Slashdot Mirror
Bush Admin. Appoints Civil-Liberties Officer
Zephyros writes "The WSJ reports that the Bush administration has appointed a Civil Liberties Protection Officer in order to assuage the public's privacy concerns. From the article: 'As the son of a U.S. aid worker stationed in Guatemala during the 1970s civil war, Alex Joel recalls being unable to tell the good guys from the bad as both armed soldiers and civilians alike would order his family out of their car to search it. Those first-hand brushes with totalitarianism, says Mr. [Alex] Joel, have led him to take the rights of individuals very seriously.' It remains to be seen how effective he will be, but at least they're recognizing the concern."
I feel so much better now.
Like Hitler appointing a blue ribbon panel to review the status of Jews.
Useless because he reports to the Director of National Intelligence. Now, if the Director of National Intelligence reported to HIM, then we might have something to celebrate.
An executive-appointed position--regardless of which party is in power--is precisely where we cannot depend on our civil liberties being protected.
I think this guy *knows without a doubt* that his place is to make the public feel better by showing the administration "cares," not to actually take the bull by the horns and enact any sorts of changes.
Talk about propaganda.
Donald Rumsfeld moved to head new "Department of Peace".
As the son of a U.S. aid worker stationed in Guatemala during the 1970s civil war, Alex Joel recalls being unable to tell the good guys from the bad as both armed soldiers and civilians alike would order his family out of their car to search it.
Let me guess. He wasn't scared because they had nothing to hide, just like all good americans!
Something tells me Joel's time in Guatemala was well spent taking notes.
May the Maths Be with you!
Does this really matter if the very administration that does the infringement is the same administration that appoints the officer? Their views will be in alignment.
"Although you might have concerns about what might potentially be going on,
those potentials are not actually being realized and if you could see
what was going on, you would be reassured just like everyone else," he says.
He lacks the same foresight as the rest of the administration. Even if you could say that the wiretap was legit, it sets a bad precedent; any forthcoming administration can establish the same program with ever stretching legal boundaries and say "Bush did it, it must be OK." And there wouldn't even be the oversight to say otherwise.
Jim http://www.runfatboy.net/
Will he have any juice to stop, sway, change direction, or do something in our best interest? Its easy to give someone a job but its quite another to give them the responsibility and the power to do it effectively.
- No child left behind czar
... working well at 3 dollars a gallon
... himself ... the DECIDER. Get me Saddam ... and who is this OBL you talk about
- Supreme court justice Harriet Myers
- Clean Air
- Environment czar to relax the environment initiatives
- Homeland security from everyone but the illegals
- VP himself to supervise energy policy
- And last but not the least
This is like a wolf appointing the fox to guard the hen house...
~S
I really thought they would nominate Helen Keller for this position. A perfect example of "See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil."
I'll tell you when your rights are being violated.
"Bad times have a scientific value. These are occasions a good learner would not miss." ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson
-Kurt
"We can categorically state we have not released man-eating badgers into the area." - UK military spokesman, July 2007
I'll beleive things have actually changed in their policies when... um... man, I can't think of anything that would prove to me those leopards have changed their spots.
PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
Real journalists? You mean corporate controlled pawns who are gagged for fear of threatening advetising revenues?
I, personally, will take the gesture with a grain of salt. However, I'm more than willing to give this a chance. The worst that will likely come of it is nothing. I'm willing to give the guy a shot though..
Isn't this story 19 days late?
Removing these NYPD cameras, could be a good start.
Isn't it the role of the head of state to preserve civil liberties ? Especially those guaranteed by the Constitution ?
The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
And so, they become propaganda tools and little else. They need to give the position teeth, but then that's exactly what the governent doesn't want, given how the 9/11 Commission took the goverment to task for its ineptitude. The last thing they need is a government-appointed civil liberties watchdog actually doing his/her job and exposing the malfeasance going on behind the scenes.
GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
If his appointment history is any sort of guide, allowing foxes to guard henhouses and the like, I'd expect this appointment to be a high ranking official in the Chinese Government.
You better watch out, there may be dogs about . .
Ministry of Love = Department of Justice
Ministry of Truth = Department of Mind Control
Ministry of Peace = Department of War
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
I know that you were being sarcastic (At least I hope you were), but this won't change a thing.
k =1923742
Over a year ago, Bush created the "Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board". They haven't met a single time since the board was created.
The LA Times article that talked about it is now in their archives, and I believe is unavailable unless you pay for it.
Here is a posting that made Fark about it a while ago, although the linked to article is dead.
http://forums.fark.com/cgi/fark/comments.pl?IDLin
in order to assuage the public's privacy concerns
Yep, that's pretty much the only reason for this. To "assuage". Not, mind you, to take any action or actually do anything. But to make people feel better about it through persuasion and talk.
