Slashdot Mirror
Congress May Add Record Requirements to MySpace
An anonymous reader writes "CNet is reporting that Congress may be working to extend the record retention requirements they're already working on for ISPs to social networking sites. Sites such as MySpace or FaceBook would be required to hold onto content access records for an unspecified length of time." From the article: "In those meetings, Justice Department representatives went beyond the argument that data retention was necessary to protect children--and claimed it would aid in terrorism investigations as well. During Wednesday's hearing, politicians also claimed that social-networking sites were not doing enough to verify that their users who claimed to be a certain age were telling the truth. (Recent news reports have said that sex predators are using MySpace and similar sites to meet up with teens.)"
While the parents groups were in DC lobbying congress, their children were chatting with this really awesome guy who's only a few years older than they are, honest!
Information wants a fueled airplane waiting at the hangar and no one gets hurt.
If MySpace is used by predators to target teens, they should have a record retention policy. It also holds people more accountable to law enforcement too. If they have illegal information on there and they "delete" it before the cops see it, they data retention would be the only way for the police to get evidence.
sudo mod me up
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/5130742.stm
It's time we put a stop to these horrible predators.
In those meetings, Justice Department representatives went beyond the argument that data retention was necessary to protect children--and claimed it would aid in terrorism investigations as well.
What's going to stop freedom terrorism happening in our country? Bullshit, like this, is eating at the highly regarded morals *I* hold which are being left the fuck alone to do whatever the fuck I like w/o having to wonder "am I a terrorist?!"
The "Republicans" are happy to erode our media's rights to disseminate important information being withheld and to chastise them using "their" news outlets while the rest of us sit here whining in near silence.
I've always said that I'm no better than anyone else as I'm sitting here whining to the Slashdot community and not doing anything but when are we going to stand up and tell the Government to go fuck itself?
This will help terrorism? Does Osama have a MySpace profile??
I think the terrorists may have won, and they only had to kill a few thousand US citizens. What a shame. I wonder when single men will be required to produce ID if they walk past a public place where the children might be or where a terrorist attack would claim many lives.
Blar.
In those meetings, Justice Department representatives went beyond the argument that data retention was necessary to protect children--and claimed it would aid in terrorism investigations as well.
guys, you KNOW you're only required to use one of those. EITHER think of the children OR terrorists
this is over the top. someone might notice your tactics!
In other news:
I hear there's also a bill pending that will make posting fingerpaintings in kindergarten classrooms illegal, and that the Department of Homeland Security will be investigating all reports of graffiti for possible terrorist links.
I just thank god that all of this is making us so much safer and that we can rest assured that we'll never be attacked again. Those weird concepts such as freedom and liberty and privacy have always been overrated anyway.
Think of the children! AND Terrorists!!
"If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
I'm sorry, but why are the parents of these kids asking the age old questions of their kids???
Where are you going?
Who are you going with?
Who is going to be there?
What are you going to be doing?
Do I know these people? (If the parent doesn't know them, then they probably shouldn't let their kids hang out with them unsupervised!)
I mean what the hell people! It's not a website's responsibility to keep your kids away from predators, IT'S YOURS!
Really...he owns myspace and the more myspace horror stories there are, the more it gets in peoples mind, plus it adds sales for his other news corp holdings. Fucking brilliant.
They really are so cute, so adorably innocent and naive, as they go about their daily business, chatting away to other people, getting crazy naive ideas in their inexperienced little heads. Of course they think what they're doing is right, but they just don't have the capacity or life experience to understand. If only we could gather them around, hug them, tell them it's all going to be okay as long as they stop for a moment and consider what they're doing, and educate them about the full, terrible impact their actions will have not only on themselves, but on everyone else around them. But, of course, they don't want to listen to wisdom, not at their age..
..I'm referring, of course, to the damn fool parents groups and lawmakers.
Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
"But for the love of god, think of the terrorists!"
"During Wednesday's hearing, politicians also claimed that social-networking sites were not doing enough to verify that their users who claimed to be a certain age were telling the truth."
I wonder how politicians expect MySpace to verify a person's age. Perhaps they're going to force them to use the age verification that was used on those OLD Leisure Suit Larry games. If you don't know what I'm talking about, the old Leisure Suit Larry games (I'm talking 286 era) used to ask general knowledge questions before the game started, assuming that a person of 18 years of age or older would be able to answer them, and allow you to play the game if you answered a few questions correctly.
"Poking" people on Facebook is found to be a secret form of communication used by Al-Qaeda
Congress held a hearing today on the action of poking, a "feature" in the Facebook social network. According to accounts from industry proffesionals, Al-Qaeda has used such "pokes" as a medium for a system of communication not unlike Morse Code. More details after the break.
i can remember a few years back when it was the parent's resonsibility to watch their kid; when they would talk to them about stuff like this just like they would tell them to not talk to strangers, especially ones with candy.
did anyone ever sue a mall for being the place in which their child was abducted/abused/etc?
Those damn kids^Wterrorists with their flash, background music and 32 sized Comic Sans fonts have to be apprehended!
My EYES!
It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
Be yourself no matter what they say
Web sites that operate in the French TLD are required to retain the email address and IP address of anything posted to their sites. I know one web site that gets requests from the police at least once a week. The authorities only get the information if they ask for it but they don't require a warrant.
In the US I don't see this being a problem as long as a warrant is required so there is some police oversight. I do, however, hate to see more regulations. But as long as all the data isn't being fed directly to the government I doubt there will be many abuses.
Developers: We can use your help.
Terrorism is their trump card.
They'll keep spewing this BS to get what they want. In the cold war days, it was communism, now it's terrorism. I wonder what's next...
That the parents of today are convinced that they are no longer repsonsible for their own children, Why moniter video games when you can penalize the industry making them, why watch what your child does online , when you can simply put that problem off on the webamsters, The parties their blaming have no control over the kids, so... how is it that they can be without the repsonsiblity yet still have the gusto to claim it is someone elses fault? that is just way to lazy
Did someone say cake?
Can someone tell me how this is any of the business of Congress?
i on.articlei.html#section8
i on.billofrights.html#amendmentx
According to Article I Section 8 of the US Constitution this is NOT a function of the US Congress.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitut
And according to the 10th Amendment, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitut
Libertas in infinitum
How long do you think it will take for myspace to go the way of napster? Going from something 'rogue' and home grown, to then shut down by some lawsuit, purchased by some corporate structure thinking they could rescue it and regulate it and bring it back?
As per the DOD: Terrorism is "the unlawful use of -- or threatened use of -- force or violence against individuals or property to coerce or intimidate governments or societies, often to achieve political, religious, or ideological objectives."
If Terrorist hate freedom and the Western way of life, it would be their political goal to reduce or remove our freedoms.
And out wonderful government, while attempting to fight against the terrorist have been slowly erroding our rights and freedoms.
So the harder our government fights, the more the terrorist win. Our government has done more to destroy our way of life than any terrorist organization ever could.
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
The idea of common people making laws for the rest of the "common" folks is interesting and for the most part works. This however is one of those situations where it doesn't work. The common law maker has no idea the techical requirements / money / time / people it takes to store such vast amounts of information. What they are creating is an un-due burden on the service providers.
This is why we have the court system to hash this out. Should someone take this up and go to trail over it they can have experts / witnesses / employees / vendors to try to settle this out and show that it's a crazy request that really should have never passed.
I hope it doesn't get that far, but I still have faith in the "system" in order to right this. The reason I say that is, this is the government asking for something to be implimented, not private business asking for something to be implimented. If it were private businesses they would lobby and spend money to make it happen.
Afterall it is an online community of folks.
No age restrictions and I'm sure some congress folks could have things to say about the GNAA type trolling.
before you say anything - yes i know the slashdot stereotype doesn't have the same bling factor as myspace in the eyes of the teens, but the principal remains.
liqbase
Clearly, that's the point of the "war" on terrorism - to silence critics. That's why the "war" will never be ended. That's why the gov't will never attempt to end it.
Your gov't has totally taken advantage of your collective love of martial metaphors (war on poverty, drugs, sports doping, whatever).
FTFA: "Rep. Diana DeGette, a Colorado Democrat, originally proposed legislation (click here for PDF) in April that would require Internet service providers to retain activity logs to aid in criminal investigations, including ones involving child abuse.
Now DeGette and some of her colleagues in the House of Representatives are suggesting that social-networking sites should be required to do the same thing."
From your post: The "Republicans" are happy to erode our media's rights to disseminate important information being withheld and to chastise them using "their" news outlets while the rest of us sit here whining in near silence.
Please berate the appropriate (Democrat) assholes.
Wow, that's a stretch. Does anyone have a link to Osama Bin Laden's myspace profile? Or is he disguised as a 16 year old goth girl?
Well start telling these teens that they got what they deserved for being stupid? Blame the victim? Damn straight. If at 13, especially if you're a girl, you don't realize that people who are 20 or older and who are attracted to you and trying to hook up with you are bad people, you are one of hell of a daft future sheeple. You can blame the victim for letting themselves get into the situation while throwing away the key of the rapist who did it. Responsibility can be dispensed 100% for both people involved. The rapist was a POS, the victim not only walked right into it, but probably did their part to instigate it.
The reason that teens don't take responsibility is that we say "no one should ever be a victim." That's all well and good, but the world doesn't work in "shoulds." If you are 14 and hook up with a 25 year old, chances are, he or she wants to screw you silly. This is not an age of innocence. Don't give me that bullshit about teens not understanding sex. The average teen today knows more nuanced things about sex than most adults did 50 years ago!
"Our children" aren't being victimized. Our dumbass, horny teens are. They're old enough to know better. Show me a real kid, ie a person who is a prepubescent 11 year old or younger who has gotten really hurt this way. Where are all of the 7, 8, 9 and 10 year olds getting raped? Uh huh. It ain't children, just adolescents. People who are old enough to understand personal safety, even if they can't fully grok the ramifications of sex.
