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"
Seems to me like an obvious abuse of power. I mean, sure, it's an obvious privacy invasion to the delegates there, but they're public officials! Public officals can't and shouldn't expect alot of privacy simply because the people the represent need to be able to contact them.
Now on the other hand, things like this are probably the reason as to why many message boards (Slashdot included) only store logs for a day or two. You can suponea what doesn't exist anymore!
For exactly this reason.
You can listen to streams of the RNC protest news Here (Portland IMC) and Here (A-Noise)
As I write, hundreds of people from the war resistors league march are being arrested, without a dispersal order or any charges.
And you don't think the reps know this?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
1) What is the Justice Department doing about the harrassment of Black Voting Leagues in Florida? If the answer (which I suspect it is) is "nothing" than this a clear case of government being used in a partisan and heavy-handed manner. It's also racist and classist. 2) I don't know about your state, but the Georgia GOP's website already lists already lists their delegates as well as the alternates for all to see. Just plug the name into Switchboard and you can get their addresses. Conclusion? This is a disingenuous, partisan, racist, classist abuse of the Justice Department. Someone else want to argue that point?
These people aren't representing anyone other than people who CHOOSE to be in Republican Party. There's no requirement for anyone to be represented by them. If I start writing posts on Slashdot representing the views of my friends, should I have my information published?
Of all that you posted, this is the only one I disagree with:
p. 2 #18: "We oppose the Endangered Species Act."
That's enough to kill my vote for Bush. It's also enough to kill my vote for Kerry. (For those of you who haven't been paying attention, BOTH Bush and Kerry are pro-hunters/sportsmen.)
It's a sad day when one's only choice is to vote "no confidence", and even that has to be a write-in.
It's been said before, and I really don't care.. But here's the obligatory:
Where are GWB's service records? Medicals? Flight logs? Why can't anyone be found that served in the same unit as him?
When people call him a 'deserter' it isn't because they think he joined the Guard to dodge the draft, they say it because they believe he joined the Guard, skipped a physical because he was snorting coke and went AWOL. Now, I don't have jack-shit to back those accusations, but that's what I've seen thrown around for a *LONG* time now.
In any case, the aforementioned 'missing' records would quiet a lot of screaming howls from the rabid-left.
And what's so unfortunate about the pro-gun voting block? I happen to be one of them.
I apologize for the slant of that comment. I did not mean to speak derisively of people that are pro-guns. I am pro-guns. I think it's unfortunate that it's a strong voting block because, as I was mentioning, I think the gun issue is used to manipulate voters. I think the Democratic threat to guns is exagerrated by the Republicans. I have friends who are liberal wackos and very rarely do they talk about how they want to see guns banned. That seems to be at the absolute bottom of the 'liberal agenda' from what I can tell. But for many Republicans, defense of the second ammendment seems to be at the top of their agenda. It would be great if the two groups could get together and recognize they aren't as divided as they thought on this issue. From there, they could unite to campaign on more important issues like protecting our forests and wetlands which are enjoyed by both groups in different ways.
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
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.
If there wasn't a vicious attack on his record by people who have all been revealed as liars, he wouldn't have to.
Given that his opponent was a deserter, it shows McCain's lack of integrity in supporting Bush.
Your respect was probably going to last only as long as McCain ripped on his own party. Somehow, I don't think he's weeping for the loss of your endorsement.
Where do you get this crazy horseshit. You seem to think party loyalty is some kind of absolute as well.
Other than in the last election, I have never voted for a Republican *or* for a Democrat. The parties are the major problem as evidenced by McCain.
I respected him because he did serve his country with honor. I respected him because I think he really was trying to clean up with his finance reform act.
I respected him because he seemed to work with people to achieve valid goals regardless of their party.
By the way, here's a standards check: do you also respect Zell Miller or Ed Koch or Ron Silver, liberals all, for going against their party because their convictions tell them to?
I respect any elected official who is working for the best of the people of this country. I respect them when they stand up for freedom (not Bush's Orwellian vision of it). I respect them when they stand on the side of We the People and against corporate interests. I have no problem with corporations in general, but when it comes to a choice between my rights and a corporations, I have no respect for anybody who sells me and my country out regardless of which party they are a member of or which one they vote with on a given issue.
I support the second amendment so I must be a Republican.
But I support the separation of church and state since this country was founded in part by Christians who were fleeing oppression by other fucking christians. Then of course they started burning innocent people alive. So it is quite obviously essential that religion can have no voice in the government of a free society.
So I absolutely can't be a Republican since they are the party who wants religious rule.
I know that government has no business of any sort legislating what happens inside my or anybody else's body, so the Republicans are far worse since they desperately want to shove their noses right up everybody's ass.
Both parties are fucked on drug policy.
I believe that some amount of government is necessary to stop some of these crazy fuckers and to prevent corporations from absolutely raping us, so Libertarianism is out too.
So I respect anybody who makes it into office who actually wants to work for freedom, which in this day and age seems to mean they have to work against both of the major parties.
My money says you're calling them sellouts. I'd be willing to bet "respect" and "conviction" is a one way street for you
Again with the accusations when you don't know a damn thing about me.
You are dead wrong.
Again.
Did you ever consider that maybe he thinks his party is the best one for the country? I mean, he's a REPUBLICAN Senator for a reason.
Not for one second. He knows he would make a far better president. Given this administration's record, nobody with a scrap of patriotism could support them. They have fought tooth and nail against everything this country claims to stand for.
And the current administration has nothing in common with the Republican platform.
They pay lip service to "small government", while they are increasing it to an incredible degree mortgaging our children's income while driving future income for any but the wealthiest down.
Creating police state agencies led by some of the worst criminals in our nation's history (Poindexter, Rumsfeld et al)
Tearing down our terrorism inv