Par for the course in my book. This administration pays a lot of lip service to a lot of things that they don't actually give a damn about. And this is yet another example of it.
Actions speak louder than words.
Somehow this makes me think of how I feel every time I see one of those anti-smoking ads created by a tobacco company. It MIGHT do some good, but you absolutely know the tobacco company didn't do it to really try to get people to stop smoking.
a REAL Civil Liberties Protection person or just a good actor at it? You know much like Gonzales is supposed be an Attorney General.
Expecting a conservative to mod me down in 3...2....1...
The WSJ reports that the Bush administration has appointed a Civil Liberties Protection Officer in order to assuage the public's privacy concerns.
Under the Bush doctrine of Unitary Executive, this posting is a contradiction in terms and not just useless but completely meaningless. The "Officer" will be implicitely or explicitely prohibitied from taking any corrective action against anyone in the executive branch, along the same lines that the EPA cannot sure the Department of Defense to clean up depleted uranium dust because both are agents of the executive, and the president cannot sue himself. ridiculous, but that's what it is.
Now, who are the ones in government trampling the hardest on civil liberties?
In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is.
And before any free-market religion convert jumps on this with "but free markets are most efficient thing ever!" meme, lets not kid ourselves, they are efficient only from the perspective of their search function and suffer a host of horrible inefficiencies elsewhere, very much as any other method of allocation of limited resources does, each being more efficient at some of its aspects when compared to others.
...that it said Alex Jones. Now THAT would have been a news headline.
Clear Skies Initiative: let factories pollute more.
No Child Left Behind: helped schools hide minority test scores.
Operation Iraqi Freedom: DUCK MOTHERFUCKER! has become Iraq's national motto.
The Bush administration has been living in Opposite Day for years.
So... A Civil Liberties officer is going to become the head of America's newest brownshirt organization and be highly effective.
Otherwise, why would they cite his hands-on experience dealing with totalitarian methods as if it were a selling point.
If they really wanted to convince us he was serious about civil liberties, he would appoint Larry Flynt or better yet have Hunter S. Thompson brought back from the dead.
The new civil liberties director would be a hard-living, foul-mouth, drug-addicted, woman-grabbing, ass-slapping, hyperactive pervert driving the biggest, meanest gas-guzzling straight-line Cadillac he could find from the car lot nearest to his last traffic accident.
I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/022006R.shtml
Privacy Guardian Is Still a Paper Tiger
By Richard B. Schmitt
The Los Angeles Times
Monday 20 February 2006
A year after its creation, the White House civil liberties board has yet to do a single day of work.
Washington - For Americans troubled by the prospect of federal agents eavesdropping on their phone conversations or combing through their Internet records, there is good news: A little-known board exists in the White House whose purpose is to ensure that privacy and civil liberties are protected in the fight against terrorism.
Someday, it might actually meet.
Initially proposed by the bipartisan commission that investigated the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board was created by the intelligence overhaul that President Bush signed into law in December 2004.
More than a year later, it exists only on paper.
Foot-dragging, debate over its budget and powers, and concern over the qualifications of some of its members - one was treasurer of Bush's first campaign for Texas governor - has kept the board from doing a single day of work.
On Thursday, after months of delay, the Senate Judiciary Committee took a first step toward standing up the fledgling watchdog, approving the two lawyers Bush nominated to lead the panel. But it may take months before the board is up and running and doing much serious work.
Critics say the inaction shows the administration is just going through the motions when it comes to civil liberties.
"They have stalled in giving the board adequate funding. They have stalled in making appointments," said Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.). "It is apparent they are not taking this seriously."
The Sept. 11 commission also has expressed reservations about the commitment to the liberties panel.
"We felt it was absolutely vital," said Thomas H. Kean, the Republican former governor of New Jersey who led the commission. "We had certainly hoped it would have been up and running a long time ago."
The inaction is especially noteworthy in light of recent events. Some Republicans joined Democrats to delay renewal of the anti-terrorism Patriot Act because of civil liberties concerns. And the disclosure in December that Bush approved surveillance of certain US residents' international communications without a court order has caused bipartisan dismay in Congress.
"Obviously, civil liberties issues are critically important, and they have been to this president, especially after 9/11," said White House spokeswoman Dana Perino, adding that the White House had moved expeditiously to establish the board. "We do not formally nominate until we are through the background investigation and the full vetting. It takes time to present those nominations to the Senate. But now that they have been confirmed, that is a good thing."
The board chairwoman is Carol E. Dinkins, a Houston lawyer who was a Justice Department official in the Reagan administration. A longtime friend of the Bush family, she was the treasurer of George W. Bush's first campaign for governor of Texas, in 1994, and co-chair of Lawyers for Bush-Cheney, which recruited Republican lawyers to handle legal battles after the November 2004 election.
Dinkins, a longtime partner in the Houston law firm of Vinson & Elkins, where Atty. Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales once was a partner, has specialized in defending oil and gas companies in environmental lawsuits.