Dude, it's not the government, it's the people. Most people in the US are too stupid to not believe the government propoganda about a "terrorist" behind every bush. I don't think that there's anything that can be done about it. The stupid people who buy into all of this bullshit are in the majority, and they tend to out-breed those of us who understand what's going on.
I don't know about you, but I'm tired of it, and I'm saving up to leave.
It's easy to verify over-18... there are various ids that can be used to provide some record which in 99% of cases will be close enough to the real person as to make it work for validation (think a kid using parents CC # to authenticate.. you can just call the parent up and confirm permission to use).
Under-18 though... there's no common ID in use. Which means that anyone over-18 can pretend to be under-18 at will. SO you can cut off access to adult services from kids... BUT you can't cut off access to kids services from adults.
Without further compromising the privacy and security via obscurity of the children in question.... through elaborate cross checking of credentials... there's no way to verify that a child is a child and not an adult pretending to be a child.
A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
I know that in many of the blatantly neoconservative states on the US, the trend is to not encourage teens to be responsible. This manifests itself through the drinking age being 21, the age of consent being 18, and so forth. Meanwhile, in Europe and various other nations, such age limits are far lower, or even nonexistant. And what do we often see? Far more responsibility on behalf of those teens from areas where they are treated more maturely.
The problem isn't so much the predators, as it is the teens who have been shielded by their parents, and otherwise kept from learning about responsibility. For the most part, nobody forces them to give out personal information on the Internet. If they do, it's likely something they did completely on their own. If they then proceed to meet up with somebody who isn't a very nice person, that's again something they likely arranged on their own. The only way to stop such activity is to get the teens to smarted up, and to not provide their address to strangers, and to not agree to meet them in alleyways.
In the 1970s, we were always told in school not to get into a car with a stranger. And for the most part, it worked. There were a few stupid fucks who didn't heed such advice, of course. But in general, if you're open and honest with children and teens, they often will understand your concern. It's when you treat them like fools that they truly become fools, as we so often see in extremely restrictive places like Alabama, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and so forth. They won't learn responsibility in such an environment. And passing numerous data retention laws won't have any beneficial effect at all, because the root problem of stupid/ignorant/irresponsible teens is not being addressed.
How about all public corporations & all governments should be forced to record their meetings & keep them for a longer time period.
It seems obvious to me that there is significantly more malfeasance happening within corporate governence and 'coporate' government than is happening at MySpace.
I'd like to have earlier known about Enron, Cheney's secret energy task force meetings, Halliburton's war profiteering, etc.
Going after MySpace for terrorists & pedophiles is mis-directed force.
Seuss - I'm telling you this 'cause you're one of my friends. My alphabet starts where your alphabet ends
Don't be a moron, its not just "Republicans" its all of our government officials. The person proposing this legislation is a "Democrat". Bottom line is, everyone in power wants more control over our lives. ALL OF THEM. Open your eyes, look around, stop just seeing Bad=Republicans, Good=Democrats, what are you twelve?
So, what happens when a terrorist is 16 years old in this continuum? Do we all self destruct?
You forgot drugs. Remember the Drug Omnibus Bill allowing the cops to confiscate all your property, say that it was used to receive, store, transport drugs, without actually charging you with anything. Then to regain your property, you have to prove its innocence ... good luck with that.
Heck yes. I'm trying to convince my fiancee of the same thing.
While there is some truth to this, the real freedom the terrorists of today want to take away is The Freedom To Be Not Muslim.
This does not immediately "disprove" your argument, but it does show your argument is a radical oversimplification, to the point where it has more rhetorical value than any sort of substantiative policy discrimination value.
During Wednesday's hearing, politicians also claimed that social-networking sites were not doing enough to verify that their users who claimed to be a certain age were telling the truth.
Someone alert all women over 40. Suddently, it's a crime to lie about your age.
I'm glad you made this point about "freedom terrorism". First off I want to say that few people, myself included, even understand why organized states support terrorism in the first place or why terrorists even exist. The bottom line tends to be that we pissed a lot of people off by arbitrarily placing governments and geographic boundaries with no respect to the history or culture of the people. All this being said and going back to my original point and that of the parent post, wouldn't we be pretty pissed of if some other country came in and changed our political boundaries and government around? Some people point this out and again I'm not advocating violence in the first place, and I often don't support the way of life most terrorist groups are fighting for ("funny" thing being often times the "normal" people of the terrorist's home country don't support it either. Another point I've seen brought up here and there on is that basing your understanding of a people by the most radical faction would be like judging the entire character of the US by using us geeks as a metric, or extreme religious factions right here in the US... which we do get sometimes but I wouldn't say the majority of our country is well described by these groups... anyway). In the end there are lots of holes in this post but I'm not going to write pages about it because then I'd have to do some serious studying and research (read: I'm lazy) but the main point is if this crap keeps going we're looking at "civil" terrorism and then we'll see how easy profiling gets. Let's hope few people are injured or killed.
It takes all types in this world. I sincerely mean it... This is just my perspective.
I agree. And think that a large part of the problem is that the govenrment tends to think like an overbearing parent. Its a parents job to protect their children not the governments. The government should not legislate irresponsiblity or protect us from ourselves. If social networking sites attract preditors then GREAT! Now they have the fucking bait and the trap set, round up the sickos. As a parent I will decide if and where my child can get online and lie about their age. If they decide to do it without my authority then guess what, they made a bad choice which can lead to horrible concequences. I'm not saying that I would happily accept it, but thus is life. Raise you children properly and maybe the world will be a smarter place.
Imposing burdens on the owners of a social network website because their users might be predators, liers, or unmonitored children is as retarted as requireing the shop-rite to keep records of everyone who shows an ID to buy alcohol or tobacco. What about bar rooms? Should they keep records too? After all underage kids might lie and there could be an intoxicated rapist just waiting to spot a hawt teen slut exposing her self in "public".
I say go after parents and irresponsibility.
The "Republicans"...
"when are we going to stand up and tell the Government to go fuck itself?"...
You get your chance at election time. It's called democracy. Ever heard of it? Asshole.
Bush has admitted to flagrantly violating the law, not to mention pushing laws that violate the Constitution. Do you really expect them to think they have any limitations at all anymore?
that the goverment is using the excuse of terrorism to be able to index everything about those who post on social network sites?
scary...
Time magazine (I believe this week) had an article saying that the state attorney generals were meeting about the social networking issues.
It said that age verfication was a top priority for them and that the Connecticut AG said something like "if we could put someone on the moon, we can surely age verify users."
Just to show the collective brains of the people running the panic-show, they entertained using social security number verification for age verification purposes (the Time article said that the problem with that was the large quantity of non-US users, and that apparently nixed the idea.)
Nevertheless, requiring SSNs to open a Myspace or Xanga account would be a disaster on biblical grounds. Though I have a lot more faith in 14 year olds than the average person, I think having them interact with their SSN at all and needing to take responsibility for it would be problematic...not to mention, SSNs of minors is a phishers dream come true--just think about how many emails you'll get from "myspace" and "xanga" saying you need to verify your age to keep your account, so log in here and enter in your SSN and DOB.
Yeah, I hate how many times I get hassled every day here in the great states about not being Muslim. Oh yeah, I don't. Policies and actions to stop that form of terrorism overseas have no bearing on actions like this. The "terrorism" they are fighting here are the freedoms we rely on them to protect.
Now, if you want to talk about our policies overseas, fine - we can do that. You should also realize that some of us don't agree with the administrations viewpoint that westernizing the world is a proper course of action.
The Republican Congress is obviously intent on doing nothing until Elections this fall when they will fall out of power, and we perhaps can start having votes on issues more important than whether they like the media or whether they think the war in Iraq is going well. I think those kind of votes are called legislating, which I think technically is what they're supposed to be doing. Although I guess it's good for the nation that they can't be bothered to actually do that. Now if we could just get them to stop spending money like it's going out of style...
You realy don't want to be left alone, you want immunity from causing someone else harm. There is a different. Be honest.
Democrats and their media shills (like the New York Times, LA Times, CNN) commit open acts of treason outing effective, classified anti-terror programs and expect immunity. Do you expect it to pass unnoticed? Not this time.
an ill wind that blows no good
Web sites that operate in the French TLD
/., maybe we should start to gather and lobby ourselves. And no I'm not a democrat but a republican and Bush's policies suck.
There is the first problem, comparing what should be done in America to what is going on in other countries. We have certain rights called the Bill of Rights that have been being overlooked by people scarried of their own shadow because they think some big bad Muslim is going to kill them and their children. Instead of fighting for real protection instead of an illusion of protection, they stick their heads in the sand like an ostrich.
But as long as all the data isn't being fed directly to the government I doubt there will be many abuses.
I guess he doesn't realize that one, the police are part of the government and that two, it is Homeland Security/NSA/FBI that will be requesting the data. If I use or don't My Space or Facebook is none of your fucking business. It is called the first Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." This falls under peaceably to assemble because people meet here to hang out and make friends online. Lets go to the fourh Amendment: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." First you have to have 'probable' cause and not 'possible' cause, then you can issue a warrant to obtain the information. The right of the people to be secure is of the utmost. Nobody has the right to take my papers/webpages or effects/digital content for their purposes.
We have a voice here at
I eat Karma for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. That's why I don't have any.
This whole "think of the children", "I can't watch out for my kids, so the government should do it for me" garbage was around long before 9/11. It around during the seventies, and was in full swing during the Clinton administration.
You can't blame this on terrorists, or the neocons, or the Bush administration. This is something that the people of this country ask, and beg for, and the government is only all to happy to comply.
George Carlin's been ranting about it for a couple of decades. He call's it the "pussification of America". AKA "WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!!11tilde1!!~~!!!!WTFBBQ!!!!!"
...Rob
The American Dream isn't an SUV and a house in the suburbs; it's Don't Tread On Me.
