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"
Is whether the people posting the information are willing to post the same information about themselves.
individuals posted [1 | 2 | 3] the names, addresses, and phone numbers of some of the RNC delegates.
What I don't understand is the purpose of this release. People protesting and hacking in the name of the democratic party is only going to piss off the undecided people.
Being a shmuck isn't any less evil even if you think you are doing it for the right reasons.
If I were a moderate and had to choose between the party of McCain and the party of hackers and hippies... I know who I would pick.
Obligate disclosure:
Physician who is a democrat... so my morals are screwie already. (grin)
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!
Having said that I don't understand this on two fronts
1. What possible benefit could the list could be to somebody? I mean it's not like these are potential swing votes. To me it would only give the Republicans political fodder for demonizing us democrats.
2. Why is simply posting it illegal? From the article
*warning* shameless plug to get myself (and yourself) a free ipod follows:
"I can not bring myself to believe that if knowledge presents danger, the solution is ignorance" - Isaac Asimov
NYC protest radio http://radio.socialtechnology.net/listen.html
Don't forget, don't post here, or you'll be hassled too...
...Doh!
Steve Jackson Games did it.
Secret service logs YOU
^^
What i think is humorous is that rncdelegates.com goes to lengths to hide the contact information only providing a hush mail account, on a seperate linked site no less, when they make this claim as justification for providing home contact information for delegates: "Where is the privacy of citizens when the USA PATRIOT Act is the law of the land? Where is privacy when "Big Brother" in the form of government and corporations worms his way ever further into our lives?" Where's their dncdelegates.com site? I'm all for free political speech and contacting representatives, but isn't this a bit hypocritical and biased?
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.
How about not logging every single thing to begin with. My proxy logs go to /dev/null.
Also, isn't this kinda similar to big brother asking the libraries about the list of books checked out by somebody? The simplest solution was the libraries stopping to keep track of who checked the book out after it was returned.
Free XBox, PS2
It's one thing to publish a known politician's info. They are opening their lives to the public (by definition, they serve the public). But, it's not necessarily right for a delegate's (often a common civilian) husbands/wives/kids to have to suffer harrassment simply as a result of their parent's or spouces political affiliations.
What if it were a Republican-oriented website with information for harrassing Democratic delegates? It'd be splashed all over the NYT before the Secret Service even caught wind of it, and the American Criminal Lawyers' Union wouldn't even touch the case!
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
You can't even peacefully wear a "No Bush" T-Shirt to a political rally now adays without being arrested for trespassing.
Your rights to free speech, and your expectations of privacy are gone now.
Politicians as part of our so called "open" government should have no expectations of privacy. Just who is supposedly representing us.
john young, doing what he does best:
http://cryptome.org
this line is just filler
as is this one.
This guy hacked the ProtestWarrior website and stole the info. It wasn't just delagets it was people registered at PW. Private emails, phone numbers, names addresses. Furthermore posted that information to the world on IndyMedia with the full aproval of it's editing staff. Then suggested that people call and harrass everyone on the list.
I don't give a @#$% 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!
A few years back, a *friend* got me a membership in the RNC for my birthday.
Does this mean that if I download this list I can sue myself for harrassment?
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.
Whatever your stance on publishing these kinds of lists, Indymedia is one of the few remaining grassroots information outlets left on the internet, free from corporate money, sleaziness and lies. It would be a shame to have them shut down, and would really represent the end of the Internet as we knew it.
:-(
Sure, there are Indymedia branches in many countries (mostly European) but if we get our own version of the Patriot act the way we're getting software patents and DMCA and other crappy corporate America anti-freedom laws, I wouldn't be surprised if we end up with only CNN and other big-money propaganda machines.
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?
An open question to anyone who thinks that posting the personally identifying information of GOP delegates on a (mostly) radical left-wing website isn't about intimidation, I ask you this:
What do you think it's about when the personally identifying information of physicians who terminate pregnancies is listed on anti-abortion websites?
Note that I'm not arguing against free speech here. Publish whatever directory you want, but it goes both ways.
Even Jesus hates listening to Creed.
to get through ALL the linked documents, in the most semantic sense of the phrase, posting this info about delegates can be considered intimidation. I'm not voting for Bush myself but in this has to swing both ways.
If a rule applies to Republicans, it has to apply to Democrats.