Foremost among her credentials, she told Senate Judiciary Committee members in a response to their questions, was the two years she spent as deputy attorney general in President Reagan's Justice Department. There, she said, she had to weigh civil liberties concerns while overseeing domestic surveillance and counter-intelligence cases.
The board vice chairman is Alan
When Bush appoints someone to protect our rights, we know we are going to lose alot more.
Fight Spammers!
Well, I, for one, welcome our new sub-Intelligence Civil Liberties Overl ....
....
no, wait
So the fox appoints a cat to protect the hens from the fox...
"We are all geniuses when we dream"
- E.M. Cioran
Anyone who has a glimmer of hope about this, forget it. Here's a little summary of a comparable establishment, the Bureau of Indian Affairs. I was astonished, but wikipedia is strangely neutral about their existence:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bureau_of_Indian_Aff
But here is some of the truth behind them. They were established to placate the Native population and to ensure that they are permanently marginalized.
They have stolen revenue from them,
http://www.earthportals.com/Portal_Messenger/bia.
they are incompetent and their existence is a keep-your-enemies-closer solution to future American-Native American relations. Just ask anyone who has contracted with them.
You know the what if Microsoft built cars joke? Here's the equivalent BIA joke:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0304/S00127.htm
Lastly, note that the name of the agency still reflects an old way of thinking - It ain't the Bureau of Native American Affiars, a symptom of what little regard is given to the North American Natives.
A Civil Liberties appointee will bear some painful resemblences and be used more for turning to the population and placating them about the administration rather than speaking on behalf of the population to the President.
This is business-as-usual.
You are checking your backups, aren't you?
With McClellan kicked to the curb my sig is out of date. Never mind, sigs are ten a penny and I'll find another one.
"The White House is not an intelligence-gathering agency," -- Scott McClellan, Whitehouse spokesman.
Double good job appointing someone who's expectation of civil rights has been lowered, and then spinning it as if it will help him do his job. Just about anything from his perspective would be an improvement, and as you know, these days, an improvement is a job well done.
In my experience, though, most of the worthwhile news bloggers are journalists already, and have just found a new medium to put their journalistic... uh... stuff to work.
You know, I thought the whole oversight thing was why we had that other branch of government. You know that one with all the talking people that pass laws that the President ignores? Yeah those guys, they should probably look into this.
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
Sounded too scary, so Dept. of Defense was the new term.
Dept. of Peace is not far off.
My mom says I'm cool.
Microsoft joins the OpenDocument alliance.
I can't believe they didn't just call it The Ministry of Love.
Just like DMCA, the PATRIOT Act or the Range Safety Act just because it has a happy feel-good name does not make it happy or feel-good.
Coding with assembly is like playing with Legos. Coding an application in assembly is like building a car with Legos.
Alex Joel recalls being unable to tell the good guys from the bad as both armed soldiers and civilians alike would order his family out of their car to search it.
This is an ironic statement since he could he be talking about either Guatemala or Iraq.
Article with search pictures
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
"Dick, they're getting upset." ..." ... wouldn't that kinda hurt us?"
"Why?"
"Well, 'cause we pretty much snoop at them."
"So?"
"Well, ya know, the things 'bout land of free and
"We already eliminated home of the brave, and they kinda liked it. So?"
"Well, it ain't good, ok? They might finally find out that we're not really working in their favor."
"Hmm. I know. We'll appoint someone to take care of civil liberties and observe it all."
"But
"How so?"
"Well, if he's constantly telling us what we can't do?"
"Never said anything 'bout telling us what to do, did I? I said OBSERVE."
"And then?"
"No then. File a nice li'l report to be put into the big round storage under your desk."
"And what should that do?"
"Make them think that someone's taking care of liberty. While we take care of what's left of it."
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
"Any bests?"
Yesssss. The flithy bloggerssss gives uss the dirts. Filthy, fats bloggerssss....
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
These are problems because
Reading further into TFA, It seems to me that his job is partially going to involve enabling datamining in a more 'anonymous' fashion.Bush, Cheney & company seem to desperately want to track/datamine people. Even after the program was 'shut down', it turns out that it wasn't. It just got a name change & was shuffled around bureaucraticly. This looks to me like another attempt to legitimize that program.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
They could have appointed someone from Yahoo.
*ducks*
What if the Hokey Pokey really is what it's all about?
Don't you mean "Donald Rumsfeld moved to head new ' Ministry of Peace'?" That's rather double double minus bad of you for misspelling the name of the ministry.
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
Many are merely people with vested interest in the matter, focusing on one single issue, some are people with journalistic aspirations, or who could be considered as the so-called "freelance" journalists. Again, it is the quality of one's work which makes one a "journalist", not some ritualistic annointment by the media corporations.
