Slashdot Mirror
US Citizens To Require ''Clearance'' To Leave?
jo7hs2 writes "The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has proposed a system which will in essence make it mandatory for you to have permission before leaving or entering the country, effectively putting everyone on a no-fly list unless the government says otherwise. Interestingly, the proposal does not seem to cover personal travel, only that on some sort of carrier like an airline or cruise vessel. While this certainly is concerning, it isn't exactly new, as a passport is already required for circumstances covered under the proposal."
I would be scared
now the government can stop me from leaving the country on public transport if they want to!
God, I hope this rubbish starts ending on Tuesday.
Please, go vote and get these people out of our lives!
Papers please, Comrade?
Thank you US gov't. Wanna just light that annoying "Bill of Rights" on fire? Seems more direct.
If this is true and threatens to go into effect, we'll find out how strong the airlines' lobby is. This would kill a stack of business for them, I'd think.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
permission for EVERY entrance and exit? Does the DHS even have the infrastructure to handle that?
ah damnit people :/
soon you'll have to file 'travel plans' with DHS to go further than 50 miles from your house.
I didn't need a passport to go on a cruise, and I didn't need a passport to fly to Cozumel, Mexico.
Morphing Software
"Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union are two countries in recent history
that didn't allow their citizens to travel abroad without permission."
"Friends of Liberty" loses!
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
Keeping terrorists out is too hard, so they've decided on another mission.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Does Cowboy Neal need clearance?
FTA:"Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union are two countries in recent history that didn't allow their citizens to travel abroad without permission. If these regulations go into effect, you can add the United States to this list."
They left out North Korea.
"We are all geniuses when we dream"
- E.M. Cioran
That what is happening is NOT reminicent of Nazi Germany, is not similar to Mr. Orwell's 1984, etc...
Smile... you are on candid camera.
God made the Idiot for practice, and then He made the School Board -- Mark Twain Look for http://Thebar.steelbeachca
Yes, but will this new beyond-draconian system run Linux?
Three tings I hate about stars: -Wars -Treks -Gates
So, when will american citizens occupy the canadian embassy until the canadian foreign minister steps on the balcony and announces: "We have come to you to tell you that your departure..." *cheeringcrowd*
Life is just nature's way of keeping meat fresh.
"Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!"
Look on the bright side... Can't think of one right now, but i'm sure someone thinks there is one...
How can these laws pass at all? So, is it a matter of time before they pass a law against some religion, and invade alternative of Poland?
Oh wait, the invasion happened already. Nevermind...
there is no issue with my network
...that, of course, is the day you go to the polls and let these people know that all this stuff is A-OK with you.
(credit to Jim Schutze for phrasing)
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
First of all, the US government can't deny you a passport (even if they want you on a no-fly list!) -- see Kent v. Dulles. Secondly, US Citizens have the right to enter and leave the US (I can't find the USSC citation -- sorry). This proposal is thus manifestly unconstitutional -- unless they try claiming that "you have the right to leave the US, but not by the means of transportation of your choice". This has worked for the government in the cases about the right to travel anonymously and the airport identification requirements.
Come to our fabulous Europe as long as you can.!11!!1!
You're welcome... (really!)
Before you need the governments permission to leave your country?
Before you need the governments permission to leave your state?
Before you need the governments permission to leave your county?
Before you need the governments permission to leave your city?
Before you need the governments permission to leave your home?
Another aspect in which this would "help" the Americans is in limiting the number of American youth would would be at risk of exposure to foreign ideals through studies abroad. Today, any American who can afford it could be exposed to all sorts of crazy ideas, just by enrolling in a foreign school. If they also had to ask permission before leaving the country, then many of them would probably not risk their souls in this way.
Sooo, civil liberties issue aside, will this actually remove the option of traveling overseas standby or on a very short notice? Or will DHS have politic^H^H^H^H^H^H^H officers on every international airport to validate people on the spot?
Military tribunals and secret decision-making like this are horrible ideas because there's no accountability involved. But what about hard-core terrorists like Osama, those responsible for WTC I and WTC II among other things? If anything, this applies more. I want to see the bastards on trial in a New York courtroom, in public, accountable to the very populace whom they injured and whose families they murdered. Then, since New York has no death penalty, a nice long term in Sing Sing in the same cellblock with the Aryan Brotherhood. Justice doesn't have to be meted out by military courts to be tough or fair.