"Fighting the underpants gnomes since 1998!" "Bruce Schneier knows the state of schroedinger's cat"
to real protesting? Whatever happened to actually telling the people what's really going on in the shadows and giving the public a REAL reason to vote for or against a cause. Now, we're just terrorists in our own country.
I haven't seen a single political ad that discusses the truth or isn't hyperbole. It's too bad the people of America are too dumb to research politics themselves and not buy into this advertisement bull shit.
NSA logs YOU.
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
when they publish it themselves?
It's funny that people cry "Help! Help! I'm being repressed!" when they are being investigated for involving themselves in this crap.
I will never understand why people think that because they are "speaking out against the establishment" they should be able to do whatever they want to speak out, and be beyond reproach.
"Hard work never killed anyone." -- Some Dead Guy
Even if you feel they are seriously misguided, if you want to influence them you do it with kindness and respect. Whether they are really being put at some risk by having their names, hotel rooms and phone numbers posted really depends on the random action (Or hopefully lack of action) by some crazy wingnut. Would you want your mother getting a threatening call at 3am? The secret Service has a legitimate concern for their wellfare.
As a protest action it was stupid and arguablly endangering. About as self-indulgent and counter-productive as breaking windows and setting fires at the WTO.
Certainly, it seems to me to be pointlessly cruel. The fact that the perpetrators hide behind anonymity rather than stand up and explain themselves betrays a coward's conscience.
As Gandhi, King and Mandella proved - effective change is possible... RTFM!
"Knowing everything doesn't help..."
If I hand out copies of a list of the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of "uppity niggers" at a Ku Klux Klan rally, do you think that my actions are purely informational?
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
Read some of the coverage. Some things are more simple, like have people blocking hotel entrances, or event locations. Other things get more personal, like groups waiting at places like restraunts or theaters and trying to fight with attendees. Some have gotten worse. One police detective was put in the hospital.
I don't care what party you are with. That's just wrong. Protesting is an important right, but protesting doesnt' mean you can do things like that. Yes, stand and voice your concerns, but getting into fights, or attempting to get in the face of any and every attendee is just a annoying.
"Fear of serious injury cannot alone justify suppression of free speech and assembly. Men feared witches and burned women. It is the function of speech to free men from the bondage of irrational fears." - Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis
Not trying to be funny, but there is some violence inherent in this system.
"Teachers leave us kids alone
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.
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
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.
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.
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.
Last time I checked, the Republican Party was not a branch of government and delegates to the Republican National Convention were not necessarily members of the government.
Given Indymedia's Michael Moore-esque visits to lunacy, the list was placed up there to do one thing and one thing only, intimidate those Republican delegates. These are private citizens participating in the political process, unlike the hundreds of millions of other people who sit on the asses complaining and they don't deserve to be targeted by potentially violent people (don't even give me that peaceful protest hooey).
This is sickening and deserves no defence unless you think targetting people for their political beliefs, whether left or right, is a great idea. Oh wait, I'm sure there will be people who think it is a great idea.
You want to know who isn't running Firefox 2.x? They spell it "definately" and "rediculous".
"...but he has lately demonstrated that his loyalty to his party exceeds his loyalty to his country."
What the hell is this? 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.
I get the impression McCain is about as impressed with John Kerry as he is with a pile of old dogshit in the road. And while he doesn't like Bush, you don't have to LIKE someone to think they're the better candidate for office. 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.
"I had more respect for him. No longer."
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.
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?
My money says you're calling them sellouts. I'd be willing to bet "respect" and "conviction" is a one way street for you.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
"Hello, these aren't the self-appointed managers of the world any more than the DNC delegates were."
Well actually yes they are. They currently have complete control of the U.S. government with the exception of the courts which take longer to stack. They are running the worlds sole remaining superpower, no longer checked by the U.S.S.R, they are running the world's largest military by far, and a big chunk of the world's economy. They have declared a policy of preemptive warfare which means any nation that crosses the U.S. is a now a potential military target, remember "You are either with us or your agaist us". The U.S. has troops in something around a hundred countries now. How much more of an empire do you need.
