. How to get off the list is largely undefined. You typically get bounced between the TSA, the airlines, the FBI and Homeland Security until you give up.
Your ability to stick your head in the sand and pretend everything is OK is exactly how people lose their civil liberties and wake up one day living in a totalitarian state.
EPIC acquired memo's on how the no-fly(don't fly and call law enforcement) and selectee(harass but let fly) lists work. It was so heavily censored that it was meaningless. You can look at them in the link the previous email.
Below are two more stories suggesting activists are being put on the list to punish them. Can you prove it.....the beauty of it is no.....the government can just claim it was a mistake or their name matched an alias of a terrorist.
People are being blacklisted because their name matches a terrorists "assumed" name. I wonder what would happen if a terrorist used George W. Bush, Tom Ridge or John Ashcroft as an alias, though of course they don't have to fly in the nightmare that is civil aviation since 9/11.
The Government's Air Passenger Blacklist
By Dave Lindorff
Barbara Olshansky was in a Newark International Airport departure gate last March when an airline agent at the counter checking her boarding pass called airport security. Olshansky was subjected to a close search and then, though she was in view of other travelers, was ordered to pull her pants down. The Sept. 11 terrorist attacks may have created a new era in airport security, but even so, she was embarrassed and annoyed.
Perhaps one such incident might've been forgotten, but Olshansky, the assistant legal director for the left-leaning Center for Constitutional Rights, was pulled out of line for special attention the next time she flew.
And the next time. And the next time.
On one flight this past September from Newark to Washington, six members of the center's staff, including Olshansky, were stopped and subjected to intense scrutiny, even though they had purchased their tickets independently and had not checked in as a group. On that occasion, Olshansky got angry and demanded to know why she had been singled out.
"The computer spit you out," she recalls the agent saying. "I don't know why, and I don't have time to talk to you about it."
Olshansky and her colleagues are, apparently, not alone. For months, rumors and anecdotes have circulated among left-wing and other activist groups about people who have been barred from flying or delayed at security gates because they are "on a list."
But now, a spokesman for the new Transportation Security Administration has acknowledged for the first time that the government has a list of about 1,000 people who are deemed "threats to aviation" and not allowed on airplanes under any circumstances. And the official suggested that Olshansky and other political activists may be on a separate list that subjects them to strict scrutiny but allows them to fly.
"We have a list of about 1,000 people," said David Steigman, the TSA spokesman. The agency was created a year ago by Congress to handle transportation safety during the war on terror. "This list is composed of names that are provided to us by various government organizations like the FBI, CIA and INS.
@de_machina
and people have actually followed through on murdering abortion clinic physicians. Not to mention real harrasment and bombings.
Also note that an elected official is a public official. A clinical physician is a private citizen.
The intent of Indymedia is to get people involved in the political process.
In short, the two do not equate.
Kind Regards
"A few great minds are enough to endow humanity with monstrous power, but a few great hearts are not enough to make us w