And DAMN MySpace for aiding them in the intimidation and upheaval of our government!
Oh, and the children. Won't someone think of them too, when you get a chance.
Hey - any takers on what the next big rally cry will be? It's been:
So what's next?? Because when people are tired of hearing of one thing, they innevitably cry about something else to get what they want.
Excuse my speling.
Making The Bar Project
Open your eyes, look around, stop just seeing Bad=Republicans, Good=Democrats, what are you twelve?
I never said the Democrats were good. I don't believe that the New Aged GOP (aka the "Republicans") or the Democrats are doing anything positive for this country.
Open your eyes and get a clue before spouting off like an uninformed 12 year old.
I think all legislation should have a preface which explains how that specific legislation is within the bounds of Article I, Section 8 of the Const. Being forced to rationalize each piece of legislation and how it is a function of the government as set forth by our founding documents is important. I also think our courts need to have more integrity and overturn ANY legislation that does not have a direct derivation from one of those specific powers.
Libertas in infinitum
Heck, I'm all for forcing MySpace to verify age and gender of every one with a profile. And clearly posting the true information on their page.
I'm tired of chatting up cute 14 y.o. girls who parents don't understand them, only to find out they are 54 y.o. male FBI agents. Come on MySpace, give a guy some warning!
set up shop someplace else I know what I'd do in a heartbeat.
There are many countries that would probably be jumping for joy to get the tax revenue that myspace generates.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
I felt (and continue to feel) the same way. On the other hand, I am loathe to let a system which was entrusted to /me/ fall into continued irrelevance and disarray. I feel that it's my responsibility in some way to stay and, at the very least, make my voice heard. Hopefully I'll find a way to live my life as well as make an appreciable difference.
Where might you head to sheild yourself from this bullshit? This kind of polarity is not going to spare your foreign hideout..
While I agree that the most desired goal is religiously based, the administration (specificly Pres Bush) has stated that "Terrorists hate our freedom"
Here are a few other ways of looking at it:
Is the real freedom the administration of today want to take away is The Freedom To Not Have Conservative Christian Values?
Or is the administration themselves a terrorist threat as they use the threat of violence against individuals or property to intimidate society to achieve political objectives? True, they themselves are not perpetrating the violence, but they are saying things along the line of "vote for us, or there will be bloodshed." Sure, they wrap it up a little more pleasantly with things like, "Other political parties are pansies, only our political party care for your safety." But that sounds an awful lot like a protection racket coming from a neighborhood gang. "The police can't keep your store from burning down, only the Crazy 88s can protect you."
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
It's amazing what media-hysteria can accomplish. There are millions of children without healthcare in the U.S., and Congress thinks it is a matter of the highest priority to worry about this overblown "OMG think of the children!!!" crap.
In addition, politicians proposed a slew of related measures this week, including blocking access to off-color Web sites for all Americans, dispatching "search and destroy" bots that would seek out illegal content, regulating search engines and targeting peer-to-peer networks.
Oh, great. That will work out well. Internet censorship ala China, here we come!
Those girls were kidnapped while in public. Hardly relevant to the grandparent's point about young horny people willingly meeting older pervs online.
"appropriate" being all of them. Join the Revolution!
No animals were harmed in the making of this sig.
Well, there was that one puppy, but he is all better now.
Some of us are very well aware of all of this. In fact, I would say at this point, more than 50%. Certainly the majority of people I talk to, though sure, I don't have a representative sample.
It really is hard. Suppose you are living in a real-life 1984. What's a guy to do? We can't really "stand up" (we'll probably just get arrested), and the system is as good as rigged (gerrymandering, etc.), so we can't really change it through elections either.
Correction, Republicrats. We are under one party that uses smokescreens to make it look like they are divided. Until we do what you suggest and stand up, we will remain under that ruling class. Join the Revolution!
No animals were harmed in the making of this sig.
Well, there was that one puppy, but he is all better now.
Of course, children are attacking adults they find on MySpace too.
But it's all about the chiiiiiildren.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled"
Join the Revolution! Sorry, Malformed URL
No animals were harmed in the making of this sig.
Well, there was that one puppy, but he is all better now.
Join the Revolution! Sorry, typo in the URL of the parent post.
No animals were harmed in the making of this sig.
Well, there was that one puppy, but he is all better now.
This goes back to MySpace and the other sites having ownership of what's posted there. If I post something, and it's mine, and I want it removed later, they shouldn't be allowed to keep it. Is this hard to understand Mr. Congressman? You don't own it either. I do, and nobody else when it's original content.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Phones are also used by sex predators and terrorists.
Does that mean AT&T should start wiretapping our phone calls? Oh wait...
Wait wait wait... terrorism? I think by terrorism they meant fearmongering. I'm sure the terrorists are worried about the number of friend requests and comments they get on their profiles.
I will forever be a student.
these politicians are idiots. are they even in touch with reality, or is there a competition between them as to who can say the most outrageous lie that still gets public attention, & doesnt actually do anything.
next step is for tehm to find bin laden and the rest of al q. jsut back up myspace.com, and hire idiots to look thru it. it so simple, should have known they were there all along.
seriously the representatives who thought this up should be fired/recalled,; not only are they totally incompetent, adn make the usa an object of ridicule to the rest of teh world, but they are dangerously stupid, so much so taht they can actually do a lot of harm .
If it's illegal content, nothing happens until somebody sees it and reports it. That person should have saved a copy as part of the report.
I'd be happier if, for evidence reasons only, MySpace saved hashes of pages, which could then be used to prove that a saved page by someone else was actually on their site at a given time, without saving the actual page.
And what about the Google cache of MySpace? Is that redundant?
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Apparently MySpace doesn't even verify that you give them a correct email address. Most web sites send a confirmation email that you have to do something with to complete your registration, but not good ol' MySpace.
If you still think you can make a difference, then good for you. I'd like to think I'm a bit more realistic. I'm planning on living on a boat, actually. The world can be in the middle of WW3, and the Bush can proclaim himself King, and I just won't care.
You must live in a very crazy place. Everywhere I go here in the northeast (that includes a little bit of travel, too), nobody worth listening to believes a word of what Bush or his government say. It's really quite remarkable these days; I wish I'd seen this same sort of attitude in, say, November of 2004.*
I realized the extent of things when I was in a room full of people and loudly stated that Bush was a murderer and a war criminal. A few years ago, people would have taken strong objection to that. Just a few weeks ago, I had the whole room agreeing with me.
(*Granted, the whole northeast voted for Kerry, but something like 40% of each state voted Bush, just as 40% of most red states voted for Kerry; there are always pockets of resistence everywhere, but lately I've been hearing a lot less of it.)
"They'll keep spewing this BS to get what they want. In the cold war days, it was communism, now it's terrorism. I wonder what's next..."
I vote for liberalism.
What those who want activist courts fear is rule by the people.
My fear would be "liberalism". Not that the war against it isn't already running.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Well put.
Incidentally, there is a good manual for terrorists, that everyone should read: Psychological Operations in Guerrilla Warfare. It was written by the CIA for use by the Contras in Nicaragua; it really makes you think who the real terrorists fighting against the US population are.
In all of these posts, I do not see a single one considering the horrific plight of the average (and I mean that literally) American Congress-critter. Let's take Diana DeGette for example. She has previously attempted to legislate that ISPs retain logs of their customers' IPs and who they connected to. Now she wants content providers to do the same - log IPs of people connecting to them.
Clearly everyone is overlooking the obvious. Diana DeGette has Missing Brain Syndrome (MBS). In fact, if you look at the voting records of all American Congress Critters, they are all suffering from MBS. Unfortunately, the only know treatment of MBS is interacting with people who do, in fact, have brains. This is stifled by grouping MBS victims in the National United MBS (NUMBS) center and then staffing the center with Intellectually Marginally Passing Service (IMPS) personnel. Take this with the tendency of other MBS patients (CEOs, CFOs, and Lawyers) of excessive interaction with this collection of MBS victims, we have a serious problem on our hands.
Right now, our only hope for aiding these poor afflicted souls is to expose them to thoughts derived from people who do not have MBS syndrome. This includes YOU, my friend. You need to write an MBS victim now and tell them, "You're stupid and I care".
Point out to Diana DeGette the redundancy of her ways. Help her understand that she doesn't have to tie each shoe twice every morning. Help all of these people acquire a functioning brain again.
Peas Ought
You are checking your backups, aren't you?
And absolutely never use the same IP address?
Original quote:
Never write when you can talk. Never talk when you can nod. And never put anything in an e-mail.
It'd be nice if we had the same goverment as in the early 20s, which realized that the amendment banning alcohol created more problems than it solved.
The war on drugs is idential to prohibition; in the end, its not a war worth fighting.
it's just another bush apointee, but bush wasn't elected by an election.
they are attacking everything. bush apointee's are everywhere fucking everything up.
when it gets bad people will dump myspace. people will not be able to criticise the government pretty soon.
bands will not sell cd's. blogs will be inaccessable.
it's past time to start snooping on the government and holding them accountable. toss out the fucking diebold machines. restore the constitution. roll back legislation. recind the unconstitutional legislation. expose the money flow of government completely. expose the truth behind 911. and get these fucking corrupt globalists out.
Remember those "Do you know where your kids are?" commercials? And the other hypeshit that's been dumped on us?
People are gullible. Especially in the so called free world, people believe what they see on TV and read in the news. Polls have shown that (aside of advertising, which is generally believed to be false) people do actually believe that news show them the truth or at least a generally correct view of events.
People ask what you want them to ask for, if you play your cards right. Play on their fears, exaggerate them and you get from them what you want. They will literally beg you to shoot them if you show them that there are much worse alternatives possible.