The Feds and the city of New York both, run by Republican's are arresting people for nothing more than peaceful protest, you can now be stopped on the street or in a subway station and searched without cause. The Republican's, with Democrat collusion, through the Patriot Act have given themselves the right to see what you read at the library, and arrest a Librarian for not keeping this intrusion secret, or to engage in sneak and peak invasions of your home where they will break and enter to get in to your home, rumage through your things and don't have to show you the warrant or tell you they were there.
They've created a no fly list that is preventing people from traveling because they have names resembling a terroris name or alias, and has in fact been used to keep anti war and anti bush activist from flying. They've made numerous attempts to use computers and mergin of private and government databases to trace every recorded aspect of every persons life. The President just signed an executive order starting the merge of the CIA, the NSA, the DIA. The prospects are high the NSA's massive spying power will be applied against American's, so we can now empathize with the rest of the world, and we will no doubt see a spying agency large and more powerful than any the world has ever seen, with all of the checks against abuse abandoned in the name of "safety".
I'm sorry but it is pretty hard to shed a tear over this litte intrusion in to the privacy of the Republican party's top echelon considering the extent to which their leaders are demolishing everyone else's rights and privacy.
"What exactly leads you to believe the republican party has a "platform of racisism"?"
Its not a platform since that entails that it be stated, obvious and public and that is politically impossible in these politically correct times.
But it is an obvious fact under a thin facade. You really don't have to look any further than crowd shots of the the people in the RNC. It is a sea of white faces. There are a few Asians, a few Hispanics, and a very few token blacks but it is obvious to anyone not wearing blinders that it is a party of white people for white people, especially affluent white protestants. My dad is a die hard Republican, more than a little rascist, and he would never dream of supporting the Democrats because to him they are the party of blacks, gays, trial lawyers and labor unions.
The rascist undercurrent in the Republican party was amplified in the mid sixties when LBJ rammed through the Civil Rights Act. When he did it he told Bill Moyers he feared he was giving the South to the Republicans for a long time to come and he was dead right. When LBJ gave blacks their rights back and put an end to segregation most of the segregationist Democrats jumped ship and landed in the waiting arms of the Republican party and its a key reason they have a lock on the South today. The Democrats in the South were the rascist party before the Civil Rights Act. Now its the Republicans though its obviously somewhat muted compared to the '50s and '60s.
You just need to look some of the Republican parties leading Southern luminaries. Halley Barbour, Trent Lott and Bob Barr have all been linked to segragationists and white supremecists.
As you may re
@de_machina
And what's so unfortunate about the pro-gun voting block? I happen to be one of them.
And yes, Hunters are pro Enviroment. The better the enviroment, the better the hunting. You can also argue that (true) hunters are more aware of the enviroment than many of the 'green' party. It takes skill, knowledge, preperation, and effort to successfully stalk wild game, make a clean kill, and prepare the meat.
There's a number of things I disagree with both parties about. I tend to be pro-self reliance, pro-liberty, moderatly green.
I'm for green when it's not economicly crippling, and for providing regulations that encourage companies to still upgrade & improve emissions/pollution, rather than hiding under grandfather clauses.
I don't read AC A human right
There's a certain irony that the people hiding behind anonymous posts which were trying to intimidate convention delagates by publishing their personal details and locations are now claiming indimidation about their mere identities being exposed.
It's just stunningly hypocritical for anyone to claim intimidation by the mere uncovering of their anonymous identity when they've posted the personal details including residence of others encouraging thousands of potential protestors to show up and ahem... 'protest'.
If you go posting information online in a way that clearly invites intimidation of others and worse, excuse me if I don't feel very sympathetic about bleating of intimidation when someone attempts to uncover your anonymity.
It almost takes anonymous posting to a new low, but let's face it, it is pretty tough to reach new depths there.
Let's go through this a line at a time.
.30-.30 Winchester, the round typically chambered in grandpa's old lever-action rifle and used to take more deer than pretty much any other round in the world. So yes, we do fear him and his kind coming to more power than they already have.
Unfortunately, in America, the pro-gun voting block is incredibly strong. A national politician has a difficult time getting elected if the opponent can say he's anti-guns.
Yes, those of us who are in favor of our 2nd Amendment rights (you know, part of that darned Bill of Rights)organize and tend to vote for people who are like-minded. That's democracy for you.
That's why major democrats promote themselves as hunters (Kerry, Ann Richards, etc.)-- to defuse potential FUD that they're going to take away people's weapons.
