Slashdot Mirror
Patriot Act Game Pokes Fun at Government
The Miami Herald is reporting that a new game based on Monopoly is taking a crack at Patriot Act and what creator Michael Kabbash describes as the curtailed freedom that has resulted. From the article: "The object of the game is not to amass the most money or real estate, but to be the last player to retain civil liberties. 'I've had people complain to me that when they play, nobody wins. They say "We're all in Guantanamo and nobody has any civil liberties left," he said. 'I'm like "Yeah, that's the point."'"
Nothing to see here, move alone.
(or something to the effect) But a quick reload showed that "The Man" did not in fact supress the story.
I'm downloading this right now...looking forward to playing it with the in-laws next Sunday.
Here's one of the 'Homeland Security' cards:
Absolutely priceless.
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
The game can be downloaded here.
One of the most troubling things about the current situation is that your average Joe Sixpack has no idea how far the current administration has gone in their efforts to decieve them and strip away their inalienable rights. Once they're properly appraised of the situation, they're usually pretty damned mad about it.
Getting the word out is one of the most important ways we can fight this assault on our liberty. The people in power thrive on ignorance. Anything that deprives them of that is positive.
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
And if more people become aware that there is a brewing problem with attrition of their rights, how is that a waste?
What's more beneficial to the bottom line of a popular movement -- one individual sending a letter, or one individual getting two people to send a letter? Or how about one individual making 1,000 people 0.2% more likely to write a letter?
Few people want to talk about civil liberties at the water cooler during their afternoon break. This game is interesting enough to be water-cooler fodder, which is a good thing -- raise awareness of the issue.
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
Have you ever written a representative or senator? Ever gotten anything besides a standard intern-generated-and-stamped form letter? The only people who actually have access to politicians are big donors, and they're generally part of the system and part of the problem in the first place.
Petitions are nice, but the real way to raise awareness is to go to the people, not the politicians. If a game like this can raise awareness, more power to it. At the very least, it made some newspapers, and now Slashdot.
So don't dismiss it so quickly: I would say the creator of this game has already done more than you to bring about change. Awareness is important.
Looks like a diverting way to spend an evening. My question though: I've heard some talk of there being a MMRT/LA* version and I was wondering if anyone had any information on how to opt out?
--MarkusQ
* Massively Multi -Player Real Time / Live Action
It's the "sound bite" media that's really doing us in. And "they", the media, are doing it because that's where the money is. There's no profit in being rational, careful, insightful, and just using common sense. Sensationalism has overtaken the media. Trying to get the issues past that, well, is impossible. Let's face it, folks want the sensationlized version. They want to feel superior to the "stupid" people who have a different opinion from theirs.
Saturday is April 1. Slashdot will be shut down. Sorry for the inconvenience.
And you know for sure this is true? Moreover, you know that they haven't, in fact, petitioned the government? There's nothing that says just because you do one thing you to make an impact can't (or haven't) done another as well. Personally, I think it's a lot better than the usual sit-on-your-@ss-and-take-it method most people have, as it might help spread awareness.
On the other hand, I don't see the game lasting long as it probably infringes on varying aspects of monopoly...
Having been one of those who not only has written dozens of letters to many elected officials, protested, mobilized my neighbors, started website communities, and even created two movies. I think that the right thing to do *is* to create a game like this to get the word out. The average person doesn't care about politics, but a game like this is something that will spark interest. The only way to get our rights back is to influence a large number of people. The game will influence a large number of people.
Yeah, we're losing all our civil liberties but some guy is still free to openly criticize the government without fear of the FBI showing up on his doorstep.
Your line of reasoning rang a bell. Where did I hear it before? Oh yeah, I remember:
You are confusing "going away" with "gone"; just because at sunset there is still more than enough light to read by, you can not conclude that daylight is not going away, and should not draw comfort from the fact that it isn't as dark as it is somewhere else on the planet.--MarkusQ
..."the only winning move is not to play" gets smacked.
"I used to write letters to government officials when I was in high school, but that didn't accomplish much."
That you are aware of. It's hard to realize you are having an effect when there is no tangible evidence handed to you.
Just as important as educating the voting public is attempting to affect the decisions of our lawmakers. It does no good to educate the public if none of the public is telling the lawmakers how we want them to vote.
Removing someone from office because we didn't like their decisions is too late -- it's just a form of censure. You've got to get them before they pass laws you don't like.
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
I know this is offtopic, but I just read the entire thing. I wanted everyone out there to know this was not funny, nor was it clever, Do not do what I just did.
I rememeber hearing Mel Brooks interviewed after his film The Producers was made into a broadway play. The interviewer asked him how it was that he, a Jew, felt it was appropriate to make jokes about Nazis.
Brooks responded that you can't fight a dictator by getting up on a soap box. Dictators are, by nature, natural spell-binders, and you'll never outdebate them. But what you can do and what works is to make them look ridiculous.
So, in this case you paint the administration as a bunch of goose stepping blockheads who are besotted with fascism. It's not the way our system is supposed to work, but it's the way politics works.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
"But if these people would have spent a little more time working with their representatives,"
Those representatives are in gerrymandered "safe districts." They don't have to care, they're the government.
This game sounds eerily similair to Police State, a game that was developed in the 1960's and inspired by life in the Soviet Union. The goal was a little different - you were trying to become the Soviet Premier (basically, the only person with any rights) while avoiding being denounced by others and sent to Siberia. The game board was even vaguely Monopoly-ish (in appearance, not in play).
If you're curious, you can see the game here.
Must... think up... something... clever!
Yes! Look that way! At China! Now THEY have it bad! Don't look here! No! You can still criticize us! Look over there!
Oh! Got a law passed. Haha, no you can't criticize us! Good job paying attention to China.
An old idiom goes, you don't have to be better than someone else to make it, you have to be the best. So no, what's going on in China is important, but you have to ALWAYS look and see what is going on here.
And there are far more civil liberties than "The right to free speech"
The president has claimed that he has the power to declare any living being, American citizen or not, an "enemy combatant". He has further claimed that enemy combatants are neither covered by United States civil law, nor the Geneva conventions, and he has exercised his power to secretly detain them, without charge, indefinitely. Once detained, he has denied these people rights to an attorney, the right to a trial, and even the right to see the evidence against them.
It wasn't until the court stepped in and slapped him down that some of this changed.
At which point it was quickly made clear that the judiciary is the tool of evil leftist terrorists. This has resulted in people ranging from terrorist right wingers to elected lawmakers calling for the judiciary to be either outright collapsed, or made a pawn subject to the whims of the Congress (in fact, right wing terrorists even publicly called for the Supreme Court justices to be assassinated). This call has been furthered in relation to preventing them from exercising the power to rule on cases involving discrimination against gays, and in relation to cases such as Terri Schiavo's where it was determined that there was no grounds for the government to interfere in the legal rights of Mr. Schiavo.
Furthermore, please note that George W. Bush is yet another individual "elected" to the presidency against the will of the people.
On top of all that, Mr. Bush has authorized the NSA to go ahead and secretly wiretap, with no public access to information, anybody he deems requires wiretapping. Mr. Bush requires no justification, as there's nobody to stop him.
But, don't worry. I'm sure that's not really that bad, and that it's just a matter of things being "blown out of proportion".
From now on, I buy only Intel.
...could someone PLEASE finally tell me what civil liberties are threatened by the PA?