As others have pointed out this is to make the public feel better, but it does far more than that. It allows the president and his administration to continue to erode our freedom and blame the new guy for not sticking up for us. It should be the president sticking up for our freedoms... and congress... and the supreme court... and the general public.
"However, as noted, the exceptions to Godwin's Law include the invocation of the Hitler comparison in a positivist manner that does not have a normative dimension." - wikipedia
nope, it was a legitimate comparison.
You are checking your backups, aren't you?
Appoint all the officers you like.
I won't feel my civil liberties are protected until we have a Ministry of Love.
No sig.
Wow, I am sure that Bush and company will finally be sleep soundly again. I am sure that their intense worry over our fundamental rights was awful for them to deal with; hell I bet that their anxiety over possible lost liberties was palpable...Probably way worse than spending a year at Gitmo.
- cause you know, Bush...he's a caring man.
- And a Christian....that's how I know he's good. Nobody would ever say they are a Christian who believes in freedom and then do all kinds of things that go against everything America and the civilized world stand for...No way.
People can either be good or bad - the TV tells me so.
I'm afraid that the post will prove surprisingly accurate. It doesn't say that he's appointed a Civil Liberties Protection Officer in order to prevent the administration from trampling our civil liberties. It doesn't say that he's been appointed to verify that our civil liberties aren't being trampled. He's been appointed to "assuage the public's privacy concerns."
Can anyone tell me how to set my sig on Slashdot?
Want to be more disturbed? Read about the new 385m$ internment camps under construction in the US.
"This may be presumptuous..." "That's my favorite kind of 'This'."
--Chag
Actually it's easy to tell the difference - good guys would stop your car or search it without probable cause or a warrent.
No, it's everyone's job. It's humanities nature to lie, cheat and steal,
murder, rape and mame... that does not mean it is only the government's
job to curtail this.
Were that I say, pancakes?
Dirt? It's all around him (and the US). Does anybody know why Guatamala has had a shaky political record? From wikipedia:
Guatemalan history has been marked by the Cold War between the USA and the USSR. The Central Intelligence Agency, supported by a small group of Guatemalan citizens, orchestrated the overthrow of the democratic socialist freely-elected Guatemalan government in 1954. This was known as Operation PBSUCCESS and led to over thirty years of unrest in the nation during which over 200,000 Guatemalans were killed (students, workers, professionals and opossitors of all political tendencies during the first 10 years of the repression and thousands of mostly Mayan Indians in the last phases of the conflict), more than 450 Mayan villages were destroyed, and over one million people became refugees. This is considered to be one of the worst ethnic cleansings in modern Latin America. Contributing reasons include US support of every successive, mostly non-democratic and military governments in Guatemala. From the 1950s until the 1990s, the U.S. directly supported Guatemala's army by supplying it with combatant training, weaponry, and money. The U.S. sent the Green Berets to Guatemala to transform its Army into a "modern counter-insurgency force," making their army the most powerful and sophisticated in Central America.
For more amusement, type guatamala and CIA into google.
Current situation:
The state is snooping too much and is acting in an oppressive and unconstitutional way. Rumsfeld, Bush, whoever must be held responsible. Someone must resign.
Future situation:
The state is snooping too much and is acting in an oppressive and unconstitutional way.
The Civil-Liberties Officer isn't doing his job properly and he must resign.
Appointing people to posts where they appear to have free reign while their strings are pulled from the shadows puts a superb buffer zone between the public and those who really make the decisions. It worked for Tony Blair for years and it's only since he's decided that he's invincible and dropped his guard, claiming responsibility for good things that unexpectedly turned to shit, that he's become so distrusted.
Hmmmmmm..... Deep fried and look like Squirrel.
"It ain't the Bureau of Native American Affiars, a symptom of what little regard is given to the North American Natives."
I think that's more of a case of little regard being given to current social convention.
But, while you're ranting, what does the "C" in NAACP stand for? Why haven't they changed that?
Probably for the same reason. There's no legitimate reason to change it. And no, hurting your feelings doesn't count as a legitimate reason.
"The government grants you rights, not the other way around."-- beav007. Yes, these people really exist...
Comarades!
I have grown up in a communist country, and let me tell you!
All problems can be solved by appointing executives with shiny titles to fix them! All of them!
Remember, and repeat after me:
All animals are equal!
If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
Bushit?
Klein bottle for rent - inquire within.
US Peace-keeping force sent to Iran.
Guantanamo Bay Hotel checks in new guests who are a bit unsure about exactly how long they will be staying for.
US companies flock to Iraq to provide much-needed services.
US citizens get first-class treatment with wonderful new voice-recognition systems.
Terrorist suspect shot in subway before even getting a chance to plan the terror attack.
Our idea of a celebrity gubernatorial candidate is Lynn Swann.
Who the hell in the GOP picks these guys?