Yes, politicians like Kerry like to pose with their multi-thousands-of-dollars over & under imported shotguns while trap-shooting at the range. If you didn't know, trap-shooting, while a fun sport, tends to be overrun with what could be termed the aristocratic snobs of the so-called "gun culture." "See, I'll let you keep your $10,000 dollar trap gun. It's just those eeeeeeevil 'assault weapons' I don't like."
And yes, Kerry and Ted Kennedy both voted for a bill (that fortunately failed) which would have outlawed "any centerfire rifle ammunition capable of penetrating a bulletproof vest." What they didn't want to tell you is that is EVERY center-fire rifle cartridge. Including that dastardly
Hunters are not opposed to the Endangered Species Act. Hunters and fishermen appreciate government regulations that provide them with more animals to catch or kill. Check out Ducks Unlimited, for example. The biggest opponents of the ESA are developers and polluters. Both of these groups are very friendly to the GOP when it comes to fundraising.
Not all "gun people" are the same on every subject. Personally I am a fiscal conservative and a social libertarian. I have friends I go shooting with who fall all over the political map. Oh, and yes, I'm a big proponent of the ESA.
"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." Col. Jeff Cooper
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!
Bullshit. The Secret Service are requesting the IP addresses of all users of the site. It's called a fishing expedition. Lots of people use nyc.indymedia.org, didn't post the information (not that there's anything legally wrong with the information) and don't want the Secret Service sniffing around their IPs like a mutt after a bitch in heat.
If you take the trouble to read the articles you'll see the FBI tried this shit with indymedia previously after an oh-so-convenient-anonymous-post put up bogus information that the FBI claimed was a "security leak".
Pull the other one.
It sounds like you are a libertarian, not a conservative. Vote appropriately.
Libertarian Party: http://www.lp.org/
Uhmm the whole point of the swift vets is to point out that Kerry did this when he came back.
Bullshit.
The whole point is to spread lies and sow dissent.
Only one of those lying bastards even served with Kerry, and he got a medal for his actions *under fire* in the same engagement that he now claims didn't involve any fire.
He backstabbed his fellow soldiers by saying they committed war crimes, when Kerry had no such evidence
If you don't know that the Vietnam war was plagued by atrocities by all sides, then you don't know a damn thing about it and have no place pretending that you do.
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.
He went.
He saw what a clusterfuck it was and he came home and spoke out against the big fucking lie that we all now know that that war was.
So this demonstrates that he can learn and even change his mind when the evidence overwhelmingly demands it. And the right wing media calls this flip flopping.
I much prefer that to well, we're invading no matter what. Even if we have to make up evidence.
Consistency isn't a good thing when you were wrong to start out with.
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.
Dude, if you don't know his people are neck deep in this you are dumber than a bag of rocks.
Keep in mind, this is the administration that wants to remove all ability for you to find out what the hell they are doing (raping of the FOIA).
They proposed an organization to feed false information to various media services. You probably believe they really didn't set it up when thay had to publically back down.
That is just fucking naive.
They have lied up and down about just about everything since they have been in power.
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.
Again with this lying horseshit.
When has he changed his mind over pressure? He has changed his mind based on evidence. Bush refuses to change his mind in the face of evidence.
Now you might say that that just sounds like I hate Bush, but that isn't the point. The point is the contrast between these 2 men.
John Kerry stands for freedom. George Bush has done everything in his power to destroy freedom.
John Kerry has demonstrated his courage, Bush has shown only cowardice.
John Kerry stands for a government dedicated to raising all ships with the tide, Bush has actively worked to hold down the regular citizen to raise the richest even higher.
I have yet to hear a Republican come up with anything Bush stands for that is consistent with America, but they *hate* any Democrat.
Why?
They don't even know. All I've ever heard is the same old lies they always spread.
When did "i don't see it that way" become "Absolutely Wrong"?
Regardless of your political affiliation, or your position in the US government, it seems that you should have the right to not be harassed, threatened, or intimidated by anybody.
If you can say with a straight face that the point of this document is NOT for people to intimidate, harass, or threaten members of a political organization, I am listening.
What happened to just being civil. Isn't it possible to say "You know, i don't like some of the policies of this administration" without threatening people, physically assaulting them, harassing them at work/home, and generally being a shithead?"