What really gets me is that nobody cares about probabilities. Yes, there could be a 9/11 around the corner. Anytime. The CHANCE is just so small that I'd sell insurances against it, 1 million USD for the price of 10 bucks. I'll be a millionare and even IF something happens I shall still be filthy rich. Your CHANCE to die from a terrorist is so insignificantly small that, if chances would be taken into account, people would be crying for a war on cars or fastfood instead.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
fMRIs. New flavor of MRI machine that "determines" whethere you are lying. And perhaps eventually act as a crude mind scanning device as they learn more about the human brain. Coming... this year.
And the book "The Culture of Fear", which inspired Mike Moore to make "Bowling with Columbine", pretty much nails what's happened. America is ruled by fear, and fear makes money and power. Nothing new about that; people went to prison or were executed for being anarchists, atheists, sodomites, communists, socialists, jews, in one way or another, in the US for all its history. And let's not forget the biggest fear of all, used to manipulate us for over a hundred years: the dangerous blacks.
What's important is that the fear police have tools they've never had before, technological and legal. They've no laws to follow, so they can do what they like to us. And now with the internet and digital telephony and cheap surveillance and GPS, they can lock us into a prison that we can't escape. All for fear.
And none of those things will make us one bit "safer". There is no safety in life, and never will be. What we need is a rational ability to assign probabilty to risk, and fear accordingly. For instance, what are the odds of getting killed in your car opposed to being killed by "terrorists"? And why the discrepancy in response, other than stupidity on the part of the manipulated and cold calculated fear manipulation by those who will get infintite power and endless wealth making people "safe" from nearly nonexistent threats.
Congress is here.
They are from the gubberment and they R heer 2 help.
Dey'l fix MySpace juz lik dey fixxed edumakation, health kare, socialist insecurity, Osama and Iquak.
Never misunderestimate the Congressional power to take a bad situation and really fuck it up.
Is that a SCSI connector or are you just glad to see me?
What for? Would you continue a war after your opponent literally screams that you've won?
What's the goal a terrorist wants? He wants to create terror (hence the name).
(I suddenly feel like creating a Photoshop pic of Osama under a "Mission Accomplished" banner...)
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
So your solution is to allow our government to take away our other rights? Go fuck yourself.
As proposed, this law will have a deeply chilling effect on free speech. Think of all the small discussion boards out there: the hobbyist-level phpBB sites, gaming chats, religious websites, political forums, etc. All of a sudden, their operators might face the same records burden that a MySpace will be forced to shoulder.
The commercial operators will find it worth their time to install logging software and find a way to make it convenient for the government to issue warrantless Patriot Act information seizures. But I can't imagine how Jill BulletinBoard and her quilting group will cope. They'll have to close, along with boards espousing minor political views -- anything that doesn't make enough money to justify the record-keeping, or where the operators lack technical expertise to make it happen.
So this law sucks. We all agree understand that child pornography and sexual predators are a problem on the Internet, but sweeping, First Amendment-smashing stuff like this is a bad answer.
This is my post. There are many others like it. If you don't like what you read here, go try one of the others.
I can understand the necessity for a community such as MySpace, the inclusion of a community such as facebook just doesn't register with me. Myspace's demographic is mostly the pre-collegiate crowd, i.e., 18 and younger. Conversely the obvious for facebook i.e, legal adults. What individuals do on a particular network is their business, the government has no place to overstep its authority.
I listened to some of the Congressional meetings on CSPAN, and I was struck by how ignorant Congresspeople are about the Internet. One woman from Tennessee was particularly clueless, yet her fears about how "scary" MySpace was can potentially drive legislation that affects the Internet. "oh my word, you mean someone can lie about their age, and MySpace doesn't do anything about that??"
I vote for liberalism.
I vote libertarian.
Oh, and for the record to the current regime:
FUCK YOU!
And yes, I do bear arms, am very well trained in gorilla combat, AND I'm willing to die for my freedoms.
----------------------
Cross that line sukka!
Most people in the US are too stupid to not believe the government propoganda about a "terrorist" behind every Bush.
I had no idea the government was being that honest. What does Cheney think about them calling him that?
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
You're the Floridian who voted for Nader in 2000, aren't you? You fucking disgust me. Is anyone really still so brickheaded as to believe there was no difference between Bush and Gore?
And now, a PSA from David Lynch.
...welcome MySpace overlords. You should too.
And out wonderful government, while attempting to fight against the terrorist have been slowly erroding our rights and freedoms.
Slowly?
"Who are you?"
"What do you want?"
"Why are you here?"
"Where are you going?"
Hail Eris, full of mischief...
E pluribus sanguinem
So who's gonna pay for this data retention?? If the government wants it backed up so bad, then they should probably supply the means for it. Who knew that 9/11 would cost us so much of our freedom?? I mean seriously everyone doesn't really care when they start taking away our rights slowly. "Hey its only a wiretap on my phone...no big deal." "Its only a government issued ID card that I must carry everywhere in public" Which slowly leads into "Its only a GPS tracker implanted into my brain, so the gov't knows where I am at all times...but its for my own saftey!! Those terrorists blew up the world trade center 10 years ago, no telling when they will strike again!" Seriously, the government has carried this 9/11 bullshit way too far, and now everyone is afraid of terrorism, so the government can do whatever they want, AND PEOPLE WELCOME IT!
Terrorism is "the unlawful use of -- or threatened use of -- force or violence against individuals or property to coerce or intimidate governments or societies, often to achieve political, religious, or ideological objectives."
George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, Paul Revere, Samuel Adams, Patrick Henry, Thomas Paine, and John Adams were all terrorists or involved in terrorism according to this. Their revolution was "unlawful use of force or violence" according to British law. Their actions were against "individuals or property to coerce or intimidate governments" in order to gain independence, definently a "political" and "ideological" objective.
I want my children to be happy, healthy, and safe. So, I don't call Congress and ask them to legislate the fear-mongering-du-jour. What do I do? I love, respect, and educate my kids - including helping them to understand the wonderful and the horrible things about the world (including the internet, and sites like MySpace). My kids have to make decisions for themselves about these things (they MUST think on their own and MUST have their own opinions) - I just provide guidance, respect, love, and lots of support. Loving, realistic parents are kids' greatest allies, not the congress.
I sincerely believe that our (U.S.) representatives are often deeply confused about the massive, swirling, changing world around them. It is almost as though they spend their day wading through the swirl of society, plucking things out of the air (just because something is popular, is in the news, ore is something important to their handlers).
A little plucking of my own, something I read on quotationspage.com, here's something I think is succinct:
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." Thomas Jefferson, to Archibald Stuart, 1791
A Passionate Independent Musician
>Can someone tell me how this is any of the business of Congress?
...
You're a little late to start asking that now.
How is it the business of Congress to tell us how to label food?
How is it the business of Congress to tell us how we can advertise 30 days before an election (or *any* freakin time before an election - political speech is precisely what was supposed to be free!!)?
I could keep going, but I would need thousands of lines
Nuff said.
By suggesting that DICK Cheney is a terrorist, you have proven that you hate freedom and you hate America, and you want to help the terrorists. Enjoy your stay in "Gitmo", you anti-American bastard!
It's all so ridiculous... I don't know if I should laugh or cry.
Now Rick, please list all the way the US Government has destroyed your way of life. I have been trying to list how my way of life has been destroyed but I can't even think of one.
"And yes, I do bear arms, am very well trained in gorilla combat, AND I'm willing to die for my freedoms.
And what good is that going to do you. Do you think your training is going to do you any good? All your liberties have been gradually eroded by the Bush administration. The US constitution has been desecrated. Free speech and the right to travel without search have been lost... your under surveillance, your country has an out of control national debt...
If there was ever a time to overthrow the Government as is 'your duty' under the constitution, it is now. HOWEVER. You don't have a fucking chance.
Before you could gather even a small team or funding for arms or ammo, you'd be in GTMO. You would be prosecuted with evidence that your not allowed to see. You will not be allowed legal representation. You will not be allowed to attend your own hearing. You will be sentenced to death.
How the fuck are those gorilla skills now?
------------------ Here is your line back...
- The terrorists want to take away our freedoms.
- The administration is taking away our freedoms.
- The administration is therefore doing the terrorists work for them.
there is a logical fallacy. The two "freedoms" are not the same thing. The administration is taking away what we usually call our "civil liberties". The terrorists we are fighting are trying to take away, as I said, the freedom to not be muslim, to live under something other than the Islamic Caliphate, to choose something other than being Muslim, Dhimmi, or dead.Terrorists don't care about "civil liberties" as such. They claim to care about creating the Islamic Caliphate, and taking it one step further, one can assume that they believe they will of course be running it, being Chosen by Allah and all that.
This is pretty close to objective truth, unless you really think that the Muslim terrorists really do just want to take your free speech away, and are willing to murder, kill, and even die just to strip of your civil liberties and for no other reason. If that's "flamebait", frankly that says more about the community or the moderator than me.
Thus, the argument is over-simplified and not really useful for thinking. The argument that "If our enemies want X, we must not give them X" (which is what this is trying for) is always oversimplified; to use that logic is to concede far too much control to the enemy. The question of whether or not a given civil liberty must be modified somehow is one that must be considered independently from whether "the terrorists" want it.
A couple of you lept to the conclusion that this therefore implies that I think civil liberty must be curtailed. That's even weaker thinking than the original argument; that an argument is bad does not imply that the conclusion is false! Plus I have an established history of being on the side of civil liberties; I ran a website about it for years. That means I want to see good arguments used all the more, and I dislike bad arguments that lead to conclusion I agree with all the more. There are good reasons not to curtail civil liberties. We don't need bad ones!
I am the Robot Government, I am here to protect you. Protect you from the terrible secret of cyberspace.
Do not listen to the Robot Government, it is malfunctioning.
I am the Government Robot, I am here to protect you. Protect you from the terrible secret of cyberspace.