I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
If a democratically elected government is so far removed from the sovereign (which, in case anyone needs reminding, is the people), that it needs a "court jester" to tell it when it is acting counter to the interests of the sovereign, something has gone wrong, a while back.
yes, we have no bananas
which by definition is one who argues against a cause or position, not as a committed opponent but simply for the sake of argument or to determine the validity of the cause or position.
So that would make him the Bush Administrations Person in charge of telling the public what a good job they are doing on Civil Rights. Just like Rumsfeld lets us know how well things are going in Iraq, Rice on Foreign relations, etc.
When ever someone has to say "at least they" then you know things are bad, also what makes you think this guy will be able to do anything of value? The Bush administration is designed against that, and I have yet to see anything good come out of this administration...oh sure they tell you all the great things they are doing...but look a little closer and you may find your self saying "at least they...."
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
... I want them to be addressed.
http://outcampaign.org/
The President is addressing concerns in a customer-facing fashion, adding value to the governmental process by streamlining customer inquiries by routing them to an appropriate effectuating center, where Constitution-based matters can be processed, administered, and serviced in a timely fashion. This is just one component of the President's full suite of customer-oriented governmental solutions. This patent-pending VAGUE (Value Added Government Unravelling Exercises) offering is a full-featured, soup-to-nuts package that delivers more value than previous open government methodologies. Tremendous price discounts are available to high-income organizations and individuals.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
Read the Federalist Papers sometime. They're the design documentation for the Constitution and utterly fascinating.
What was *supposed* to happen was that the states were supposed to protect their citizens against any hypothetical tyranny by the Federal government. If not out of good will, then out of jealousy for their own powers.
That's a dead letter now.
... creating a well-publicized office that does nothing more than distract attention.
Misdirection: A classic stage-magician method. Watch the left hand say things like "we need to be careful of civil liberties", while the right hand performs the amazing "disappearing civil liberties" trick.
I am in awe...
speaking off the record, said "I, for one, welcome our new canid overlords."
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
This is just creating another position in the government and appointing someone (qualified for once) to sit in it. It doesn't mean that they care any more than they did yesterday about civil liberties, and it doesn't change anything. This guy will protect my civil liberties in about the same capacity that "Homeland Security" secures the homeland...in title alone.
If Bush were really concerned about civil liberties he wouldn't have the stance he does on snooping on citizens...
You want to make this position really seem like it's doing something, have them actually start action against Bush for spying on citizens or conspiring to wiretap the Internet. But nothing truly groundbreaking like that will ever happen.
This is a good way for the Bush administration to pander to the public and have a press conference pretending like they care about your freedom, and I bet every news organization will lick it up like the true lapdogs they are.
Judges and senates have been bought for gold; Esteem and love were never to be sold.
Damn good post. Thank you!
We are the fire that lights our world.. and we are the fire that consumes it.
Job Qualification: You must be presentable, affable, and be able to lie brazenly while keeping a straight face.
Yeah, I have to say that it doesn't take much of tinfoil hat to assume that this guy was stationed in Guatamala as an "aid worker" by the CIA. Such activities were very common in the region between the 1960s and 1980s in an attempt to prevent the region from turning into a foothold for communism in this hemisphere.
Now you have to wonder... if he's CIA and was stationed in Central America during the heyday of U.S. involvement there... what exactly would his agenda for U.S. civil liberties be? *shudder*
He could be a great guy, but given the administration that he reports to, I have to say that the doubts win out for me, and I'm certainly not feeling like my rights were just protected.
First, Executive Agencies can and do fine each other under civil enforcement actions. For example see this EPA site about enforcing against other Federal (Executive) agencies http://www.epa.gov/compliance/federalfacilities/en forcement/index.html.
Secondly, there are these things call "Executive Orders". They are official orders from the President to all the Executive Agencies. If any Federal Officer runs afoul of an Executive Order, he can expect to be disciplined within the agency. Entire agencies have been "called on the carpet" by the Office of Managment and Budget.
For some strange reason, ther term "Unitary Executive" gets all the left-wing crazies bent out of shape, but it really means "separation of powers". What is Executive is wholly (and solely) Executive. What is Judicial is wholly (and solely) Judicial. What is Legislative is wholly (and solely) Legislative. Unitary Executive means that all executive functions are performed within the executive branch and are subject to the Executive Branch's chain of command. No branch may meddle in the internal affairs and running of the others. This is basic constitutional law in the US. The term "Unitary Executive" is primarily used to argue that the creation of "independent prosecutors" are unconstitutional , since prosecution is an executive function and all executive functions fall under the President and his appointed officers (like the Attorney General), while "independent prosecutors" are appointed by and answerable to Judges (thus running afoul of separation of powers).
Why not appoint the guy that runs the ACLU?