Were there ever any good ole days of "well, i'm voting for the other guy"?
My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
What the hell happened to the Secret Service in the last three and a half years?
Firstly, they have been instructing police departments around the country to construct "First Amendment Zones" whereever Bush or other Bushites are speaking. A First Amendment Zone is an out-of-the-way place miles from the President, surrounded by walls and wire, guarded by goons and dogs, and festooned with cameras to record your every visual detail. Show up to protest, and you are unceremoniously shown to the FAZ, where you are identified, processed and allowed to chant at a telephone pole. Presidential supporters are of course bussed in if necessary - happened here in Chicago.
Secondly, the Secret Service is being dispatched, along with the FBI, to investigate even potential protestors in their homes. The "we know who you are" routine.
Thirdly, the SS won't let the press talk to Michael Moore, who is corresponding for USA Today this week.
Secret
Service shuts down Michael Moore interviews. Why is the
Secret Service Engaged in Direct Political Work for Bush? Isn't That
Illegal? 8/31
Here's a sample of what happens when a political party gets its own federal guard:
Seabrook: Yes, I am in the middle of a...you might be able to hear the Secret Service yelling into my mic at the same time. There, there are a bunch of Secret Service that have surrounded Michael Moore's section. There are three or four reporters with him right now, but they are trying to kick all of the reporters and press photographers who are around him out of his area. The convention staff is also here. They're standing here telling us that we have to move from this are...they're obviously disturbed by the fact that Michael Moore is here and want as little public here as possible.
Stachio: Can we hear? Can we hear what's going on? Can you stick a mic in there? I don't know if we can hear.
Seabrook: Yeah...ah...eh...they've sort of moved me away from that area.
Stachio: I don't understand. Who is it? Is it Secret Service?
Seabrook: It's Secret Service which is interesting because the Secret Service of all agencies is the one that remains...is the least involved in the sort of political...political kinds of things, but of course they always cover the candidates and they have to be involved in the convention like this. They claim that what they're doing is for safety reasons, although there is a almost nobody around Michael Moore right now. So a we'll see if I can a...
Secret Service Agent: [crosstalk] thank you very much
Seabrook: Yeah, I'm being herded back in four different ways right now.
***
People, Bush has created his own private extra-constitutional intelligence and police force! The SS must be loaded to the gunwhales with hard-right wing fanatics.
Doesn't this terrify you all?
The Secret Service was created to protect the President. Does "protection" mean reelecting him at all costs?
Why do we even need a Secret Service, anyway? Why are they guarding the Saudi Arabian embassy in Washington DC? Can't police guard the President? Is the President so holy and inviolate that we have to shut down entire cities when he arrives? He's a civilian employee, for God's sake, not an emperor! They are welding manhole covers shut in foreign countries to protect him. WHAT? THE? HELL?
Why do I think that this level of political protection will not be deemed necessary by the SS when Kerry assumes the office? Kerry, clean house. Grow a pair, find out the names of the officials who have cultured this monster. and make them be gone.
I call bullshit.
Kerry wasn't making those specific accusations himself, he was reporting what was said by other vets at a VVAW meeting in Detroit earlier that year.
Go here and read his entire testimony (about halfway down the page), not just the excerpts that George Junior's attack dogs want you to hear. For example, the part about crimes being committed on a daily basis? Well, here is how Kerry's testimony starts:
He was just relaying stories he had heard from others. The only backstabbing going on here, is the Vets who still haven't gotten over the fact that a lot of their own came back to the States from Vietnam, and became opponents of the war, Vets who were not afraid to talk about the uglier things that happened (many of the specific examples Kerry refers to did in fact happen, and we know plenty of other atrocities happened too - see the link above). This has less to do with current politics and more to do with an old wound. What is really happening here is that 30 years after we left, America is still fighting the War in Vietnam.
Two problems: first of all, there are too many deer in the world. In many places if hunters do not kill enough they will litterally eat all their winter food before the winter is over and starve to death! Ask a biologist who knows, it happens. (The whole herd starves, because all the deer eat until they run out, deer aren't smart enough to sacrafice a few so the rest survive)
Second, I like to eat. I like to eat deer in fact, it is generally healthier than beef. (essentially fat free) What difference does it make if I eat deer or a cow? Both are food.