They got ya coming and going, kids. There is a way to win against our beloved government: vote them out. All of them. Start over. For EVERY ballot use your own name in the write-in spot. Demand a "no confidence" vote for recall on your Senators and House Reps when they do stupid shit (won't take long, as they all screw up eventually.) Demand Congressional term limitations (might I suggest 12 years?). Demand a removal of the PATRIOT Acts. Take back America. Before it's too late.
Maybe Congress should bolt cameras to everyones heads so they can see what we are doing at all times! That way, they could keep video recors of everything we look at and say! Since thers no privacy, theres no way to commit a crime! That would make the world such a better place! This is exciting!
Now Ben, tell me all the ways the masked gun man with an AK-47 pointed at your head has destroyed your way of life. I mean, you can still go to work, raise a family, etc, the guy with the AK-47 pointed at you head the whole time hasn't prevented you from doing anything.
You just never know if, or when he will shoot. Same with the government. They have the power to detain you at the drop of the hat. The question I have for you is, do you wait until the gun man starts shooting to take his gun away? Do you wait for the government to start abusing there power before you place limits on them?
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
This has to be the holy grail of American lobbying... it appeals to both the "Won't somebody please think of the children!" crowd and the "If we don't pass this law... the terrorists win!" crowd.
Bravo!
"The terrorists hate our freedom."
Indeed the terrorists do hate our freedom - but the real terrorists are not Arabs or Muslims or other imagined threats, they are the ruling class in this country. Less freedom for us equals more power for them. God bless the USA, and God bless the government.
History has proven over and over again that government is the most dangerous, destructive force in the world, far more destructive than any "private" criminal organization could ever be. Governments, democratic ones included, have killed more innocent human beings, confiscated more wealth, and destroyed more lives than would ever be possible by Al Capone, Bin Laden, Charles Manson, and every other criminal in history combined.
Why, I must ask, do we continue to believe in government at all?
But it does get politicians votes. And it gives conservatives the chance to claim their liberal opponents are "soft on drugs" when in reality it is more like "realistic about drugs". They are clearing out room in prisons for non-violent drug offenders by paroling rapists and other violent criminals.... WTF? Why don't they send chronic alcoholics to prison??? Oh, wait, the alcohol industry lobbyist money, right...I forgot....
Prohibition in the US basically created the start of "organized crime" in this country...
"But this one goes to 11!"
This is quite possibly the worst idea I have ever heard... Fear, in the sense you are talking, has not one time this year dictated my decision. I am a pretty large demographic (White Caucasan Male) of the US so I am not isolated. With this said how do you base youre "idea" that everything is based on fear? "Nothing new about that; people went to prison or were executed for being anarchists, atheists, sodomites, communists, socialists, jews, in one way or another, in the US for all its history." Umm yeah... when did the government kill any of these demographics for that purpose? "They've no laws to follow, so they can do what they like to us. " Are you reading what you are writing? Hello earth to major tom! This is getting ridiculas. I was considering myself moderate but now I can tell a true liberal is letting his views known, count me in as a right wing nutjob! I choose to take the risk of riding in a car but I do not choose to take the risk of having a 747's jet fuel burn me at 1000+ degrees.
And now you may have the chance when the NSA show up at your door...Not too sure about gorilla combat, but how are you with dog combat? And what is the best defense for when an ugly chick laughs and points at your genitals while taking pictures?? These are the skills that will help you during your extended stay at Gitmo...
P.S. Libertarian is for pussies. Become a Libertine! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertine
"But this one goes to 11!"
"There is more you can do," DeGette said. "You can do algorithms that will go beyond just the date of birth that they register, to start to weed out some of the underage users."
It's easy fellas, all we need is an algorithm. That'll solve all our problems. Just use an algorithm. Why didn't we think of it sooner?
"As per the DOD: Terrorism is "the unlawful use of -- or threatened use of -- force or violence against individuals or property to coerce or intimidate governments or societies, often to achieve political, religious, or ideological objectives.""
Sounds an awful lot like the US is doing in Iraq right now. And sounds exaclty like Ann Coulter's game plan for foreign countires she doesn't approve of (which is all of them)
"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity." - Ann "Born with a Penis" Coulter
"But this one goes to 11!"
It's no longer the blacks. It's now the angry white man, especially the angry white Christian or angry white Jewish man.
I, for one, wonder how long it will take people to realize that white men died to free the slaves in America, white men died to defeat Hitler, white men died to keep South Vietnam free (and in vain), white men voted for the black majority to be able to take power in South Africa, and white men are dying now to help Afghanistan and Iraq. Even if you disagree with the actions of the U.S. Government, surely no reasonable person expects every U.S. soldier, airman, sailor, and Marine to be serving for evil purposes.
Just because powerful white men did terrible things to other groups in the past doesn't mean that all of today's white men are rich, evil, powerful, and well-connected. White men have been on both sides of those evil issues in the past, and few white men believe those were right today. White men are not the only group that has done evil or bad things, either. Pol Pot was not white. Mao was not white. Ghadafi is not white. The Japanese that participated in the rape of Nanking and the Bataan death march are not white.
Personally, I believe the hypocrisy of Bush's administration is the worst part of his work. To take away freedom in the guise of protecting it is exactly what we've been warned about by countless philosophers, sages, and authors. And to grow the government more than ever and spend more than ever to make the government more powerful under the guise of conservativism isn't much better. A real conservative spends less, not more. "Terrorism" and these wars are the excuse to be a liberal and call himself a conservative. Sure, the military expenditures are necessary when you're fighting a war. But no one made him declare war on Iraq at the exact same time we were in Afghanistan. No one is forcing him to use the war to spend more and more money domestically. The Congress and the President have pulled the proverbial wool over the eyes of the country.
I am a true conservative white man. I believe in spending only as much on government as is necessary, and that only as much is necessary as to perform the basic tasks of government. A people has never been better off when the people are afraid of the government, and people should never have to be on the side of their government. It is the government who should always be afraid of the people, and the government that should be on the side of its people and doing the will of those people. Hence the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and the First, the Fourth, the Tenth, the Fifth... all of the first ten amendments, the ones called the Bill of Rights... which are quickly becoming a bill of sale for a product with no real warranty.
All of this makes me angry. I guess that means I'm an angry white man. One who believes in gun onwership, small government, and truly free speech. Come knock on my door, FBI, I'll be expecting you. I'll show you what should be the greatest weapons in my arsenal, as our founders planned -- my pen (and keyboard) and my voter card. Let's hope people wake up and those are enough.
Good argument/explication. The thing I don't understand is why we even need to argue for our civil liberties. Yes, in a real-politick sense I do, but in a more academic way I see the fact as a symptom of a deeper problem, and not necessarily the problem in itself. This main problem could probably be traced back to the basic mindset of our leaders, which can, ultimately, be traced back to the complacence (ignorance comes to mind, but its a mean word) of the public which they rule...
Sadly, in line with your point, on the arguing for civil liberties side, I generally here nothing but BAD arguments for it, or overly dogmatic idealist positions. It seems that the left-of-center has stopped being able to come up with any form of decent argument against the gradual decay of our liberties, and especially one that could convince the hoi polloi that it is in their best interests to make a stand, or at least voice the fact that we DO value our freedoms.
Not that I presume to have an actual answer to this, if I did I would have to hand in my philosophy schooling.
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
The terrorists we are fighting are trying to take away, as I said, the freedom to not be muslim, to live under something other than the Islamic Caliphate, to choose something other than being Muslim, Dhimmi, or dead.
Except, the problem with that is that you're extrapolating the intentions of the Islamic Fundamentalist movement. They could give two shits about converting or ruling Christian, Jewish, or secular westerners. They don't want to create an Islamic theocracy in the U.S., Denmark, Russia, or Argentina.
They might be interested in taking away the freedoms of Iraqis, Afghanis, Pakistanis, etc., but they mostly just want the U.S. empire out of the Muslim world.
In other words, they actually don't hate our freedom to not be Muslim, and they don't hate our civil liberties either. They hate our presence. And so do a lot of Muslims, even though they may equally hate the Islamic fundamentalists.
myspace, myspace, myspace!
Not least of whom are the politicians, whose careers are built on perpetuating the notion that we can somehow "win" against ourselves -- because we're the ones consuming the drugs, anyway.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
liberalism...
# man tar
All your liberties have been gradually eroded by the Bush administration.
Not the second amendment buddy. That trumps many of the others that were lost.
Freedom of speech is without question in the presence of the dead. Just makes for a boring audience though, but freedom of speech does not require and audience.
Your quite right. I like to look at if from this perspective...
"As per the DOD: Terrorism is "the unlawful use of -- or threatened use of -- force or violence against individuals or property to coerce or intimidate governments or societies, often to achieve political, religious, or ideological objectives."
Definition of the US Government: "is the _lawful_(?) use of, and threats of, force or violence against individuals or property to coerce its society, and intimidate foreign governments to achieve US political, religious, and ideological objectives."
Welcome the advent of Big Nanny.
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government.
Edward Abbey
When did our society become more about security than freedom? I'm Republican, and I believe that the government should be small and involved as little as possible in most matters. Why does anyone need to know who I'm e-mailing? What websites I visit? Whether or not I transfer files using BitTorrent? When I call my grandmother? That's completely unnecessary. I'm not a criminal! Child pornography is bad news, but it's hardly worth 100% government surveillance of every American. To be honest, I don't care who knows what about me - if some quack at the NSA wants to watch me take a shower they're welcome to it. I'm far more concerned what they do with that information. The problem is this: they can use that information to screw me. Let's say I'm applying for a job - they can tell my potential employer that I post negative blog comments about them on the internet in the past and I will not get the job and never know why. I don't care about privacy, I care about the transparency of the use of my data. Same goes a thousand fold for people who oppose a government or particular political party. Government officials can simply use their "private" information to completely destroy them. We know about these spy programs, what we don't know is what they're doing with the data they've obtained because it's "classified." Any idiot (terrorists included) knows that they're combing through it to identify terrorists and gain intelligence on terrorist activities, but without confirmation (at least of what is not being done with it) we can't assume anything. That's not acceptable. You can have my private data but in return I should have a right to know what is being done with it. And I seriously doubt that's going to happen. The United States government wants the best of both worlds - everyone's data and no transparency or oversight of how it's being used. That's absurd! I honestly don't think the average American realizes exactly how utterly and completely accessible everything they do is to the right people. If they did, politicians would be getting elected on privacy concerns instead of kiddie porn. At this rate of data security I forsee this scenario: Bob steals my identity. Bob accuses me of identity theft. Bob wins, I go to jail. I plan to run for office in a few years (not sure if I'm going local or state - or even which state I'm going to be in), I can assure you that there are at least some politicians who aren't senile or interested in a police state.