From the ACLU website:
The American system of government is founded on two counterbalancing principles: that the majority of the people governs, through democratically elected representatives; and that the power even of a democratic majority must be limited, to ensure individual rights.
Majority power is limited by the Constitution's Bill of Rights, which consists of the original ten amendments ratified in 1791, plus the three post-Civil War amendments (the 13th, 14th and 15th) and the 19th Amendment (women's suffrage), adopted in 1920.
The mission of the ACLU is to preserve all of these protections and guarantees:
* Your First Amendment rights-freedom of speech, association and assembly. Freedom of the press, and freedom of religion supported by the strict separation of church and state.
* Your right to equal protection under the law - equal treatment regardless of race, sex, religion or national origin.
* Your right to due process - fair treatment by the government whenever the loss of your liberty or property is at stake.
* Your right to privacy - freedom from unwarranted government intrusion into your personal and private affairs.
We work also to extend rights to segments of our population that have traditionally been denied their rights, including Native Americans and other people of color; lesbians, gay men, bisexuals and transgendered people; women; mental-health patients; prisoners; people with disabilities; and the poor.
If the rights of society's most vulnerable members are denied, everybody's rights are imperiled.
The ACLU was founded by Roger Baldwin, Crystal Eastman, Albert DeSilver and others in 1920. We are nonprofit and nonpartisan and have grown from a roomful of civil liberties activists to an organization of more than 500,000 members and supporters. We handle nearly 6,000 court cases annually from our offices in almost every state.
The ACLU has maintained the position that civil liberties must be respected, even in times of national emergency. The ACLU is supported by annual dues and contributions from its members, plus grants from private foundations and individuals. We do not receive any government funding. Learn more about joining the ACLU.
We are one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. Back to you with the weather, Bob!
Its also his job as head of the executive branch to see that the Treasury Department issues Social Security checks. Do you think he personally signs every one of them or do you think he appoints somebody else to do it?
I've created a wikipeda article for this guy - I hope somebody here can de-POV it for me. This is my first post on /. in around five or six YEARS. You guys are entertaining.
There's not much I could add to this discussion - the 1984 references are all taken, enough people have taken umbrage at the intellectually offensive 'assuage' comment in TFA, etc.
I may make you feel, but I can't make you think.
The only time Bush has ever "reached out" beyond his circle of friends is to borrow credibility from a poor sap who will inevitably be chewed up and spit out whenever it's convenient for the Administration to do so.
In short, I feel sorry for this guy. He may be convinced that he'll be able to do good, but then so were Colin Powell and Paul O'Neill.
My sig is too lon
For that job they just had to hire someone who couldn't tell the good guys from the bad.
We don't need our concerns over civil liberties assuaged. We need our civil liberties protected. By ourselves, not by the government, or this will turn into a 1984-esque "Ministry of Civil Liberties.".
"Give me liberty, or give me death!"
The plan is not to nuke Iran, the plan is to use nuclear weapons against Iran, just as we used nuclear weapons aginst the USSR (and they used them against us) for decades. "Leaks" about plans to nuke Iran are just one way in which we use these weapons.
And, scary though MAD was, this continuing use of nuclear weapons has done a remarkable job of preventing shooting wars between major powers.
Actually detonating a nuclear weapon is the least poductive way in which we use it.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
The fact is that there is very little that PATRIOT, etc. allow now that was not allowed before.
With very few exceptions there were no police powers added in the Patriot Act - the important change is that you can now call someone "a terrorist" instead of "a drug dealer" to bypass their rights. It's up to the courts now to reign this stuff in. As I say above, I'm OK with the intention, but there always needs to be some system of oversight (and from a different branch, not some apointee of the person being overseen!).
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
It is one thing to be knowledgeable of the business. There are plenty of principled people who have worked in such businesses before. It's another thing entirely to be a shill for irresponsible behavior by such businesses.
I'll pick James Connaughton for my example. This man is a lawyer who has lobbied on behalf of coal, chemical, and utility companies to avoid having to pay to clean up Superfund sites that they created. One of these companies was GE, which has been responsible for creating the largest number of Superfund sites of any other company in the nation. They've also pumped a ton of money into lobbying against having to pick up the bill for toxic waste dumping and against the designation of sites as toxic waste dumps in the first place. A real good cause there, huh?
He also helped head up the ISO 14000 standard for environmental policy which has no real requirements beyond minimal compliance with the law and no external audit requirement. It's toothless and basically just a free sticker you can apply to your company to claim that you care about the environment without actually having to do so.
Once in office, he helped lead the charge to prevent the government from tightening standards on arsenic in the water supply. He has been a passionate advocate against any policy to reduce greenhouse gasses and has been implicated in censoring language in research studies that support the existence of global warming. He's been a supporter of the "Clean Skies" initiative which destroys a lot of the Clean Air Act's protective provisions. He likes to push for "volunatry standards" a.k.a. "not having to do anything about a problem."