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.
I asked this question once too, and the internet told me in about 5 minutes.
Kerry's stance on the issues:
Gay Marriage: Supports separate but equal civil unions; gay rights groups give him good ratings despite the fact that he isn't for all out gay marriage.
Iraq War: "Internationalizing" the war effort (this probably means sharing the oil in exchange for some help and possible "legitimacy").
Taxes: Middle-class tax cuts. A repeal of the tax cuts for the rich.
Health care: Wants to socialize health care for >90% of the population.
Labor: wants to index the minimum wage against inflation.
Medicine: government backing of stem cell research!
Abortion: is personally against abortion, but says he could never impose his personal preference on others (pro-choice)
Education: boring policies on education I don't care about. Also, wants to start some kind of mandatory community service requirement in order to graduate high school.
And so on. Kerry and Edwards apparantly published a book about their positions: http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/our_plan_for_america. pdf
Try watching less TV -- you might learn something besides other people's opinions this way.
Personally, I'm against many of Kerry's policies, but overall support them over Bush's.
Neither Kerry nor Bush is as evil and some would make either one to be. It's super hard now to get any kind of real debate going on anything.
The hatred is too much for me, I've gone turtle and am heading for high ground until November before the sheer negativity infects me as it has others.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
If any of you want a right to privacy, ever, then you'd better respect their right to privacy, whether you agree with their views or not, and whether you think that you are using this knowledge for some greater good.
Moral relativism is evil, and it is wrong to assume that the ends justify the means. Ever.
These people are not your representatives. The political parties are not the government.
They will decide what the views of the party are, and then you will decide whether to vote for that party. If you don't like it that way, then move to another country.
Howdy All, Looking at what the Republicans are trying to do, keeping their delegates secret, sickens me. I thought they were supposed to represent the people they are delegating. How are the people that they are representing supposed to contact them and let them know what views we want expressed? Well we can't without contact information. What it sounds like is that the terrorists won. By not giving out this information, we have changed our system to compensate for what the terrorists want us to feel... Fear. Guess what, we obviously are fearful. I personally think this is cowardly and that leaders need to step up and become leaders. As a concerned citizen, that sees the system starting to break, we got to start being more responsible, and make a democracy work, and start talking, not hiding. I know that it is hard to risk your families, and your lives at these conventions (and I am personally not sure really how high of a terrorist threat that exists), but someone has too, and you choose to be the leaders, and represent. As the people that are still in school and that you are inspiring (or not), we got to be able to write and let you know our views. We are not electing a dictator that chooses policy for 4 years, the person we elect is supposed to be a president that hears the people and reacts. A president can change his mind. A candidate can change his mind. They are supposed too as they get public opinion, more information about controversal subjects, and become more informed to make a better intelligent decision. But to make an intelligent decision, we got to know who to talk too. Else the system breaks down. Imagine you were a CEO, and had to tell 10 people a message, just to get a message the client representative. I have done this game before (not through ten people, but three), and communication breaks down. The client wants to be able to pick up the phone and talk to the people in charge, or at least the secretary. Guess what delegates, we are the client, and we want to call and contact, and pass our opinions. It is how our system works. I don't want to have my email lost, and I have no clue when I send one, what really happens to it. I imagine most of the public does not know what really happens to it. Maybe someone should do a commercial about how their voice counts? It could make for a nice way to get their votes. Well I hope this lets out some of the frustration I am feeling, and I hope the lists stop becoming "secret". Thanks and Gig'em!
And that word is: FEAR.
The government and media in America has its citizens whipped up into a frothful and delirious state of constant fear. Fear of terrorists. Fear of different ethnicities. Fear of liberals.
A gun is an equalizer for those who feel powerless. A gun makes them feel as though they have power in an environment where they are frightened.
The NRA manipulates their fears for political and financial gain by promoting the notion that there is a campaign afoot to take their guns away. The NRA is the great protector of Americans' only safety blanket.
There are many lessons for Americans to learn from Afghanistan and Iraq. Among these is this: Allowing each household to own a fully automatic AK-47 does not seem to have created an orderly or peaceful society.
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
When did "i don't see it that way" become "Absolutely Wrong"?
When "You're either with us or with the terrorists" became your new foundation for diplomacy?
-- Language is a virus from outer space.