Haiku for you!
We are at war with terrorism. We have always been at war with terrorism.
Feel the fear and do it anyway.
My guess is sooner or later MySpace; et al will be subpoenaed so that the parents can track down who ever put their kids up/got into trouble for X. Where X can be teenage pregnancy, drugs, joy ridding, burning poo, etc. After all their parents told (do as I say...) them to be good and they can't BLAME CANADA forever.
A book called, "the culture of fear" inspired Moore to produce a movie which appears to have the sole intent of stirring the fear-pot without actually presenting a solution or suggestiong a moral of any kind? (except racism and smarmyness)
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
First off, my apologies for your modding, I think you have a valid point that is worth discussing even if I don't agree with it. I also do not assume that since we do not agree that you are for the erosion of our rights.
However:
"The two "freedoms" are not the same thing." and "the freedom to not be Muslim, to live under something other than the Islamic Caliphate"
I'm sure you will find that many of the freedoms (civil liberties) we take for granted are pretty well opposed to under Islamic Caliphate. The difference between the administrations erosion of our civil liberties and Muslim extremists attacking Western societies is not the religion, the difference is who is in charge once those civil liberties are gone. Religion is just a mask and a tool, used to hide the ambitions and give a political movement a manifest destiny. I stand by my statement that the enabling goals of both groups are the same (reducing freedom) and the objective goals only differ in who stands on the podium once the smoke settles.
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
I didn't make up the word "global" in "global Caliphate". It comes from the big-name terrorists themselves, including bin Laden.
Last I checked, the US is in fact located on the globe.
Like all conquerors with delusions of grandeur, they want N + 1, for all N. (And this is not an unusual trait; witness the number of people driven by wealth who just need 10% more to be happy.) If they get us out, they'll start wanting the next country. When they get that next country, they'll want the next. There is no "enough" for people like that. If you implement one part of Sharia, they'll want the next. If you manage to implement all of it, they'll start adding parts. Until we all bow to Allah, and of course to them as the representatives of Allah, they'll want more.
In fact it would be somewhat interesting to see what would happen if such conquerors actually did take over the globe, but it would probably be some variant of breaking up due to internal power squabbling.
Claiming to just want us gone is a smokescreen they use to convince people like you that what they want is reasonable, taking advantage of the fact that you believe their claims are stable and constant, rather than ever-changing in response to events. (That last bit is of course not a terrorist trait; changing conditions warrent changing responses. Failing to adapt has its usual penalties.) Today it advances their goals to claim they just want us out, but if we actually left, suddenly a new claim would be added. This is just simple psychology; for them to act any other way would be non-human, to expect them to act any other way is to expect them to be non-human. See also our amazing "rationalization" skills; there a similar process at work here, there's always (a reason it's not my fault)/(another thing you must do to satisfy me), without end.
"Not the second amendment buddy. That trumps many of the others that were lost.
My point is that you have no power. What could you do if they changed the second amendment, or were required you to register your weapons, or if handguns were outlawed for non-mil/law enforcement?
You couldn't do a damn thing. The legislation would be put through as an anti-terrorist measure and if your opposed to it,.. you are with the enemy.
Seriously though, what could you if they banned private weapons?
Does having a private arsinal give you any power against the Government?
What say you?
D.Cheney
They're stealing our ability to communicate out from underneath us in the name of the children, and terrorists.
It's a joke.
First, they stifle the ability to organize in protest through shady police tactics that definitely overstep constitutional boundaries.
Next, they attack the internet because the "terrorists" (I hate that biased word...it's the equivalentof garbage.) might be able to talk there, or a pedophile might stumble onto a horny13 year old girl with no parental supervision looking for drugs and rape her.
After that, the phone will become the new tool of terror/pedophilia that must be taken away from the freedom loving United States before it's too late and a terrorist prank caller caller rapes the kids.
Presto...an isolated population that has no ability to wipe its own ass without governmental permission...and even when they can wipe their own ass they have to save the toilet paper for a specified amount of time so the govenrment can be sure that no terrorist corn was eaten.
Fuckin joke.
Before 9/11, this type of overreaching on the government was still somewhat kept in check.
Today, all the legislative or executive branch has to do is tack on the phrase, "it would aid in terrorism investigations" and poof, instant justification for abuse of our constitutional rights.
Right to privacy, right to free speech, all thrown out because we Americans (you Brits too) are sheep. We are told we are scared of terrorists, and therefore we act scared. And the government manipulates it, feeding the trolls and then benefiting from the hysteria. A wicked cycle that will ultimately be the downfall of the very freedoms we have paid blood for.
Beware of geeks bearing formulas.
Why was this never an issue with ICQ, or Yahoo!, all of which allow for easy communication, the building of profiles, et cetera? Popularity? I have little doubt that Y!'s impact was not as widespread as MySpace's, but this wasn't a problem when it was the first name on everyone's lips in the subject of 'internet.' Just wondering exactly what has changed between then and now?
I am not the only one. Try a Google search on "New York Times" and "treason". I am going to enjoy watching them twist in the wind. Whose side are you on?
an ill wind that blows no good
You're under arrest for being an apple fanboyist!
*frisks you* *finds an iPod*
Hey, scumbag, who sold this shit to you? That's it, we're going downtown.
110100 1101000 1101000 1100110 0 1101111 1101000 1100011 1
Yeah. Previously, they called it the war on communism and the war on terrorism. Or, at theast the hard-right have tried to cast it that way for decades.
110100 1101000 1101000 1100110 0 1101111 1101000 1100011 1
I don't know that I can make a difference.. but I like to remain optimistic, as opposed to wallowing in hopelessness (no that you are- but that's where I feel like I'd go if not for powerful, blind optimism.) When considering the mindset of a population as diverse and numerous as we are, ideas and opinions can move through us like a tide. I want my opinion to count, if even only in the lives and minds of people with whom I communicate.
Errr, didn't you get the memo? The 10th amendment is moot in light of the commerce clause.
Seriously though, while I think much of the reaction to this is a tad melodramatic, the potential for legislation like this to be enacted is exactly why it's important to help privacy-enhancing technologies reach critical mass -- e.g. Freenet, darknets, and Onion Routers.
Eventually, one's right to anonymity will only be secured by technological means, since governments will increasingly come together to counter it, regardless of their political philosophy. We should be teaching "ordinary folks" how to use these tools in much the same manner as we'd teach them to avoid phishing scams; their privacy is threatened in both cases.
Pi Ran Out
If you aren't happy with MySpace and the rules they play by, don't use them. Don't let your children use them. It should not be up to the government what information these people collect in order for you to use their site. The government doesn't make Disney World take your finger print before you enter the park, Disney World does that on their own. Same with the grocery store, or library, or local club. Make the government implement laws to "save the children" from an online service and physical commercial gathering places will follow.
If you really don't like how MySpace works, then start a company to rival them, with background checks and what not. Then see how little difference that makes when someone gets raped after meeting someone else on your site and you get sued.
Take care of your own damn children, and leave the government out of my life as much as possible.
Cheesy Movie Night
Touchy today aren't we. I'm actually a Texan who voted for Bush. The current administration then failed miserably to deliver on its promises. The Democrats' plan is to attack their oppontnets plan and both end up blaming each other when nothing gets done. Stupid issues like Gay marriage ammendments and flag burning take the place of real issues that might lighten the grip of those in power on our freedoms. Nader is a whack job which is why he has never made a real difference. I am a moderate who believes instead of being brickheads arguing about non-issues we need to stop government encroachment on our freedoms and wallets. The only brickheads are the morons who vote straight down party lines and think they will make a difference.
No animals were harmed in the making of this sig.
Well, there was that one puppy, but he is all better now.
Well, first of all, declaring a "war on XXX" sounds like you really do something. Not li'l bit, you really start moving against XXX. Serious business. But how do you wage war against an idea? You can only fight ideas with better ideas, or even better, putting them into reality. The "war on communism" wasn't won with guns, it was won because the people enjoyed free trade more than planned production. People were shown that there's a better thing out there than having a party decide what's good for you, and thus the war was won.
How do you plan to win a "war on terror" by terrorizing your people yourself? You're not showing a "better" world to them and try to convince those that insist on "terror" to embrace the free world model instead, as the better model. You terrorize your own people with laws and regulations that smell like fascism.
And if we learned one thing from the fall of the East Block it is that you lose a war when you start alienating your own people.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
You know, a thought just occurred to me. If an eco-terrorist blows up a dam or something, and dies and goes to paradise, does he get 72 vegans?
Soylent Green is peoplicious!
And that, unfortunately, is something I think we can both agree on. (FWIW, I voted for Voinovich and for Bloomberg.)
And now, a PSA from David Lynch.
Then you'll sit back and sell yourself and your children away, bit by bit, all in the name of an idea that cannot be contained, a concept that cannot be "defeated", and a war that cannot be won. You cannot defeat a concept. You cannot eliminate the concept of armed resistance, especially in the name of a cause that you believe in enough to sacrifice your life for. Americans have forgotten the meaning of sacrifice and courage, and embraced the culture of feel-good and self-deception.