I've been hearing about this for five years or so now, but it's always this vague "oh no they're taking our civil liberties". No one ever actually states the real problem.
When did it become so difficult to actually inform the people, rather than just spout the equivalent of sensationalist headlines? It's hard to be worried about the PA when I haven't been affected by it at all and no one who tells me I should worry can tell me specifically why.
Preemptive strike against negative mod points: This is NOT a troll, I'm honestly asking for information. In five years of reading stuff like this, no one has ever pointed to specific items from the PA that directly threaten my liberties. I tend not to believe anything I read on the web unless the author can support it.
120 characters for a sig? That's bloody useless.
The president of the United States has exercised the power to secretly arrest and detain American citizens without charge, access to a lawyer, or due process rights.
That's ONE. Never mind the torture, spying, and the fact that the president was elected against the will of the people in 2000. You only asked for one.
I'm so sick of mindless ignorant fuckheads...
That's okay, I'm sick of people like you who can't have anything approaching a slightly intelligent conversation. Go back to your moonshine, Bubba, there's nothing for you here with the durned lerned librawl posters from mas-a-choose-ettes.
From now on, I buy only Intel.
A slight grammar lesson: "losing" is not the same as "lost". It comes first.
Does anyone know of an online monopoly game or even a good download with ai?
Religion for nerds. Stuff that really matters
Anybody notice that the game rules / cards seem to randomly use 'lose' and 'loose'?
Unpleasantries.
Rights are not a gift given by a government. They are assertions, part of the contract with government, and define the line which crossed justifies rebellion.
The control of government power is a check to make sure rebellion is never necessary. Broad surveillence powers with no oversight are a threat against the people.
The secret do-not-fly list of American citizens. You lose.
You know, like me. I don't want my gov't spying on me with no paper trail...no way to determine in the future if something bad was done.
Bush wants this, because the curent wiretap rules allow him to spy for days before getting the warrant. The only reason I can think of for Bush not using this system is that he doesn't want anyone finding out that he is spying on people who are not a threat.
I smell a filthy no-login Freeper!
Blar.
Name one civil liberty that you have lost during this administration.
The 6th Amendment.
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
You know, more games should (no, not kidding) have political leaning and teach people about the political situation of today, and the history of American meddlins in the middle east. Maybe, just maybe, people will become aware of what their tax dollars have done to their fellow man in impoverished countries, and just maybe, with enough people, a few small but key changes could come about.
I always give a great deal of respect and support and love to people who try to keep an eye on the government, and even more when they have a sense of humour about it. The reality of the situation, for all citizens, is kinda like a parent trying to keep an eye on a really mischevious kid who likes to steal your stuff and money and beat up other kids, but instead of an unruly pubescent child, you have an army of secret agents and powermongers to try and keep from running amok.
Ex nihilo nihil fit.
Moderate, or respond? RESPOND!
You do know that american idol was taken directly from a EUROPEAN TV SHOW called pop idol?
Trying to call the american public 'stupid', along with saying that somehow the abuse of power commited by certain individuals in the US governemnt is to be blamed on the general public shows me all I need to know about your line of reasoning. Otherwise, can you support your argument with something other than straw? Using the phrase 'some people say', or 'some believe', and then countering with your own statement, is a horribly wrongly overused style of debate. You may have heard of it, its called setting up a 'straw man'. The only purpose of which is to knock down, making you look like you are actually debating something.
You believe leaders to be god like figures who are destined to rule over the 'unwashed masses' who dont know any better.
Blowing things out of proportion? warrantless wiretaps, detainment wihtout legal representation, arrest without being informed of your crimes, media used for propaganda, and now PHYSICAL warantless searches as well. Exactly at what point do you think it would be appropriate to stand up for yourself? When the boot is already on your neck?
I hate to tell you, but you ARE necessarily defending what the government is doing. Saying you are 'not necessarily' defending it is to soften your language to fool yourself into believing your own words. Unfortunately, subjective thought matters little to objective reality. Looks like you fooled someone else beside yourself though, as you were marked as 'insightful'. I wonder if it was one of those guilty, stupid, uncaring americans who modded you as such? Maybe it was one of those 'enlightened' Europeans who are smarter because they made 'pop idol' a smash hit in europe first?
Believe it or not, you are advocating fascism. Stop trying to put makeup on a pig and telling me it is beautiful.
Monopoly isn't privately owned. It was developed as a 'folk' game by Quakers, and was in the public domain. Parker Brothers engaged in fraud in an attempt to get a monopoly on it, ironically enough--but they failed.
http://www.antimonopoly.com/ for the story.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
Hasbro don't own Monopoly.
http://www.antimonopoly.com/
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
Ahem.
Or did you just mean not recently?
The fact is, "they" ARE coming.
They're coming for muslims.
They're coming for the homosexuals.
They're coming for abortion providers.
They're coming for environmentalists (Greenpeace? Terrorists? Puhleeze).
They're coming for leftist protesters.
They are wiretapping private citizen's domestic telephone conversations.
They are restricting your right to free speech.
They are rigging elections.
Soon enough, they'll come for you, if you ever open your eyes. Keep em shut, agree with everything you're told to think, and you'll be "safe."
Yes indeed, they are coming.
I may sound paranoid, but I consider myself a student of history. Here's hoping I never get the chance to say, "told you so!"
When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross. -Sinclair Lewis, 1935
Yea, yea. Blah blah. Go felate Karl Rove some more you overstuffed NASCAR inbred. Bush could be standing in front of you biting off the heads off small children and you'd still get down on your knees and grovel like you were looking at God Himself.
You asked, I answered, you're clearly a child who should be doing his homework, so get back to work. I'd like to think that not everyone from your generation is such an imbecile, otherwise I'm going to starve in my old age.
From now on, I buy only Intel.
"You know, more games should (no, not kidding) have political leaning and teach people about the political situation of today, and the history of American meddlins in the middle east."
I.e., instead of games I should get pure propaganda.
And not even that, but some nerd's unilateral lopsided own One True Way in which everyone should think. Forget about thinking for yourself, let Mr Game Designer tell you exactly what you should think about economics, politics, ecology, etc. Never mind that he isn't actually qualified to talk about any of those subjects, and never got any actual education or training in those fields. He's not any more qualified than your average cabbie or barber talking about how to balance the economy when they can't balance their bank account, but don't mind that. No siree, don't let such things as "education", "expertise" or "reviews by qualified peers" (qualified and peers in that field, that is) get in the way of being taught the One True Way to see a problem. Trust Mr Game Designer. He's read something vaguely on that topic in a blog once, so he's qualified to tell you what to think.
You know what? No, thanks. If I want information, I'll take it from someone who has a Ph.D. in that field, not from cabbies, barbers, game designers, and other completely unqualified people talking out of the ass.
And either way, it's still propaganda. Where have we heard that before? Oh, right, there was this Chinese game discussed right here last week: Learn From Lei Feng Online. Let some propaganda spin-master tell you what to think. E.g., how dangerous the capitalist spies are and how you, as a good Chinese citizen, must unmask them and thwart them at every turn. (I.e., go tell the police when one of your friends says unpatriotic stuff already. They're probably a spy working for those capitalistic pigs.)
Does it sound like disgusting propaganda yet? Well... what makes you think I'm happier to hear _your_ propaganda?
Whatever happened to the idea that a game is just entertainment? If I play a game, it's just to waste some hours unproductively and hopefully in a fun way. If I wanted to spend it taking sides and shouting pro- or anti-government slogans, I'd go to some party's meetings instead. It's that simple.
