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"
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)
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
^^
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
Watch as the government makes it mandatory for discussion boards to maintain logs for a much much longer time. And to edit/censor posts in real time to prevent children from pornographic material...after all the children must be secured.
See that long UID - that's what you get for lurking too long
How are they public officials? They aren't agents of the government, they don't hold any sort of public office. They represent a political party, which is a separate entity from the government.
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
You can't even peacefully wear a "No Bush" T-Shirt to a political rally now adays without being arrested for trespassing.
Your rights to free speech, and your expectations of privacy are gone now.
Politicians as part of our so called "open" government should have no expectations of privacy. Just who is supposedly representing us.
john young, doing what he does best:
http://cryptome.org
this line is just filler
as is this one.
This guy hacked the ProtestWarrior website and stole the info. It wasn't just delagets it was people registered at PW. Private emails, phone numbers, names addresses. Furthermore posted that information to the world on IndyMedia with the full aproval of it's editing staff. Then suggested that people call and harrass everyone on the list.
I don't give a @#$% 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!
Our objectives are to: - Supply anti-RNC groups with data on the delegates to use in whatever way they see fit.
Uhh... Reading something like that makes me not want to give the benefit of the doubt. What could any 'anti-RNC' groupie do with that new information that is not unethical or harassing? They don't vote Republican, so the delegate really isn't interested in what they have to say, so that's out.
Click here for a free picture of an iPod!
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.
"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.
Is publishing their personal information any different than me drafting up a list of "red pinko communists" with your name on it knowing that it will cause you social stigma and may destroy your career and friendhips?
Lets not kid ourselves, nobody is going to use this information to send these men fruitbaskets or singing telegrams.
Click here for a free picture of an iPod!
How about those who are merely registered Republican voters? Are they too de facto government officials? Where do we draw the line? Poll watchers?
NSA logs YOU.
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
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..."
...after all the children must be secured.
I don't need the government to secure children, thank you very much. I've got duct tape.
KFG
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
If you can tell me a way to investigate avenues of illegitimate funding by only using a name, address, phone number, and hotel room without doing anything illegal I'll be impressed. But you can't. There is nothing productive that can come out of this besides a letter to his home (which will unlikely be read, and won't cause his magic conversion to the other party.)
Click here for a free picture of an iPod!
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.
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
What, like in 2000? Yeah, right.
Well, right now you're modded "Insightful", so at least one mod shares your knee-jerk tinfoil-hat mindset. That doesn't mean you have any actual insight, however. It's easy to be cynical. When you're cynical you can just lean back in your chair, lick the orange stuff from your Cheetoes off your fingers, and sneer at everything. Doing something to effect real change is much more difficult.
To the extent that the "major parties" get preferential treatment under US election law, I actually don't disagree with you. However, the fact remains that convention delegates are *not* government officials, are generally *not* public figures, and so retain the same rights of privacy as anyone else. Yourself included, even if you chose to attend a convention as a delegate for some reason.
So, yes, people with that kind of power over the politicians who will spend 60+% of your hard-earned cash every year should be publicly accessible.
You'll find that delegates have relatively little power. At least for the first ballot, they have no choice as to how to cast their votes under the current primary system. Their individual identities are therefore as relevant as those of the Electors who actually vote for the President. At least the Electors' duty is Constitutionally mandated! And seriously, is there any doubt about who they're going to nominate? If there wasn't for the Democrats, where there was more than one candidate in the primary field, how can there be for the Republicans?
Incidentally, tax freedom day this year was April 11, representing rather less than 60% of your income.
And the brethren went away edified.
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!
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.
it's hard to argue that the SC is republican, mostly because they take so many sides of seemingly identical issues. but it's actually not either one - depending on the specific jurisprudential issues at stake in each case, the justices may decide seemingly contradictory things.
so you can put them on record as supporting gay marriage, abortion, secret courts, against gay marriage, anti-abortion, pro-federalism, anti-federalism, etc. it all depends on what case the litigators bring to the Court. if i argue a particular set of issues to the Court, they may decide that my argument is crappy and rule in favor of my opponent, solely because i built a weak case. if i argue a different set of issues that differ only slightly from the previous case, the Court may rule for me.
so what looks like inconsistency is actually the much-vaunted "nuance" that kerry would bring to the white house. whether you think nuance is a good thing for the executive branch, too, is one of ideology.
jon
-- http://www.cerastes.org
"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.
"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.
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
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.
"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!
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.
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.