-b.
I'm afraid I don't take these "Friends of Liberty" folks at face value. Their assertions are backed up by a volume of evidence found in similar conspiracy theories. NONE WHATSOEVER.
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
...he'd be beating the crap out of anyone responsible for this proposal.
The OP is incorrect in saying that passports are the same thing as requesting clearance. They are not.
Once you have a passport, you can fly out to nearly anywhere at any time (if the destination has allowed you an entry visa), without a by-flight request for personal clearance. The Man can of course stop you at the checkout, and your passport may even act as a trigger for such an action, but that is *NOT* the same thing as asking for clearance for each separate exit.
The distinction is pretty fundamental. It centers on presumption of freedom. Passports give you that.
Passport Passport Requirements If you are planning travel for 2007 or beyond, please take a minute to review the passport policy below. If you don't already have a valid passport, be sure to avoid the rush and give yourself plenty of time to apply for one. Once you've got a passport in hand, the whole world is yours to explore.
U.S. Citizen Passport Requirement
Air Travel
Effective January 8, 2007, passports will be required for all U.S. citizens flying to or from all international destinations. This includes all areas of the world in which our ships sail, such as the Bahamas, Bermuda, Canada, the Caribbean, Mexico, Europe, Asia, Central and South America.
Cruise Travel
As early as January 1, 2008, subject to U.S. Government amendment, passports will be required for all U.S. citizens cruising to or from all international destinations. This includes all areas of the world in which our ships sail, such as the Bahamas, Bermuda, Canada, the Caribbean, Mexico, Europe, Asia, Central and South America.
http://www.royalcaribbean.com/beforeyouboard/passp ortGuidelines.do;jsessionid=0000kBVFJqoUxBesiUlnSf waVxz:10ktdmnut
This is nothing like the fact that we already are required to use a passport for a number of these same reasons.
A passport is documentation to foreign countries that you are a documented U.S. citizen.
Being required to "check out" of the country with DHS, despite all the calls of "Godwin rule" invocations, is exactly like Soviet Russia, Communist Cuba and China, and Nazi Germany, in recent history.
Seriously, if you people don't get out and vote these facists out of office, you're going to be just like the guy from WWII who wrote the poem about how, when there was no one else left, they came for him, and there was no one left to stop them. Enough with the "But I don't have anything to hide". When are you going to realize it's not about, and never has been about, "hunting the terrorists" and "making us safe", it's about "controlling the people", through fear, and travel restrictions, and spying? The more people say "But I dont have anything to hide, let them go ahead", the more they win.
This space for rent. Call 1-800-STEAK4U
This was one of the selling features of living in the US vs USSR. We were free to come and go, in the USSR travel was very restricted.
Personally, I'm disgusted.
One day, older American will weep and younger Americans will be confused by lines like:
Capt. Vasili Borodin: I will live in Montana. And I will marry a round American woman and raise rabbits, and she will cook them for me. And I will have a pickup truck... maybe even a "recreational vehicle." And drive from state to state. Do they let you do that?
Captain Ramius: I suppose.
Capt. Vasili Borodin: No papers?
Captain Ramius: No papers, state to state.
Capt. Vasili Borodin: Well then, in winter I will live in... Arizona. Actually, I think I will need two wives.
Captain Ramius: Oh, at least.
There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.
Over here in Europe I am increasingly hearing people who say they don't want to travel to the USA at the moment, whether for tourism or business. The effect of this kind of thing on tourism would be fairly easy to measure, however the effect on business generally - if businessmen outside of the USA don't want to travel there - is impossible to know.
I thought the Republicans were supposed to be "pro-business" - surely they can understand the potential negative consequences of this kind of thing? Having said that, they don't seem to be worried about the negative effects of their neanderthal foreign policies, so perhaps not.
Back in 1984 I lived in Yugoslavia. I was a child, but I still remember how the system worked. One of the things were long LONG queues at the border crossings with Austria and Italy (yes, we were not completely behind the iron curtain, we were actually permitted to travel abroad). I also remember an institution called UDBA - it meant "agency for national security", but its main task was to find the ones who disapproved the system - (like, you were in a bar with your "friends", said something funny about Tito - the president, and they would get you) - and send them to an isolated island for a long, long time... Some never returned and those who did had completely changed personality.