Being force-fed propaganda isn't a game, and isn't fun. Being preached at isn't fun. Having the game punish me for stuff out of my control, just to illustrate someone's own agenda, isn't great gameplay. It's that simple.
Even the idiot discussed in his article, what did his friends tell him? Right. "I've had people complain to me that when they play, nobody wins" Ah-ha. They complained. I.e., they weren't finding it fun to play.
What's his answer? "I'm like "Yeah, that's the point."" I.e., his goal wasn't to make a fun game, his goal was just to shove his personal ideology and agenda down people's throats. No, that's _not_ the whole point of game design.
In a nutshell, no, I don't think we need more games like that. I think that what game designers should be doing is design a good _game_ and devote more time to _gameplay_. If you need to sacrifice gameplay for any other agenda points, then that's your clue that that point doesn't belong in the game.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
That's the best you can do? This is all you've got?
Making fun of people for pointing out that since the electoral college votes are based on the popular vote, a successful challenge to the Florida vote would have changed the electoral votes cast by their college members and thus the election (while telling them that they should study government)? Making the same old tired claim that having sticks shoved up your ass and having your balls electrocuted is just "humiliating" (If gay sex is "only" humiliating then why is the President so gung-ho about banning it)? Making the most pathetic attempt to link Iraqis to 9/11 that I've seen (insert stats about Saudi participants, and the fact that until we kicked him out, Saddam was busy gassing bin Laden's Kurdish friends)?
reporting on Japanese balloon bombs during WWII also.
Funny you should mention the last war America ever declared.
Please get with reality.
Reality? The reality is that our administration held an American citizen without trial for years (and don't give me some "terrorists have no rights" bullshit, since even the government has quit calling Padilla a terrorist). The reality is that we have a secret no-fly list that prevents those awful terrorist infants from ever setting foot on a plane. The reality is that our government freezes citizens' accounts for paying down credit card debt on the chance that Mastercard is secretly a front for a terrorist organization or drug cartel.
Do you have a real rebuttal?
Tell the world which of your guaranteed constitutional rights that you can no longer do because of the Patriot Act or whatever.
Also, The Ninth and Tenth Amendments. Every power the government claims for itself that is not mentioned in the Constitution is one that has been stripped from the States and the People respectively.
Others mentioned the no-fly list. People claim that I have no right to fly (see also: 9th Amendment), I claim that the United States has no right to prevent me from flying. If you find this in the Constitution, let me know. "Interstate commerce" doesn't count, as the no-fly list applies even on intrastate flights.
Others mentioned elections. Elections are specifically delegated to the states, with the exception that Congress can choose the election date. Someone (you?) claimed that the Florida election was "lost", however, the SCOTUS cancelled the recount before a statement could have been made as to who "won" or "lost".
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
Because while it may seem great when 1 nerd reaches 200 people with his propaganda, it's a two-way road. The shafting that's the mainstream media can extend just as well to games.
And for what? Chances are that anyone who actually plays something this monumentally stupid and non-fun is already doing it for the preaching part, so it's all just preaching to the choir. You won't get too many _normal_ people playing an idiotically designed game where every step is a 50% "game over, you got sent to prison" chance.
But it just starts a slippery slope that can lead to some big money muscling into this kind of territory and out-shouting the lone millitant nerd by orders of magnitude. And:
1. Let's be honest and start with the selfish reason: in my playing time, I don't give a flying fuck about it all. That's the time when I relax, forget about it all, and only care about shooting the next bear in WoW, not about politics, economics, whatever. It's the time where I _lower_ my stress levels, not the time to get someone to try to get me more frenzied about some point on their personal agenda.
There are already too many people competing for time to tell me what to think. All over the TV, radio, newspapers, billboards on the way to work, etc, I'm bombarded by basically being told what to think. Heck, even at work, the memos come around telling me again, what to think. I quite like having some time to myself when I actually get entertainment, not propaganda. I'm _not_ looking forward to games becoming yet another battle-ground for lobby groups, special interests, and PR spin-doctors competing to spoon-feed me their own version of The One True Way.
2. Because I find it all insulting. There's something inherently insulting in an attitude saying basically, "I know you're too retarded to use your own brain. Here, forget about using that stupid little brain of yours, let me tell you exactly what to think and how to view this problem." That's the underlying attitude of all these busibodies and zealots -- ranging from Jack Thompson, to religious zealots, to the local "back in my day the grass was greener" nostalgiac, to whatever -- trying to tell you what to think: they think everyone else is just too stupid to evaluate a problem on their own, or to have a list of priorities of their own. And I find that insulting.
Doubly so when it's from people who aren't qualified to discuss it anyway. People who can't balance their grocery expenses tell me exactly how I should view balancing the economy. People who can't even fucking find France or Iraq on a map, tell me exactly what I should think about them or about the US presence there. People who can't even deal with a new guy at work, tell me about how whole countries should deal with each other. Etc. Hello? So someone utterly incompetent and unqualified is trying to call me even more stupid than that?
3. Because it's just not fun to play such idiocies. Look at the description in the very summary here. Everyone who actually expected a game and gameplay -- as opposed to pre-existing zealots looking for something to reinforce their zealotry -- _complained_ about it. Unsurprisingly, because it violates several principles of good game design, starting with: don't create "bang! you're dead!" situations where the player suddenly loses for no fault of his own and without any chance to react. The thing doesn't just give gameplay a secondary role, after preaching, it outright deliberately tries to not be fun to illustrate a point.
4. Because I quite like choosing games purely on gameplay reasons, and not on which side did the publisher align with. I can just see a future in which MS games just serve to preach that outsourcing is good and monopolies are good for the economy, Vivendi games just preach that the USA sucks, EA Games got paid by some lobby group and preaches a third thing, Sony games a fourth, and Nintedo gets yet another party's or lobby's money to carry their message. And where you end up choosing games and companies based on whose message
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
How long until someone writes a client and a server, turning it into an online computer game? I bet it won't be long.
You know, REDACTED had a chance to look over REDACTED, and it looks to be a pretty REDACTED REDACTED about the problems us REDACTEDs are facing with the increase in REDACTED's REDACTED, even as REDACTED's support wanes here in REDACTED. But REDACTED wouldn't worry, since REDACTED sure REDACTED will REDACTED before REDACTED's too REDACTED. Then again, REDACTED just a bleeding-REDACTED REDACTED, so what do REDACTED know about REDACTED?
*****
Dear Mary,
I yearn for you tragically,
A.T. Tappman, Chaplain, U.S. Army.
Give examples. They haven't done any of this as far as I know unless by "coming for abortion providers" you mean trying to end abortion (infanticide).
Stupidity is like nuclear power, it can be used for good or evil. And you don't want to get any on you.
That was kind of a half-hearted troll attempt, friend, but I respect that you tried (p.s.: I'm not a psycholiberal, so the whole "blood and guts patriot" thing doesn't actually bother me any).
From now on, I buy only Intel.
I guess I could say that first they came for the Communists, and I said nothing, because they were actively working as spies and traitors to bring my country under the domination of a spectacularly hateful totalitarian regime of epic proportions.
Might as well give me the "first they came for..." sermon on account of a rabid dog.
Plus, any formulation that equates Communists and Jews is pretty suspect by default. Are you trying to whitewash communism by associating it with Judaism or Jewishness? Or are you trying to blacklist Jews by associating them with the horrors perpetrated by the communist regimes?