He's just one example. His expertise has entirely been in helping business pursue profits at the expense of public health. His kind of industry experience the people can do without.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
You don't even have to call them a terrorist...there is a political corruption trial going on here in Las Vegas, where some local officials took bribes from stip club owners. The FBI just admitted a couple of weeks ago to using the PATRIOT act to get financial data on the accused, simply because it was faster than getting a warrant, and because, well, they could. No implied terrorism, but our leaders gave the justice system a useful tool and the right to use it, so they do.
(sorry, full article has been archived by the review-journal)
FBI confirms Patriot Act's use in corruption probe
By ADRIENNE PACKER REVIEW-JOURNAL. Federal authorities confirmed in court Wednesday that they used the Patriot Act to access bank records while investigating alleged political corruption involving former Clark County commissioners and strip club owner Michael Galardi.. The Patriot Act, enacted after Sept. 11, 2001, as a tool to fight terrorism, included provisions that allowed authorities to access personal financial records more easily.. During the federal trial against former county...
My debut novel AMITY now available: http://jeremydbrooks.c
Sounds like a waste.....
Of public money....
and of an article for slashdot....
Of all the import political stories in the world. Why put this story on Slashdot when the really important stories never make it to Slashdot.
Who really cares about some stupid Public Relations move comming from the White House.
Just like Department of Homeland Security. Transcripts from the meeting: Bush: What could we call someone to answer questions about the civil liberties these wack-jobs are complaining about? Cheney: How about "Civil-Liberties Officer?" Bush: Yeah, yeah, I like that! It fits right in with my strategery!
the Judicial Branch and U.S. Constitution containing the Bill of Rights. However, Congress is not doing its job as counterbalance to the Executive Branch in the first place as too many civil liberties issues get decided by judges in a court room.
The word bad is doubleplusungood.
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
Other than Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas and Where the Buffalo Roam, his fiction stuff was marginal at best.
Actually, his sports stuff was pretty good, too. On a good day, Thompson could mix sports, politics and Bible quotes into the damnedest thing you ever read.
Disappointingly, ESPN keeps his entire archive under subscriber lock and key on their website.
Thompson was probably the last white man to understand the NBA on its level.
HST was a great loss, but who would have bet he would have lived that long in the first place?
I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
why have the president out there shredding the Constitution when you can apppoint a special person to do it for you?
I am sure civil liberties will curtail at an even faster pace now, and all the children will be safe
But the information bloggers dig up tends to come from traditional journalists. Obviously that's not true in every single case, but the vast majority are sourced from professionals and basically, well, regurgitated.
I understand the purpose of the masses chaotically publishing whatever they wish, and I could have expressed my point in a more coherent and less pissy fashion, but in the end the consistently low quality of anything but the most professional blogs eliminates them as a source of news for me.
Sorry for the massive run-on.
Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
s/ie/y/;
Were that I say, pancakes?
I thought sadam hussein was in jail how did he get the job of civil liberties officer.
I am not sure if that is so, as far as I can tell no verifiable data exists to back that assertion up. On the other hand, great many possibilities of worthwile journalistic activity exist on small time, one-issue blogs run simply by people with personal, first hand knowledge of the events and a grasp of English language. For example, take a look at this blog.
In light of this, you would have to come up with some stronger argument which would show a strong corelation between traditional media credentials and the originality of information. May I remind you that to be a "journalist" only two things are required: an original, relevant story and some means of publishing it. With the advent of the Internet, it is understandable why the "traditional" media journalists feel so threatened and why they desperately attempt to paint themselves as the sources of all journalism, in spite obvious evidence to the contrary.
but in the end the consistently low quality of anything but the most professional blogs eliminates them as a source of news for me.
Then you are looking at this in a wrong way, there are many functions many of the blogs perform out there. Some are mostly irellevant junk most of the time, interspersed with a rare gem of originality. Some are boring but by the confluence of events in the real world can become highly relevant. But some are aggregators of data from such rarely visited blogs and their role is similar to that of the "traditional" media: to bring various pieces of data into one spot, subsequently "refining" the overall quality of the contents, so that busy people do not have to dregde through the irellevant. Some are more successful at this then others. But the crucial distinction between blogosphere and the traditional media is that blogosphere requires the reader to search and think, while the traditional media purports to have done it all for you already.
But the crucial distinction between blogosphere and the traditional media is that blogosphere requires the reader to search and think, while the traditional media purports to have done it all for you already.
I take issue with one part of that - traditional media may purport to think for me, but that doesn't mean I need to let it. I am capable of assimilating the content without it making my decisions for me.
On the other hand, great many possibilities of worthwile journalistic activity exist on small time, one-issue blogs run simply by people with personal, first hand knowledge of the events and a grasp of English language. For example, take a look at this blog.