I think the people of the US should be afraid. Raise against your crazy government before it's too late...
What the fuck is wrong with people who will go out and vote more power to Bush and his fucking fascist government this Tuesday?
Torture, shredded Habeas Corpus, thousands of kidnapped people in CIA prisons around the world, "signing statements" vowing to break the law he just signed, martial law powers, leaving the country only by his permission... Bush has turned himself into the king of a fascist kingdom,
If you know one of these monsters voting for the Republican Congress in collusion with Bush, do everything you can to get them to vote people into Congress on Tuesday who will stop this destruction of America.
--
make install -not war
In the immortal words of John Stewart: Can you say anything if you just ask?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ki2GWdOIYxw
Even though it is very easy for us to sit back and say "those SOBs, how dare they do this to us?" We are the lazy SOBs who didn't fight hard enough to keep those SOBs out of office. Now our fight will be 10 times more difficult and 10 times longer and require 10 times the sacrifice to undo what has been done. And this is not about republicans doing something that the Democrats would not. Even if by some Deibold miracle the Democrats should take back the House, Senate and eventually the White House, they will not feel sufficiently motivated to undo what the republicans have already done for fear of being labeled "soft on National Security". That just means that the republicans bide their time until the next shift in power when they can pick up where they left off. If we US citizens can pry ourselves away from our computers and tvs long enough to get involved in the workings of our government then we could possibly fix this horrible situation. I just don't see that happening, though, because as history has shown only the extremists and single issue pundits take the time and make the sacrifices to make their voices heard in congress.
The damage that is being done will not be undone no matter who is in power after the elections, unless there is a groundswell of pressure from the general population, and I just don't see that happening because 8 out of 10 people don't know and don't care what their government is doing.
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act!" -- George Orwell (Eric Arthur Blair)
Bush is an antichrist. It's in the book.
--
make install -not war
If you read the article:
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (HSA) has proposed that all
airlines, cruise lines-even fishing boats-be required to obtain
clearance for each passenger they propose taking into or out of the
United States.
DHS has been getting manifests for all flights into the country (a smart move that actually is pretty effective), it just seems like they are expanding the program (to other transport methods and now, people leavkng the country) so that they know who is coming and going in the country. YOU don't have to get clearance....the airline/boat/bus has to get clearance, so for all practical purposes, international travel will not change for Americans (unless you are that small percentage that always ends up getting "randomly" screened)
Okay, so we have a story on a political website ("Friends of Liberty") with a link only to published comments by another political website ("PapersPlease.org") concerning a proposal where the original RFP was posted July 14 of this year. Where was the outrage then, where was the irate Slashdot article then?
Could it possibly be that this regulation would not have the effect that the far left claims that it would have?
If you read the regulation proposal, what this regulation change would actually do is require manifests to be transmitted to US Customs before the aircraft pushes back from the gate, rather than 15 minutes after takeoff (which is the current regulation), so that DHS can have do-not-fly list passengers removed from the flight before it takes off rather than causing a possible situation in the air.
This attempt at political chicanery on Slashdot's part is so transparent it's laughable.
This is getting all too surreal. First they start ignoring private property rights, then they amass the right to detain anybody anytime for any reason, with or without cause. Then they enact a bill that allows them to declare martial law at any time for any reason, now they are sealing the borders to US citizens that want out?
It sounds like they're gearing up for something. I'm not typically one to be part of the tinfoil brigade, but I think something seriously BAD is on the horizon. Maybe Alex Jones was right?
For every 5 anti-gun soccer moms and hippies, they're a psychopath in the Utah desert with an arsenal ready to be passed out. I have $5 that says there'll be a 2nd civil war within ten years.
These losses of privacy and requiremens to "show our papers" has been ongoing, even within the US. It immediately reminds me of John Gilmore's protest against having to show his papers in order to take a domestic US flight (or travel on Amtrack or stay in a hotel). If he didn't have anything dangerous on his person, why did he have to prove his identity? This stuff is not really making anyone more secure, but it might make the airlines more money by preventing transference of tickts.