I mean, not only is comparing an ideology with an ethnicity like comparing apples and oranges, but in this particular case one of the two is pretty thoroughly rotten, likely to the core...
Which fruit is the rotten one is left as an exercise to the reader.
Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.
Slightly different idiom, I think it captures your point a bit better: Mind the wolf in the pasture. The packs roving beyond may never get in.
Forgive me all for responding to a Troll but:
They haven't come for the Jews.
No. But they've come for the Muslims
They haven't come for the Communists.
No. Because it's profitable to ignore them.
They haven't come for the trade unionists.
No. Because they no longer matter.
And they haven't come for you.
They won't bother because we don't matter.
"Bah!" - Dogbert
When did Civil Rights become Civil Liberties?
When they become Civil Priviledges, I'm running for the hills.
Jake
Dating: while( 1 ){ call_girl(); get_rejected(); drink_40(); } return 0;
They are? where?
They're coming for muslims, but muslims are still citizens. Mosques are still houses of worship, and just as protected as Churches and Synogogues.
They're coming for the homosexuals, too. I think the worse curse for homosexual people would be for them to get married, but hey, if thats what they want, no government will stop them.
They're coming for abortion providers? ok....... I haven't heard about abortion clinics being raided by the police..... have you?
They're coming for environmentalists? (um.... no. oh, and spiking trees is terrorism, as loggers get maimed even when trees aren't spiked. making their lives more dangerous is truly unnecessary)
They're coming for leftist protesters? not that I've seen.
They are wiretapping private citizen's domestic telephone conversations. ok. fine. no, its not really fine. but unless they do something with the wiretapped conversations, so what? Are they going to come arrest me if I say, "Bush is a pig!!!!!" no. Are they going to arrest me if I say, "I've just put a bomb in the whitehouse!!!!" no. but they might check the whitehouse for bombs just in case. And its not like the NSA hasn't been listening in on domestic Telephone conversations ever since Ma Bell was a virgin.
They are restricting your right to free speech? how? If so, how come Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon haven't been imprisoned? How about Michael Moore? How about any number of celebreties who have publically bashed the current administration? What free speech is being restricted? RIAA? ok, I'll buy that one. but that's not a political problem, its an economic one, and if you think Clinton or Gore would stand up to the RIAA, you are truly joking.
They are rigging elections. There. There it is. 6 years have gone by and you still can't get it through your head that GORE LOST! he lost Florida. maybe he lost because a bunch of old people couldn't read a ballot or because of some dangling chads, or for some other reason but he LOST! Done! over! you had your chance to correct the problem in 2004 and GORE LOST AGAIN! So get over it. You don't like it, leave, or volunteer in your local district to be part of the voting process. Hell, run for office if you feel strongly about it.
Soon enough, they'll come for you, if you ever open your eyes. Keep em shut, agree with everything you're told to think, and you'll be "safe." Me, I'm safe. I've never contemplated the violent overthrow of the US Government (no mater who was in power). I've voted for independents, republicans, once for Mickey Mouse, (though that might have been on the state level). I've got a job, wife, house, kids, cars, and all that. I'm not gay, have never had an abortion (being male) nor forced another to (though I had one ex-girlfriend threaten me once, turns out she hadn't been pregnant). I've never done hard drugs, nor committed any crime beyond a traffic ticket. I'm safe, just like so many other people. I didn't have to work to be this way. I didn't have to hide a portion of my personality or my sexuality, or my political preference, or anything. I'm safe.
But I'm not blind either. You say they're coming, but I know they aren't. They aren't coming for the muslims, they aren't coming for the homosexuals, or the abortion providers, or the environmentalists, or leftist protestors or anyone else. They're coming for terrorists. If you aren't a terrorst, meaning you don't wish to cause others to fear you and die by your hand, then you too are safe. If they wiretapped my phone, they would hear a whole lot of boring conversations. Then they'd stop listening because they would realize that I'm not a threat. I would say that for every person with a slashdot account, this would be true as well. Except that one guy who's reading slashdot for the purposes of creating a biological agent that's spread at Gencon. or something stupid like that. Do I hate having to wait longer at airports to fly? sure, so does everyone else. I especially hated it when the "new" security measures were still under development and things were slow.
No indeed, they aren't coming. They are here. trying to keep your lousy ass safe. And they aren't going away.
Ira
I have a lot of American-Arab in-laws and they are regularly mistreated as they go from airport to airport. The only time that my wife did not recieve a "random" security check was after she married me and got my American last name.
My brother in law, who couldnt hurt a fly, has been checked every time and treated rudely and even interrogted. His high school band went on a trip to Washington DC and a tough-looking Secret Service agent asked him if his last name was "some kind of joke."
My father-in-law regularly runs into the same kind of problems.
These are merely anecdotal, but this shows that those in official positions sometimes rely on predujices to decide who is "suspicious." This has been true even before the Patriot Act. It just makes me worry that these officials will label someone as suspicious just because of their last name. Why arent they looking for better evidence instead of wasting their time strip searching everyone whose name last name ends with Al- ?
http://archive.salon.com/comics/tomo/2002/04/01/to mo/index.html
"I might have made a tactical error in not going to a physician for 20 years." -- Warren Zevon
While it seems like most of us slashdotters are in agreement of how the Patriot Act is dangerous and unconstitutional, it seems as if the majority of the American people support it. Their mentality seems to be this, "Well there's no reason for ME to worry". We need to change this viewpoint in order for change to occur. This game is a step in the right direction.
That's funny. When I was recently in Seattle, I was reading an article on someone involved with (I think) DHS, who as much admitted that Muslims were rounded up after 9/11 as much 'as a PR measure, to show we were doing something', than any valid reasoning.
Well that's really clever. Next I'll be making the game Nuance, where if you're an individual or a labor union or an activist of any type, you automatically win, and if you're a corporation or the government or a capitalist then you automatically lose.
At least games will be shorter than his droning crap.
Re civil liberties...
Sh!t.... they can still refuse entry into the US for persons who support anarchism!
Re game
Sh!t.... they should still be playing Nuclear War! Fun game, and quite often everyone loses!
In fact, I view this game as similar to NucWar; the former was released in 1964. Just after the Cuban Missle Crisis.
Hopefully, this game will get respect similar to NucWar. NucWar has been played in nuclear subs, missle silos and "places that don't officially exist".. maybe this game will get the same respect.
I used to be someone else. Now I'm someone better.
Real life is underrated.
Don't forget that the only reason Congress gave GWB the power to declare Enemy Combatants is because he promised them that he wouldn't use it against American citizens..but then the first two Enemy Combatants he declared were American citizens. Oh well, this administration hasn't been accountable for anything else it's done.
What you reap is what you sow
Two things are very predictable here:
/. is only now getting around to posting it.
1. This story has been out for a while, but
2. This story trashes the Patriot Act, thus it gets an automatic berth.
Here's an idea: instead of making board games, why don't you vote out your Senators and Congressmen? While you were busy making funny little downloadable games, they re-authorized it.
I'm not a fan of the Patriot Act myself, but for christ's sake - quit acting like little bitches and do something productive with your discontent!
Brooks responded that you can't fight a dictator by getting up on a soap box... But what you can do and what works is to make them look ridiculous.
True enough, when you're fighting a dictator.
So, in this case you paint the administration as a bunch of goose stepping blockheads who are besotted with fascism.