The world is a place of complexity. The "war on terror", the Israeli-Palestine conflict, global warming...none of these things have band-aid solutions, and all of these things require reflection and change on a scale that we no longer have the fortitude for. We'd rather be buying iPods at Wal-Mart and drowning out the cacophany that is REALITY than face an uncertain future. But that future MUST be faced, and it shows the cowardice of our populace that we are leaving the REAL challenges to be faced by those who come after, instead choosing the easy path of sacrificing LIVES instead of lifestyles. I'm not a luddite, I'm not overly liberal or conservative, I dont' believe all business is evil...but when you look around this country and you say "Everything is RIGHT", then you've joined in the deception and abdicated responsibility for your actions to your children and their children.
And you should be ashamed.
--- I'm going sane in a crazy world.
I think every city block should record our activity on the block. As we move from city block, each block records our movements and if we do any activity such as buy food, knock on a door, communicate with another human being, or even... have sex...
Its for our own safety!
I'm sure plenty of pedophiles and/or terrorists are neither single nor men.
Freedoms for one, are freedoms for all.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
"Imposing burdens on the owners of a social network website because their users might be predators, liers, or unmonitored children is as retarted as requireing the shop-rite to keep records of everyone who shows an ID to buy alcohol or tobacco."
Already being done. Here in San Diego, the local 7-11 stores require that you *swipe* a CA license to purchase alcohol. I don't know about cigarettes, I don't smoke or drink, so I noticed in passing. Visual inspection is not adequate, the response from one store manager is that they are keeping the records to provide to the police if a question arises about sales to minors.
KeS
Sorry, I don't buy it.
I think they want a global caliphate in the same way we want a global democracy, which is to say it may be a nice talking point, but the logistics of it just don't work.
I don't think this is a smokescreen. I don't think this is an active goal of the islamists. And I don't buy your armchair psychology.
Of course, you may be right, but the threat of a global caliphate is right up there with the threat of "The northern migration of killer bees", which is to say- insubstantial. Now, we face a much higher risk of terrorist violence out of these folks, and I don't mean to trivialize that, but largely we are targetted because we are in their back yard.
I tend to think that our prior strategies of propping up secular authoritarians while encouraging isolation and international political structures was more effective. But then, Iran, Pakistan, and Afghanistan stand out as failures of such policy.
Pax -- Ob
I don't think this is a smokescreen.... the threat of a global caliphate is right up there with the threat of "The northern migration of killer bees", which is to say- insubstantial.
Your reply seems to contain the implicit assumption that it is impossible for the terrorists to have irrational goals, as you seem to be arguing "The possibility of them extending the global caliphate over the US is minimal, so they can't possibly be acting towards that goal."
You grant them much more rationality than I do, or than the evidence suggests.
I completely agree the logistics of what they want are completely impossible, but I don't think that they realize that, and even if they did I'm sure they'd just say Allah will fill in the blanks.
As for calling that "armchair psychology"... are you seriously going to deny that there are people who always want or need just a little bit more? "Greed" of all kinds dismissed as "armchair psychology"? Unfortunately, labelling that "armchair psychology" isn't going to make it go away.
Sometime around 1980. I blame Reagan (Nancy, not Ronnie).
In the 1970s, oh man I miss the seventies. I really REALLY miss the seventies.
We had freedom. Freedom like nobody had before, and certainly like nobody had since. At least, nobody in THIS country.
You could smoke a joint and nobody cared. Not even the cops. Hell, if you got pulled over for spee^H^H^H^Hdriving too slow and they smelled reefer, they'd confiscate it. And smoke it themselves in their squad cars.
Rock and roll... oh man, like never before. Zepplin, Floyd, Hagar, Nugent...
And sex. Oh man, the sex. There were no untreatable STDs! We had myrad forms of birth control (many now gone, like the IUD) AND abortion had just been legalized. You could walk up to any woman you knew and say "wanna fuck?" without getting slapped or arrested! And chances were she'd say "sure, wanna smoke a joint first?"
Hell, even if you were a cowardly nerd who couldn't bring himself to ask a girl if she wanted to fuck, they'd ask YOU! I shit you not, young man. All true.
Then Reagan started his war on (some) drugs; the same war Nixon had tried to wage before being shooed out of office. And AIDS reared its ugly head.
The last time a woman asked me "wanna fuck?" was maybe 2 years ago, I couldn't because I didn't have a twenty in my pocket. AIDS killed the Free Love movement. It's harder than hell to get laid these days, especially if you're an old nerd who remembers the seventies.
And a thought struck me so hard I still have a knot on my head - I've only known ONE person who has died of AIDS. And he was gay.
AIDS isn't a sex disease, it's a BLOOD disease. You get it from sharing needles or from sodomy, as the anus wasn't exactly engineered to have stuff shoved up it. If someone with AIDS sodomizes you, you're probably going to catch it whether you're a man or a woman. Anal Intercourse Death Syndrome, one guy I knew called it.
If you suck on someone's cock or lick someone's pussy who has AIDS you're probably going to catch it, because you've probably got at least one dental cavity, or have burned your mouth at McDonalds, or have gum disease.
The only way to catch AIDS from straight penis vagina sex is if you have a scratch on your pecker or in your pussy.
Hell, I'm 54, I'm more likely to die of a heart attack in the middle of the sex act than catch AIDS from it. Well, actually I'm not likely to get laid at all... God I miss the seventies!
But the media and politicians still keep pushing the AIDS scare. How many heterosexuals do you know personally (Isaac Asimov and the guy from Queen don't count; you didn't know Asimov personally and Freddie was teh ghey and you didn't know him either) who have died of AIDS? Now how many do you know who have died from strokes, heart attacks, cancer, or car wrecks?
The parent poster is right. "cold calculated fear manipulation by those who will get infintite power and endless wealth making people 'safe' from nearly nonexistent threats."
We're nerds, we shouldn't be listening to this bullshit. We're supposed to be able to think for ourselves.
Unfortunately, the Geneva Convention also requires -- gasp -- a declaration of war. And an opposing force who does not follow the Geneva Convention gives up its rights under it.
How do they handle the fact that the magstripe on my license had a deliberate "encounter" with an 2T MRI machine?
But uh, there is. The Bushes and the Bin Ladens have been doing business for literally years.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Win-win situation. Company saves time and money defending itself by moving out of country. Congress saves time and money going after real threats. Perceived problem solved?
So here I am, working on a startup Social Networking Site, wondering, How in the hell am I going to implement the requirements if they become law? In particular since our policy is very specific about not tracking users and ensuring privacy by not keeping records of where a user goes or what pages they visit.
I mean I suppose it wouldn't be that difficult to write a script to record what each user's ip login is and dump it to a file. and I suppose it wouldn't be that difficult to record each user and when they visit a page and dump that to a file.
That's not the point. The point is this data retention is an undue burden on any company involved in social networking. Not to mention the forced collection of information for law enforcement purposes strikes me as a potential Fourth Amendment violation. And yes, a social networking site would have standing as being harmed as we are the ones who being forced to spend money to track and retain the records.
So yes, i can promise you, we will be sending letters, and we will be prepared to file suit against the implementation of the law if it does pass and get signed.
"The bass, the rock, the mic, the treble. I like my coffee black, just like my metal" - Mindless Self Indulgence
Yah, history shows that when the elites allow society to rot from the bottom up, that society becomes weaker over time as the productive people have to pick up more and more slack for all the unproductive people. Eventually that society becomes weak enough that it gets conquered internally through a revolution of the mob, or externally from a society which has its act together.
Parents should be held accountable for their children and the reason parents don't care as much anymore about raising their kids properly is our welfare state absolves them of the need to raise their children properlyas it is merely a crutch in shielding irresponsible parents from any responsibility or accountability in raising their children.
In the distant past before we had Social Security and Medicare, when you got old your children would take care of you ASSUMING YOU RAISED THEM CORRECTLY. If you didn't have any children, well then it was tough luck as an old maid or old miser since you should reap what you sow. If you did have children and you raised them to be a bunch of selfish pricks with no concept of loyalty to their family, community, and country, well then you got what you deserved in old age as a parent as well.
Nowadays, the baby boomers think they can run up the federal deficit, the trade debt, and force the younger generations to deal with tax rates that make their lives extremely uncomfortable, all the while big mommy government hands the old farts checks for social security and medicare when most of these old farts clearly do not deserve it. Instead of living the good life at the expense of their children, they should of invested in their children in the form of not just money, but time, values, and good parenting to raise the next generation of productive Americans. Instead, due to their bang-up job of parenting, their children tend to mostly have an identity that does not go much beyond "ME ME ME ME". Great job baby boomers in raising a bunch of spoiled brats who have no loyalty to you when you get older, especially when you all move to Florida to enjoy that "good life".
In older generations older people did retire, but yet they still kept contributing to their community in the form of charitable works, handing their institutional wisdom down through their family and community, and helping their children with parenting in the form of being good grandparents. Now, many old farts think it is OK to just pack their stuff, move south, and retire to the good life and not give a hoot about the future generations since half of them think the apolocalypse is coming soon anyways.
In addition, they let Congress and our presidents over the last 30 years turn the United States into a debtor nation that produces very little relative to what it actually consumes. Ships from around the world come to the United States to dump products at our ports that are destined for Wal-Mart and then head back home largely empty. Who is responsible for this insanity? Well as a generation you can blame it all on the baby boomers and their lack of personal responsibility for everything in the United States actually makes Soylent Green seem like a great idea.
Though many baby boomers will probably die and go off to the heavenly where they will be rejected by St. Peter for being selfish pricks who left future generations to deal with the aftermath of their decadence, they better hope they had their bodies cremated or else their descendants will likely make it a yearly ritual to dig up their corpses and violate them in anger of the country and world they have left behind.
So, how about we start holding parents accountable for how they raise their children, rather than just leave them all to the wolves for raising as we do now in our broken school systems, family court bureaucracy, and whatever mind-numbing socialization propaganda happens to be on television for any given day.