Perhaps people just feel more secure when they believe something is being done. even if nothing is, and even if it really sucks.
It certainly is something new. A passport is issued every 10 years and you aren't required to notify the government in advance of your travel or get permission to leave the country.
Before this bill is enacted, I'll leave the country permanently.
No, goldspider loses the ability to learn from Nazi atrocities when they're repeated in front of goldspider's own eyes.
You still think this is a game to be won by nonsense rule lawyering, when you're helping destroy your own country?
--
make install -not war
The pdf file referred to in the article is authored by the "The first amendment project" (I hadn't heard of them before), and refers to a "Notice of Proposed Rulemaking" (NPRM). I believe that there are probably lots of NPRM's that never make it into any sort of bill that is to be submitted to the House or the Senate.
Now while I can believe that some people in the current administration would entertain such thoughts, any such proposal would have to pass both the House and the Senate, and somehow I just can't see that happening.
In addition there are doubts about whether it's contitutional to bar people from travelling abroad unless authorised to by the government, so that any such laws will be open to challenge in a New-York minute.
For a while, a passport was not required for Mexico and Canada. Before, a birth certificate was good enough. This is a bit of a nitpick but you do not require a passport to leave any country. You need a passport to enter a country. That's why nobody checks passports as you depart. Now, this rule makes it that your passport is checked leaving and entering. It's a small but important difference.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
TFA provides no supporting evidence at all. Yes, IF it's true, this would be a major blow to American liberties. IF true, it would be one more step towards an Orwellian state. If true, it would be smacked down by the U.S. Supreme Court, but how can we judge the accuracy of the article when no support is given whatsoever?
Of course, we've made many steps towards becoming an Orwellian state already anyway, so, given the likelihood of finding another Reagan (none), I think I'm voting Dem for a while!
"...the [Supreme] Court held that the right to travel is an inherent element of "liberty" that cannot be denied to American citizens. Although the Executive may regulate the travel practices of citizens, by requiring them to obtain valid passports, it may not condition the fulfillment of such requirements with the imposition of rules that abridge basic constitutional notions of liberty, assembly, association, and personal autonomy."
.," but "a virtually
Kent v. Dulles
357 U.S. 116 (1958)
Summary from http://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/case/1053/
EPIC cites other cases in their comments on the proposed rule:
"The Supreme Court has long recognized that there is a constitutional right to travel
internationally. The right to travel is "not a mere conditional liberty subject to regulation and
control under conventional due process or equal protection standards . .
unconditional personal right." Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618, 642-643 (1969); see also
Aptheker v. Secretary of State, 378 U.S. 500, 505 (1964); Kent v. Dulles, 357 U.S. 116, 126
(1958)"
Vote, damn it. If you haven't before, call your local Secretary of State's office and ask what the rules are. You might be registered automatically in some places. You might be able to cast a provisional ballot if not. Check http://www.canivote.org/ if you prefer, but in the name of everyone who has crawled through mud, spent years with combat flashbacks and nightmares, or *died* to preserve basic rights, drive to your polling place. It won't solve the problems but it's an indispensable first step.
It written by a bunch of conspiracy nuts. They think the Federal Reserve 'banking cartel' runs the planet.
...just another step closer to a dictatorship. This is the real victory of the terrorists.
And I will have a pickup truck... maybe even a "recreational vehicle." And drive from state to state. Do they let you do that?
One day that will not be allowed, no.
It's hard to believe an entirely slanted opinion piece on some random website (sorry, I never heard of sianews and don't have any reason to trust them). The one link they give at the bottom of the page is to a PDF supposedly filed against this proposal, and it comes from some site I never heard of too. Couldn't either the submitter, editor, or the site themselves point to one lousy thing that supports that this is more than some joke on a larger scale than maybe the Onion does? I mean, I can easily believe that this could be true, but how about a document on a site that at least ends in .gov or something? The way it sits, I could have made the whole thing up - so why should I trust that someone else didn't?
BTW, if it IS true, then damn that sucks. Maybe they should also have pointed us to where we can help fight the proposal?
On the 7th, I'll be voting. And I'll be voting to attempt to wrest my government back from the extremist assholes that my fellow countrymen... the ones with less foresight... saddled us with for the last 6 years.