It seems to me that if the administration really were dictatorial in nature, you'd have to wait until they were out of power and their regime had failed, in order to begin with the ridicule.
The fact that all this ridicule is going on in public, by free citizens, with no reprisals, strongly suggests that the administration has not actually established any kind of dictatorship at all.
Which leads pretty much instantly to the reasonable conclusion that you're not ridiculing Bush because he's a dictator, but rather because you have neither evidence of a dictatorship nor any other reasonable argument against him, and are therefore reduced to cheap and unsubstantiated smears.
But please, don't be ashamed. I totally understand: "It's not the way our system is supposed to work, but it's the way politics works."
Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.
Most of the cards read "You loose one civil liberty".
Can't a professional designer learn to spell?
But honestly, how many people griping about Bush/Ashcroft today thought that Clinton/Reno were A-OK?
I for one, dislike them both (see here and here for just a few recent posts predating this thread, to substantiate my claim...google should turn up more, back to the Clinton years, when Marc Rich and the Gubernatorial pardons of attractive women roused my ire). But whenever you attempt to level a rational criticism of a politician you discover that you will be instantly labeled a partisan, and the substance of your point dismissed.
Which leads me to a conclusion: attacks on politicians are frequently non-partisan (especially during primaries, when the parties eat their own to impress the masses) but defenses of them are almost always partisan. This includes the sort of "why don't you criticize this guy instead" defense going on here. It's my firm belief that reasonable people of both parties (for what it's worth, I happen to be a Republican) are appalled at the sort of shenanigans that get pulled by the leaders of both parties, but that the highly partisan yahoos always jump to the defense when their side's in power.
What Bush is doing is wrong, and frankly he should be in jail. The fact that Clinton may well deserve the next cell over is not an excuse, it's an example of how bad the problem realy is.
--MarkusQ
You do know that american idol was taken directly from a EUROPEAN TV SHOW called pop idol?
Actually the origin was in New Zealand with a program called Popstars on which pop idol was based, then american idol followed.
For reference, we in New Zealand are very very sorry.
-Qyiet
Wait, it's not a computer game, but something I have to download, print out, and then cut out in order to play? And it's gonna be all monochrome on my laser printer, and I wouldn't waste ink on it. Heh, my apathy gets the better of me, ironically - its more work than I want to invest, political statement or not.
I was with you until you pulled out the not-really-quotes. Dude's a loser, but close-enough-to-half of us voted for him. Just cause your side lost doesn't mean the other guys cheated. Sometimes, stupid people hold the majority. Hell, MOST times.
You are totally blocking my view of the wall. - Dogbert
The constitution specifically excludes threats against the president's life from protected speech.
The US Constitution? The constitution of another country? In the US Constitution it's made perfectly clear that (a) all legislative power of the US federal government comes from Congress, (b) the President has very limited scope to do anything outside of enforcing legislation, and (c) Congress can't abridge speech. All states of the Union, further, have to uphold the Constitution. How this is worded would leave many states to censor individuals, but virtually all states have Constitutions with similar language preventing the abridging of speech. The use of the phrase "protected speech" is merely a recent justification for why exactly the US Constitution and various is ignored.
For an example of what my state's Constitution says: Article I, Section 9. "No law shall be passed, restraining the free interchange of thought and opinion, or restricting the right to speak, write, or print, freely, on any subject whatever: but for the abuse of that right, every person shall be responsible." From the sounds of the law, abusing the right to free speech (ie, locking someone up) would require everyone to be locked up. I'm not so sure you'd want to pass that sort of law.
Eurohacker European paranoia, gun rights, and h
All this Patriot Act stuff is just a Yale political science research project to determine which rights actually are inalienable.
So far, they're getting lots of good data; indeed, it may be that the Declaration of Independence needs to be reworded, with phrases such as "conditionally inalienable"; "all men, equally, are created"; "That for security, Men are institutionalized by Government", "deriving their just powers from the labors of the governed," and so on.
However, this research project doesn't extend that far. Its purpose is succinct and well defined -- the question of which rights are actually inalienable. Future research projects will test out other aspects of the Declaration
Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
Apparently you have misunderstood the reference to Communists in this poem. Perhaps I have as well, but the understanding that I have come to makes more sense. The way I see it is this refers to the Red Scare in which McCarthy oppressed the American people under the guise of "The Communists have infiltrated America." Therefore, McCarthy and his cohorts "came after" the people they suspected of being "Communists".
What you reap is what you sow
I dunno if it's exactly what you're looking for, but have you tried out NationStates? It's free and all that...
Any program relying on (nontrivial) preemptive multithreading will be buggy.
I have to answer this question with another question. How many people would have been all for Clinton or Janet Reno having the same powers under the "Patriot" Act? I for one would not!!! Personally, I have very conservative values. Being a conservative does not necessarily make me a supporter of the Republican party. When it comes to choosing to keep the protection of our rights or giving them up in the name of a war against a tactic, I will choose to keep the protection of our rights. The media propagandizes a "War on Terrorism." Terrorism is NOT an ENEMY. It is a tactic used by an enemy.
I am not even questioning the intention of Bush, Congress, or the court system. Only the Almighty knows the true intentions of one's heart. I'm just questioning how politicians will use these powers in the future. History shows that just about ANY country that has created a Ministry of Internal Security became a police state. I already believe that police and government officials already have way too much power. The more a government does, the less power people have.
We are already told how and where we can build our homes, what equipment we can have in our homes, when we have to sell our homes and to whom (eniment domain abuse), when and if we can add to our homes, what evidence we can use in our defense, what types of code we can write, and the list goes on and on. I would rather see a terrorist get a fair trial in a local court and be hanged from the oak tree out in front of the court house (if he is found guilty) than I would for this nation's freedoms to be held hostage by runaway government.
There are several things that can be done that will protect Americans against those who would harm us from both within and without. Having the governemnt do a good job of monitoring and regulating the border is one of these things. If this was done the P.S.A. government could stop letting in people from countries which have high concentrations of enemy personnel. The U.S. government could also stop screwing over its citizens. A citizen which has been screwed over or feels that he or she has been sufficiently screwed over will make a prime candidate for recruitment by enemy personnel.
When a nation has freedom and the people feel that the government works to serve them, the nation will have a massive army (the people) that will willingly fight to the death to protect that nation. Most American will be still willing fight to the death to protect this nation, however will we be willing to fight to the death to prop up the powers of the political cartel? I don't think so. If even 5% of the people of thi nation rose up and guarded the borders and coastlines, I guarantee that the courts and government would rise up against that 5%.
A nation that has a government that ignores, puts off the concerns of, or runs roughshod over citizens rights will grow a cancer from within. This is where the P.S.A. is heading. It is hard for a common man who works for a living to be able to get a fair day in court without almost depleting his savings. (It is extremely hard for any of us to get a fair day in traffic court on any day). Find a family who has had everything stolen from them by the I.R.S., or a family that has had their home stolen from them by a city council and given to a corporation, and I will show a family that is a prime candidate for recuitment by enemy personnel.
The last declared war on something other than an enemy was declared by President Reagan. This war was declared against various chemical compounds called drugs. What has happened since? Crystal meth, crack, and many others continue to be sold around this nation allowing drug dealers to wreak havoc on this nation while just about every working man, women, and child are forced to piss in cups in order to obtain even menial employment. In the Police State of Florida, there is a law (Unconstitutional) against publishing information about how to beat a drug test. Drug tests are almost as widespread as drugs, and yet the drug pro
FWIW, I can run Tropico nicely under wine-0.9.10-1.fc4.