Great idea. From now on, all tech-, computer-, and internet-related bills and laws should be required to be written in l33t. It's not like the politicians read them anyway.
kurzweil_freak
5th Kyu Genbukan Ninpo/KJJR student
Be the darkness that allows the light to shine.
And the new fear--illegal immigrants.
harmonious design
Instead of parents bitching about this crap, why not raise your kids? Government is not designed to raise kids. Proof is the Hitler Youth. These parenting groups need to grow up and understand that the only people that are allowed to raise kids are the people that had them. That simple. Worked for hundreds of thousands of years, why break with tradition now?
The battle is already lost. Sorry. There's nothing you can do. Come to think of it, there has never been any battle: they say "jump", you may ask "how high", and that's the end of it.
At least you have had the Internet to snivel on, but that will be over soon, too.
Step in line.
This may be being done, but its insurance for the store not a federal requirement for record keeping of customer transactions. Simply a choice.
The store can refuse to serve anyone for any reason however when the federal government says they can only serve certain customers under certain conditions there becomes burden to comply with someone else's(i.e. US society in theory) choice and not thier own.
I can refuse to show ID and the store can refuse the sale. But I could be under age and show a fake id and the store might be tricked into the transaction. Same applies to websites. T
Law enforcement agencys have long been operating undercover at catching stores who sell to minors what makes anyone think that they wouldn't do the same to websites once they have regulated who can use which services?
So:
1) I(an undercover agent) team up with a kid
2) Have kid sign up at a website and lie about his age
3) I fine the site for allowing it to happen(profit!!!)
Thank you and apology accepted. I know just glancing through some of my writing makes me look like a Nader voter so I can easily understand where the whole brickhead thing comes from.
No animals were harmed in the making of this sig.
Well, there was that one puppy, but he is all better now.
That was written when George H. Bush was the head of the CIA. The CIA worked _with_ Manuel Norieaga on many things back in those days.
Don't think that a small group of dedicated individuals can't change the world. It's the only thing that ever has.
how is this going to protect children. It will make it easier to find the bad guy after the damage is done. But protect... I think not
The whole idea that the terrorists hate our freedom (as espoused by the Prez, et al) is just a bit of rhetorical baloney. When you're trying to condemn the terrorists, it sounds great to say that they're trying to destroy our freedoms. It certainly sounds better than saying they want us to stop mucking around with the rest of the world, and stop supporting Israel.
After the 9/11 attacks, many people felt that it would be a kind of defeat to let the attacks change our way of life. The right to privacy, freedom of speech, protection against unreasonable searches, the right to a fair trial -- are these the things that the terrorists were aiming at? No. But they are some of the things that made America great, and by our government trampling over them in their supposed attempts at fighting terrorists, we have let the terrorist attacks degrade us. Our government's reactions to the terrorist attacks have damaged us in ways that are more fundamental than the destruction of buildings and the deaths of citizens. The terrorists can kill us and destroy our resources. It takes the government to destroy our freedoms. I don't know if we ought to technically say that the government is letting the terrorists win. In my book, what our government has done is probably worse.
-- dR.fuZZo
You couldn't be more wrong. In fact, I don't even know where to begin to correct you. But I will say this...
The Islamic Fundamentalist movement is all about establishing a global Islamic theocrocy. Anything other than what is governed in sharia law is hubris. Hubris (or any form there of) as preached in the Koran is the ultimate form of sin, often punishable by death to those in the extreme sect (Islamic Fundamentalists).
When you add it all up, it's very clear that Democrocy is seen as the ultimate sin. No man, woman, or child may govern themselves. All that is needed for governance is written in sharia law. Ergo, Islamic theocrocy.
Life is not for the lazy.
>And what good is that going to do you. Do you think your training is going to do you any good?
To take him down, they'll need about 6 armed men and a 30-seconds firefight.
While to take down 1000 slashdot nerds, all it takes is one jock and about 10 seconds. I'll grant you this, however: it will take him some more time to shit over their faces. 1000 nerdfaces, takes some serious shitting.
How can you know for certain they don't just want us off their land? Your assumptions are just that, assumptions. They COULD be interested in spreading global Islamist values, but it seems far too unlikely for a guerilla force like theirs. IMHO I think they just want us and all other foreign occupiers gone. I could just as easily be wrong, however.
china
When I saw this, a lightbulb went off. Then you diverged from my line of thinking.
Isn't that exactly what they're doing with Guantanamo/secret prison camps (individuals) or wiretapping/bank tracking/electronic communications tracking (property)?
"May the days be aimless. Let the seasons drift. Do not advance the action according to a plan."
Ah, but that's the government's trump card: If you tell the government to go fuck itself, you are a terrorist.
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
For instance, what are the odds of getting killed in your car opposed to being killed by "terrorists"? And why the discrepancy in response, other than stupidity on the part of the manipulated and cold calculated fear manipulation by those who will get infintite power and endless wealth making people "safe" from nearly nonexistent threats.
Blame. If you crash your car it's difficult to point your finger at the government and claim they're reponsible... that "someone should have done something." But if you were hit by a drunk driver you can blame the person who served him alcohol--no matter that the driver was the idiot who got behind the wheel intoxicated. And if you're harmed by a terrorist (ie. someone with a vaguely political agenda) well then the government is completely responsible for his existence and for not protecting you from him! The US stayed in Vietnam for years longer than it should have simply because we were unable to admit we were wrong. Policy changes are unheard of, even if a new strategy is proven to be better. After all, to change policy would shake the public's confidence in its leaders. And besides, a public that lives in fear with agree to anything if they think it will protect them. If there was any doubt of that it was shattered by Nazi Germany... not to mention Stalinist Russia (though Stalin didn't write a book about it first like Hitler did).
We live in an age where the pen is truly mightier than the sword, an age where publicity is all important. The Gulf War was sold to the public as a "clean and moral" war. A war where we could drop smart bombs from magical airplanes high in the stratosphere and those bombs would destroy weapons factories with no collateal damage, no mistakes, and no loss of human life. And the public bought it hook line and missile video camera footage. Or at least they did until the media began running stories about the bad intelligence we received and occasional hospital we blew up by accident.
The War on Terror is a propoganda war in the truest sense of the word, and the goal was multifaceted: revitalize the US economy, secure a new military location in the middle east, and hopefully secure a reliable source of oil to boot. The plan sort of worked even though the war itself was horribly botched. And because the US claimed to be acting against "terrorism" (ie. Arabs, not to be confused with the prior definition of 'terrorist' above) the public will never know if no futher disasters have occurred because of something the government did or simply because there was no danger.
If the public were interested in addressing the true dangers to human health we'd be spending more on cancer research and addressing automobile safety. If we were interested in protecting our children we'd talk to them every so often instead of treating them like fragile possessions. And if we were interested in actually changing things we'd take responsibility for our actions. But it's much easier to pass blame, and people are lazy.
I'm he does,he has bear arms.
A little correction for you. AIDS isn't spreading in the first world because we are educated, and don't have unprotected sex with everyone we meet. Meanwhile in Africa, there's tons of people dying of AIDS. Because of lack of proper protection, and just ignorance about the disease, it's spreading fast and is already a major epidemic.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
Step 1. Create the internet, make it free, and get people to incorporate it into every facet of their lives.
Step 2. Mine the data and use it to silence your foes, prosecute for thought crimes, and manipulate the masses.
Step 3. Profit.
Well see, the next thing will be either robots or clones. This is because that's what they will use to get rid of the terrorists eventually, and when its over they'll realize they can't trust the robots (Who are disguised like the Terminators and thus could easily sneak into somewhere) or the clones (Who may have been influenced by the genetics of the individual they cloned... And they aren't really human anyway so a rebellion is inevitable, better stop them now). Thats pretty much how its going to go down... Well unless a Democrat gets elected.
Next up: Legislators install 360 degree cameras in public schools, because sexual predators are using them as channels to target children. Thousands of new jobs created so that millions of hours of tape can be meticulously reviewed to hunt out sexual abuse in schools. Lawsuits brought over the installation of cameras in washrooms and changing rooms. Arrests made over newly-hired film reviewers viewing tapes of children in school showers and posting them to the Internet.
Yet again a donkey solution posed to a common problem.
How about educating children so that they don't run off to meet people IRL they met on IRC or MySpace or whatever? How about parents spending enough time with kids to know when their child is engaging in this behaviour, or how about parents having meaningful conversations with their kids to ensure that they know the dangers involved in these behaviours?
I'm sorry, but we can't build in 345786 extra layers of time and money-wasting effort just to guard against the stupidity of a few users. I'm sorry, but if you can't protect your children, or teach your children to protect themselves enough to avoid being preyed on by the one in a million MySpace users who wants to abuse them, then you have bigger problems.
Driving your kid to school every day in the morning is more hazardous to their health than logging onto MySpace.
Leaving your kid under the protection "in loco parentis" of his/her teachers for 8 hours a day is probably more likely to result in sexual abuse than logging into MySpace.
Having a gun in your house is probably more dangerous to your child than logging onto MySpace.
Anyway, maintaining meticulous MySpace records doesn't stop the problem, it only fuels witch hunts and probably violates more peoples' privacies than anything else.
I apologize if my use of "armchair psychology" was construed as pejorative. I don't happen to buy into your opinion of their "motivations"- that is all.
FWIW, my understanding is that there was a high level of education and sophistication surrounding global terrorists. This probably differs among regional conflicts and roles within terrorist organizations. So yes, I see these guys sitting around tables and discussing top level strategy in the same way I see Cheney and Wolfowitz talking about "sending a message with Iraq" and drafting up more PNAC documents.
I do not claim that my assumptions about the motivating factors of terrorists are any more sound than your assumptions. I suppose that when we are out of Iraq for good (it's going to happen sooner or later), we'll have some evidence to support our hunches.
Pax -- Ob