There's some interesting content there, but mostly it's not news, it's a journal. It gives a limited perspective, just like every other source. I suspect you value it because it reinforces your opinion (which is understandable). I could be wrong, I'm rather tired as I type this, and I necessarily have to make assumptions in any case. (I'm not expressing disagreement with the content of the blog you pointed out, and I'm aware it's only one of many, so don't take this as a dismissal of anything. I don't intend that.)
By and large, I think we disagree on this because we approach things from different angles. I'm not sure how to express this correctly because, once again, I'm extremely tired, but I'll try. It seems that you are looking to cast a wide net and eliminate what you find valueless. Panning for gold, perhaps? I pick a few high-profile sources that are in opposition, and read between the lines as much as possible. I think in the end we probably tend to settle near the same space.
Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
I believe that this article does an excellent job of painting the picture of what the first day of the war with Iran will be like.
I think that article is hilarious in that it blatantly ignores how Iraq was rolled in so short a time - twice. I'm as anti-Iran-war as the next guy, but the far-left nutjobs who write this crap are just pathetic.
1) The fighter jets don't take off before dawn, they take off before sunset.
2) The first jets to arrive are ultra-low radar cross section bombers.
3) When the air defense systems are turned on, anti-radiation weapons start neutralizing their radar stations.
4) By mid-morning, you're getting hit by the 10th strike, not the third.
5) Planes stationed near the gulf were unable to take off to down the tankers because every runway within 30 minutes flight time to the persian gulf was pitted with craters from anti-pavement weapons.
6) The anti-ship missiles managed to get within 2km of american ships before the phalanx close-in weapon systems, firing 75 20mm shells per second ripped the missiles to shreds, sending them splashing into the persian gulf.
7) The torrent of missiles lasted barely 10 minutes before the launching sites were neutralized and less than 1 in 10 managed to hit a high-value target since the missile guidance system was poor and the Patriot PAC-3 batteries took out nearly all those able to get sufficiently close.
Education is a better safeguard of liberty than a standing army.
Edward Everett (1794 - 1865)
Wanna bet.
Look here for Bushie's new adventures:
EFF is a nonprofit group of passionate people -- lawyers, technologists, volunteers, and visionaries -- working to protect your digital rights.
http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/att/
EFF's Class-Action Lawsuit Against AT&T for Collaboration with Illegal Domestic Spying Program
Better than a Big Mac lunch:
https://secure.eff.org/site/SPageServer?pagename=
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
Sorry I fell asleep at the keybored
I value it because it offers unique perspective. One of course has to take it with other factors in mind: Riverbend is Suni and likely from a family which was moderately well-off under Saddam, which colours her perspective by this association with a particular ethnic/social group. But such a caution has to be excercised with every news source.
It seems that you are looking to cast a wide net and eliminate what you find valueless. Panning for gold, perhaps? I pick a few high-profile sources that are in opposition, and read between the lines as much as possible. I think in the end we probably tend to settle near the same space.But what makes these sources "high profile"? I would posit that it is their corporate backing and financial resources, frequently not associated with the "journalism". Washington Times for example is essentially a front to the Sun Myung Moon's religious cult and loses vast sums of money every year, yet is able to maintain "high profile" due to essentially limitless supply of cash from that organisation. GE, Viviendi own NBC, Viacom owns CBS, Disney owns ABC, Newscorp owns FOX, etc and so on. All of the "high profile" media are essentially fronts for some multi-national mega-corporations 99% of whose business consists of something other then "journalism". And the criteria for being an employee of these organisations is similarly suspect.
So while using blogs for news may seem as low-yeld activity, as the signal-to-noise ratio is low, relying on the so called "mainstream media" strikes me as exceedingly dangerous. One does not need to look much further then the "Rah! Rah!" media coverage in the run up of the Iraq war, where any dissenting voices were essentially muzzled as "unpatriotic" and many "high profile" media were downright complicit in manufacturing "rationale" for the war, complete with fake "news" stories being fed to them by White House operatives and various other con-artists like Ahmed Chelabi. All of this followed by being cheerfully and uncritically "embedded" with the military to deliver sanitized, Hollywood-approved version of the "war", while studiously ignoring the reports of all the freelance, independent journalists on the ground. And may I point out that during all that time it was the blogs who were painting a picture of the affairs much closer to reality, as it is now patently obvious, eventually forcing the much belated, navel-gazing, dismissive and defiant "mea culpas" from places like The New York Times.
To me a journalist is not someone annointed by a multi-billion corporation, but someone who is able to publish original, thought provoking stories and whose search is not for the corporate dollar but for verifiable truth. And I would suggest that odds of finding such a person on his/her passion-driven blog are much higher then in a corproate news-room where any such frevor will, by the very mechanics of such a place, be severely constrained and manipulated by conflicting loyalties and financial concerns.
It's not extinguish. It's EX-TER-MI-NATE! (See sig.)
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.