Any program relying on (nontrivial) preemptive multithreading will be buggy.
Bush got re-elected.
That is democracy for you. Very few people can accept it when democracy results in laws they do not approve off. The left of the patriot act and similar stuff. The right of abortion and social security systems.
Some even go so far as thinking that democracy is right and good and would result in good goverment if it ever really was allowed a chance and not corrupted by rightwing and/or leftwing extremists who have hidden agenda's and god knows what else the paranoid come up with.
Sadly in the real world even if you had a pure democracy where people would vote for ideas not people you would still be faced with the fact that it is people doing the voting.
Normal average people you meet everyday on the street.
The difference between a dictatorship and a democracy is ultimately the size of the group that does the telling. It don't much matter to the group that is being supressed. Ghandi had a saying that went something like, "what does it matter to the person wether they were killed in the name of freedom or oppression".
Oh, and as for the people who protest against it? Well take this board game. The maker is an Arab civil rights activist. Not Human rights. Very important. Name one arab/muslim who has every fought for someone elses rights.
Then there is: U.S. citizens get 5; non-citizens 1. Whites and Asians get 5; Arabs 1. Ultra right-wingers get 6; Democrats 3 or 4.
Where are the blacks, the jews, the hispanics?
No, this again is democracy. Everyone votes for himself. Wake me when we get a real Civil rights activists who is for EVERY human being. Not just his own group.
You can also wake me when a single arab/muslim run country has even a sliver of the human rights that the evil west has, even the west under Bush. It is no excuse for westerners but it certainly means that arabs should first fix their own affairs. Just check resent developments in indonesia where muslims are suprresing the other religions for being to erotic.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
I downloaded it ... does that mean the NSA is now surveilling me, scanning my email and planning my trip to tropical isles?
Re-electing that bozo
Letting said bozo remain in charge after sending troops to war for non-exisiting WMD's
Letting bozo rush us into war in the first place.. the urgency was ??
And if you want to get into "culure"...
ALF
Harry and the Hendersons
anthing with "puppets" not for edutaining children
any show that's basicly a rip-off of candid camera, which wasn't funny itself
movies made off old TV shows that were not good themselves --- Charlies Angels
movies made off old TV shows that were not good themselves --- Dukes of Hazard
movies made off old TV shows that were not good themselves --- Starsky & Hutch
movies made off old TV shows that were not good themselves --- Mod Squad
-- (I'll forgive Hillbillies, and Mission Impossible because they were originally good shows)
that's enough, it would be an extremly long post to name all the crap that entertains the American public which is requires the intelligence of a 10 year old. There are "maybe" 3 or 4 shows in a week "kinda" worth watching, and occasionaly a decent couple new movies a year. And to top it off the public overpays the cable and sattelite companys for this stuff ... yeah, we be smart.
waiting for ad.doubleclick.net
yeah, that's it
waiting for ad.doubleclick.net
Hey, the Dept of Education (and several of the others, Labor and Energy being at the top of my list) certainly *ought* to go; Reagan didn't fulfull that promise well enough.
;) If you're in a Borders or similar bookstore, I think the relevant segment starts on page 177.
Speaking of small government and superflous departments -- check out the book The Undercover Economist, by Tim Harford; he makes some IMO quite funny jabs at the Cameroonian Department of Tourism, whose chief job seems to be discouraging tourism
timothy
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
Strike while the irony is hot! -- The Freethinker
You just do a little better each time.
sic transit gloria mundi
They're coming for environmentalists? (um.... no. oh, and spiking trees is terrorism, as loggers get maimed even when trees aren't spiked. making their lives more dangerous is truly unnecessary)
Terrorism != (does not equal) crime. Spiking trees is a crime, not terrorism. IANAL, but I do believe it would be along the lines of Attempted Murder, Premeditated Murder, Manslaughter, etc.
They are wiretapping private citizen's domestic telephone conversations. ok. fine. no, its not really fine. but unless they do something with the wiretapped conversations, so what? Are they going to come arrest me if I say, "Bush is a pig!!!!!" no. Are they going to arrest me if I say, "I've just put a bomb in the whitehouse!!!!" no. but they might check the whitehouse for bombs just in case.
First of all, you are correct in asserting that "wiretapping private citizen's domestic telephone conversations" isn't ok, and I applaud you for that assertion. However, if they were tapping your phone (how would you know if they were?) and you said "I've just put a bomb in the whitehouse!!!!", I guarantee you they would be "coming" for you. Even if you said it in a joking or hypothetical manner. They would be coming for you, and they would be interrogating you as to the location and configuration of the "alleged" bomb. I'm actually afraid of quoting that part of your post, and that is chilling.
And its not like the NSA hasn't been listening in on domestic Telephone conversations ever since Ma Bell was a virgin.
No, the government has not been "listening in on domestic Telephone conversations ever since Ma Bell was a virgin." The government had to ask telphone companies for the ability to conduct wiretaps, it wasn't already built into their network when they designed it.
I've never done hard drugs, nor committed any crime beyond a traffic ticket. I'm safe, just like so many other people. I didn't have to work to be this way. I didn't have to hide a portion of my personality or my sexuality, or my political preference, or anything. I'm safe.
How do you know you're safe? You don't know what criterion the government is using to identify suspected terrorists. Neither did the American couple that tried to pay down their credit card debt with a legitimate $9000 check that were subsequently suspected of funding terrorism. Nor did the American citizen who also happend to be a lawyer and a Muslim that was detained because he had the same name as a suspected terrorist.
No indeed, they aren't coming. They are here. trying to keep your lousy ass safe. And they aren't going away.
I feel safer already...
What you reap is what you sow
The 4th amendment is undermined by the Patriot Act in the sense that there is not sufficient oversight by the judiciary over searches and siezures. The rest of your post has very little to do with the USAPATRIOT act.
However, the real issue is that this is part of a much larger trend including (as you mention) extraordinary rendition, warrantless and widespread wiretaps, and so forth. This pattern has been gaining steam since at least 1997, so it is not just a reaction to 9/11 nor is it fully to be blamed on the current Administration.
These are scary times in which we live, but in the end our greatest foreign enemies may have miscalculated and given us a chance to preserve our great republic.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
It seems to me that if the administration really were dictatorial in nature, you'd have to wait until they were out of power and their regime had failed, in order to begin with the ridicule.
Dictatorships don't typically happen overnight. You are correct: the current administration is not a dictatorship, but it's trying to head in that direction. It's trying to circumvent the checks and balances, it's doing things without Congress' permission, and it's not being held accountable for anything it has done wrong, legally or ethically.
The Bush administration hasn't succeeded yet in eliminating free speech, but it's trying. When Bush was running for his first presidential election in 2000, he said on TV, "there ought to be limits to freedom" in response to a political site aimed at him. I agree, there should be limits on freedom, but within reason. For example, you shouldn't be able to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theatre when there isn't one, and for the most part, you can't, it's been made illegal (IANAL). But to say that you shouldn't be able to satirize a political candidate is pure idiocy.
Which leads pretty much instantly to the reasonable conclusion that you're not ridiculing Bush because he's a dictator, but rather because you have neither evidence of a dictatorship nor any other reasonable argument against him...
He's not a dicator, he's President of the Executive branch of the United States of America, and he has a strong desire to be a dictator. He has said in an interview that "This job would be easier if it was a dictatorship--and I was the dictator." No man who has a desire to be the leader of this country should be saying these things nor even thinking these things.
and are therefore reduced to cheap and unsubstantiated smears.
The things I have said are neither cheap nor unsubstantiated, and one could hardly call them smears. These are legitimate concerns about the words and actions of our President, which, by such words and actions, appears to want to be a dictator, and who has made significant headway towards that goal, more than any other person in America's past.
What you reap is what you sow
Keep your eyes to the sky.
Do not collect $200. Lose citizenship for a turn.
"You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
This is NOT a troll, I'm honestly asking for information. [...] I tend not to believe anything I read on the web unless the author can support it.
So, you aren't trolling, you're just trying to... get someone to argue with you?
You can't take the sky from me...
FYI
--- widget evolution: enhanced, plus, super, ultra, extreme, exxxtreme, ultra-extreme,
Could somebody please pass me the soap ? and a little more hot water ? Aaah that's better, thanks !
They haven't come for the Communists in Europe at all. Germany and France at least are chock full of Communists and Socialists, and public consensus is on their side.
But what do I say - we've had years of stagnation, where the US still did very well economically...
"Anyway, to summarize, what I'm proposing is like an educational game, only not in mathematics, but political science."
Oh please. One party's/lobby's/etc one-sided half of the story isn't political science, it's just dogma. I hate to break this news to you but "science" is a bit more impartial a _process_, and make no mistake it's all about "process" and "method", not about ultimate truths, and _not_ about "you're the ones to blame unless you join preaching on our side." So slapping a "political science" label on your pet dogma or conspiracy/slippery-slope/whatever theory does not make it education.
"Unless you're one of those folk that run around screaming that liberals are ruining america by, say, doing some real fucking research, or that the left made us lose the Vietnam war by protesting against it and decrying its stupidity (in which case, you're just an idiot)"
Ah, how refreshing, the fallback to "you're probably one of the enemies, and an idiot to boot." Was wondering when that would be scheduled. So if I don't join your preaching choir I'm against you liberals. Right?
Did I mention one-sided dogma and propaganda yet? Good, because it looks more and more like that to me.
How about that, plain and simple, I'm just a _gamer_ in my gaming time? I'm not either a Republican, nor a Democrat, I'm not either liberal or conservative, not left wing and not right wing. In my gaming time, I just care about gameplay, not about your preaching agenda. I'm just there to collect golden rings, shoot NPCs, or whatever the game is about, and have a fun time, not to get a dose of "liberals = good, conservatives = idiots ruining the country" (or viceversa) propaganda.
You want to discuss politics? Good. Then do it in the rest of the time. Then I'll be happy to tell you what I think about both the Republicans and Democrats. It might involve some graphic metaphors. It might also involve some pointing at Europe, where we still keep our politicians in check and they at least try to look like they're not bending over for the highest corporate bidder. It might also involve some suggestion to go vote instead of just whining about how everyone else is an idiot. Etc.
But when I'm gaming, I just want _gameplay_. That's all. The purpose there is to be entertained, not to be a medium for your political propaganda.
And yeah, that's exactly what I'm proposing: when I want to know something, involve "doing some real fucking research", as you aptly put it. I don't need some wannabe politics zealots telling me what I should think, and how I'm an idiot if I don't join in preaching their One True Faith.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
This is frightening real. Consider the potential here. BinLaden has won the war against freedom ! Mystery
MYSTERY
1. Senators and congressmen of the US government cannot be voted out by non-americans. Many victims of the patriot act are not american civilians.
2. Senators and congressmen make massive use of television and newspapers. Most of their opponents do not have the same acces to mass-media. So they look for other, creative ways to get their message through. Like board games.
Trust me, I work for the government.
I have fond memories of trying to avoid a global nuclear war while trying to become the sole super power in the world. Fascinating game from way back in 1985! Balance of Power
Just because you consider yourself a student of history doesn't mean that you don't lack perspective.
My other first post is car post.
Quick! Find anywhere in my post where I said anybody cheated at anything!
From now on, I buy only Intel.
I call the turban for this round! (I hate being the shoe)
Furthermore, I'm horrified to see that many of you are quite willing to accept persecution of communists, and explaining this line away with things such as "it wasn't the persecution of the communists that was bad, but the persecution of the American people under the guise of communist infiltration". One of the other posters implied that equating the communists with the Jews in this sense was somehow wrong - do you not have both freedom of religion and freedom of (political) speech in America? If so, the two should indeed be equated, whether or not you like either.
Being a socialist myself, about the only thing I like about the United States politically speaking is the strong belief many people there have in freedom of speech. It would be a shame if that belief were to disappear as soon as it came to the issue of non-capitalist ideologies. (Obviously, persecution of communists is hardly a relevant issue in America today, since they are no longer a significant political force. But parallels can easily be drawn to other ideologies that are on the fringe from an American point of view.)
"elected". Unless you were actually quoting someone you'd heard using that word.
I can actually picture you using the little finger-quotes. You (apparently) have no idea how stuff like that undercuts your argument.
You are totally blocking my view of the wall. - Dogbert
Again, I ask you, where did I indicate anybody cheated? I want you to quote, word for word, the exact text that indicates that I claimed anybody cheated, rigged, coerced, or any other illegitimate activity in relation to the 2000 election.
You (apparently) have no idea how stuff like that undercuts your argument.
Just out of curiosity, does inventing make-believe charges against a person undercut an argument, or is that acceptable fare on Slashdot? I'm sure I could invent some amusing charges about you in relation to the source of your current genetic makeup, if that's legitimate debate practice around here.
From now on, I buy only Intel.
I guess I'd be more concerned about my rights of dissent if there weren't so many awards going around for famous people performing in big movies about how the government stifles dissent.
#-#
Ad Astra Per Aspera
A rough road leads to the stars
You're not going to get it. I inferred it from your quotes around the word "elected". If you did not want it to be inferred so, you would not have made it look like the word was not entirely accurate. But you did, so there's not point in being coy.
And I never mentioned the 2000 election.
And that's the last morsel I'll toss to this troll.
You are totally blocking my view of the wall. - Dogbert
First note that I'm on your side.
However when you put "elected" in quotes you implied that he wasn't really elected. And he's right... dragging up that extremely extremely close mess of an election does undermine the criticisms of everything Bush is doing wrong and everything Bush is doing badly. It sounds like sour grapes.
Better to make it perfectly clear that even Republicans think Bush is doing the wrong. That Bush's approval ratings are polling in the low to mid 30s percent. That you only hit that dismal level when you have lost the entire middle and you lose signifigant percentages even from your own party. The middle is critical of Bush, and even Republicans are increasingly critical of Bush. That this has nothing to do with biased partisan politics or sour grapes. The only thing keeping Bush even that high in approval ratings is biased partisan politics dismissing any critisism of Bush as being bias and as lies. The only think keeping Bush's approval ratings even that high is people mentally filerting out critism of Bush... that criticism must be coming from Demoncrats and therefore can and should be ignored.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
I inferred it from your quotes around the word "elected".
And since nowhere in the post does it say anything that supports you conclusion, I infer from this discussion that you have a bad habit of negatively reading into things so that you can start arguments.
And I never mentioned the 2000 election.
And I did. In relation to the text you were using for you inferences. So, I suppose I will further infer that your reading comprehension wasn't up to snuff for this thread either.
And that's the last morsel I'll toss to this troll.
Yea, yea. You made a specific claim against me that you can't back up now that you're being challenged and I'm the troll, right, sure, gotcha.
I'm wasting my day off for this crap.
From now on, I buy only Intel.
He's not the only one to do this:
Search eBay for Patriot Act Game. I was expecting to find people packaging and selling his game, but it turns out it's a completely different game....also based on Monopoly, also poking fun at the Patriot act, civil liberties, and the terrorist threat.
I like the free one better, though, it seems more thought out.
"reporting on Japanese balloon bombs during WWII also."
Funny you should mention the last war America ever declared.
Did I miss something?
Haven't we declared war on Iraq twice now?
Technically up until Iraq every conflict we've had since WWII has been some variation of a "police action", true, but we have declared war since WWII.
To the extent that a foreign and hostile power is infiltrating a nation's governmental and cultural institutions for the purposes of espionage, propaganda, and revolution--to that extent I accept a nation's persecution of such spies, propagandists, and revolutionaries.
To the extent that free citizens are persecuted simply on account of their ideology, I oppose such persecution.
McCarthy's campaign resulted in both the persecution of very real spies and traitors, and in the persecution of people whose only crime was to espouse the ideology of the foreign and hateful power in question.
Given what we know today about Soviet Communism in general, Stalinism in particular, and the U.S.S.R.'s very real and very extensive espionage operations, it doesn't surprise me at all that there would be some spill-over from the legitimate suspects to innocent (or ignorant) fellow-travelers. I'm sure you know better than I how complicit the average American socialist was in Stalin's covert war of ideology. My guess is, not nearly as complicit as most people think, but in hindsight rather more complicit than anyone should like.
Luckily, McCarthyism petered out soon enough. The Soviet program did little lasting damage. In America today, socialists such as yourself are free to say whatever they want. This is all as it should be. I'm just glad it turned out for better, and not for worse.
Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.
All of this innuendo and supposition about Bush's motives and goals would be a lot more compelling if there were any evidence at all that Bush was serious about establishing himself as a dictator.
When the 2008 elections come and go, with no martial law, no Constitutional amendments allowing Bush to serve additonal terms, etc., will you then finally admit that this has all been politics as usual, rather than a headlong slide into fascism?
Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.
on the last part. Never confuse fascism with outright incompetence.
Ira
...you are playing the game mean that you still have civil liberities?
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
That said, there are, in my opinion, gray areas. You say that propagandists and revolutionaries who are infiltrating a nation for a hostile government can legitimately be persecuted, which sounds reasonable in the case where someone obviously falls into this camp: i.e., they are being compensated by, or taking orders directly from, the hostile government, and committing acts that are illegal in the country they operate in(wherever there are laws against treason, this last point is pretty much open to interpretation, which is not unproblematic). I'd wager, however, that there were many communists in the United States in the fifties who did actively propagandize and advocate an eventual revolution(both being rather central tenet of the dominant communist ideology at the time) - but largely on account of their own ideology. Many of these undoubtedly fell for the propaganda of the USSR, believing that Stalin had achieved what they were dreaming of, but ignorance, naïveté and blind acceptance of things that should not be accepted blindly are not crimes when counted by themselves. Thus, they did sympathize with the USSR - but sympathy for a foreign and hostile government can't be a crime on its own in a country where freedom of speech is upheld, and the persecution of these people was (in my opinion) unjust.
In conclusion: My issue with McCarthyism is that I do not believe that it was primarily a counter-intelligence operation intended to weed out Soviet spies, but rather an attempt at a political cleansing of sorts, an operation against communist sympathizers - from one angle, people who might easily be turned to be Soviet spies, or from another, people who were simply uncomfortably outspoken with their views in favour of the enemy. Though I'd like to research that more thoroughly, I simply do not have the time to do this right now. I'd call your attention, however, to a quote by McCarthy in 1950 regarding whom he intended as targets for his campaign(Source: Wikiquote, though I feel the need to warn you that the selection of quotes was obviously done from an anti-McCarthy point of view, but I assume that the quotes themselves are legitimate): "...a list of 205 names that were known [...] as being members of the Communist Party and who, nevertheless, are still working and shaping policy in the State Department."
These people are not being accused of being spies, at least not explicitly. They are being accused of being members of the Communist Party, and it is implied that, because they are members of a certain political party and subscribers to a certain ideology, they are incapable of loyalty to the state as their employer and unfit to work within the State Department.
I do know that communists in the United States enjoy freedom of speech today. But as I said, communists are hardly relevant in USA at the moment, and other groups may be threatened today the same way that communists were fifty years ago(though I am not claiming that this is happening to the same degree as in the fifties).
Furthermore, persecution of communists in democratic capitalist countries during the Cold War was not unique to the United States. To use an example from my own country: in Norway certain politicians were kept under surveillance apparently simply for being dangerously radical(ironically, the surveillance was probably done by a government which was dangerously radical by American standards) - these incidents have been heavily debated since the declassification of documents relatin
Ah, good point. The restriction of free speech to not include threats against the president is merely USC, but it has been upheld by the SCOTUS for quite some time. This case helpeddefine the boundarys between actual threats and political hyperbole, which is protected speech. The history referred to in the footnotes is quite interesting.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
So why the random punctuation around "elected?" Most people put punctuation into a sentence for a reason, so it seemed reasonable to infer that you did as well. Since there was no indication of a direct quotation, the only punctuation construction your use of quotes resembled was scare quotes which are typically an indicator that you're distancing yourself from the idea contained in them. So was that why you used them, or was it just a malfunctioning keyboard? Perhaps your deity is angered by the use of the word "elected" when not in quotes? Since we can't make any inferences based on what appears to be standard punctuation, I think we're all at a loss to divine your meaning.
An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
Mostly unrelated fact: The last time Congress actually declared war: World War II.(Other unrelated note: "Holiday" just ended.) Incidentally, that's the last time a stable democracy has occured as a direct result of a US invasion.
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
Most people put punctuation into a sentence for a reason, so it seemed reasonable to infer that you did as well.
Maybe, but if you didn't understand the sentence, why did you just go running off with your own random interpretation? It wouldn't even be that bad, except your interpretation completely ignores the context of the sentence (wherein the entire thing is clearly subjected to the non-election in terms of popular vote versus the official election in terms of electoral vote) and claims that I made specific statements that I didn't make.
Hell, even if you'd made an interpretation that merely missed the context it wouldn't be so bad, but you didn't even do that, you made an interpretation using input that didn't even exist.
From now on, I buy only Intel.
You can find it to if you're actually interested in reasearching what really happened.
Now, you tell me: Find an example of a steel-framed building that has collapsed from fire. Ever. In all history.
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
Seriously, I was as disappointed as anybody (well... that's probably not true since there are a lot of total nutters out there, but I was pretty disappointed) in the past couple of elections, but I suppose that's just the way things go. Maybe we'll all learn a lesson from it. Eventually.
An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
The summary mentions a Michael "Kabbash".
What is he trying to put himself on?????
"The more you watch the footage of 9/11, the more obvious the lies become. But don't take my word for it...do your own research."
I had two very close friends who were in visual range of the towers when this happened. I trust them with my life. They told me what happened and I beleive them.
You, on the other hand, are a notorious conspircay theorist and general shit talker, with absolutely ZERO credibility.
Frankly, sir, you're a liar, and the testimony of my friends is all the proof of that I need.
"The government grants you rights, not the other way around."-- beav007. Yes, these people really exist...