Believe nothing, not even if I say it, if it violates your sense of reason -- Buddha
*clapping*.. This one gets it.
Exactly
God made the Idiot for practice, and then He made the School Board -- Mark Twain Look for http://Thebar.steelbeachca
...er.
Wait a minute.
Does this mean if Robin Williams visits the former Soviet empire somebody will help him defect and we'll never have to face the possibility of there ever being any such thing as The Bicentennial Man 2?
These stories are free but worth money.
What the fuck is wrong with people who will go out and vote more power to Bush and his fucking fascist government this Tuesday? Can Bush even be president again? I thought US law only permitted 2 consecutive terms for any president, to offer some protection against evil dictators.
Visit http://ringbreak.dnd.utwente.nl/~mrjb/growingbettersoftware to download your free copy of the book
Now watch the majority of the population from apathy and the unwillingness to face complex questions and answers give in to overblown fears and surrender their liberty. Of course the people with enough money for regular leisure travel will generally have few problems getting travel papers. It might be harder for the rest off us though.
I am curious though, there are some companies making BILLIONS from this whole DHS/TSA thing. Who will make money from this expanded no fly list? Remember, much of the work you might think of as being done by the federal governemnt is currently being contracted out to companies.
All in all I am registering republican, getting a membership at the local fundamentalist megachurch and making some small donations to the cause. It is begining to look like America is a place where the correct party membership can make a difference in your privileges in society. Or am I the only one to find it odd that democrat Ted Kennedy was the only member of the house to be put on the no fly list and it took three weeks to get his name off? :)
Imagine the fun we will all have when every American has to be approved. With the current no fly list it is illegal for you to know the details about the process or why you are denied. You are not allowed to know who to talk to in case of a problem. As the article points out, you can be left in legal limbo in a prison overseas if this expanded version oges through. Better hope someone has enough contacts and money and really likes you to get you out. Your local US embassy in whatever country you are in does not have access to the current no fly list nor does it have any idea who to talk to about it. I now this because I talked to some nice people at the US Embassy in Mexico about this topic when I was considering travelling there again and I was curious.
I am hoping this never gets passed, given our current court system I am not sure they would strike it down for the unconstitutional piece of garbage it is.
In the meantime, time for me to get some caffiene, get my name off the rolls of those dangerous lefty organizations like the Sierra Club and onto the rolls of someplace that thinks The New American Century Project is a great idea.
In the upcoming election's closest races, if you are a liberal, vote liberal, but bet money on the conservatives and neo-cons winning, that way when your candidate loses at least you will have some spending money. Diebold is profiting from elections, you should to.
I'm afraid I don't take these "Friends of Liberty" folks at face value. Their assertions are backed up by a volume of evidence found in similar conspiracy theories. NONE WHATSOEVER.
Read the PDF listed at the bottom of the press release. The very first paragraph explains the source of their concerns:
The Identity Project submits these comments in response to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) published at 71 Federal Register 40035-40048 (July 14, 2006), docket number USCBP-2005-0003-0003, and the associated "Regulatory Assessment" published July 18, 2006 on the Web site at http://www.regulations.gov/ and docketed as USCBP-2005-0003-0005.
In the guise of an NPRM alleged to propose a change only in the required timing of transmission of information already required to be provided to the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the CBP has actually proposed a fundamental regulatory change with far-reaching (literally and figuratively) legal, policy, and logistical implications: The NPRM would replace a requirement for ex post facto notice to the CBP of information about who is on each vessel (ship or plane) with an unconstitutional system of prior restraint of international travel, entirely unauthorized by statute and inconsistent with the U.S. obligations embodied in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Here is the full docket in PDF format (took me a while to find it until I came across a Reddit comment that said to make sure you allow the search engine to search closed-for-comment documents...and when I did, it took the search engine a minute or more to find the document.)
Please help metamoderate.
There would be support for it. At a 1987 news conference, the 41st President had this exchange with a reporter:
Sherman: Surely you recognize the equal citizenship and patriotism of Americans who are atheists?
Bush: No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots.
During the cold war, the US stood for "freedom" as opposed to the civil liberty restrictions of the communist regime. Now, when the communist enemy doesn't exist, the US seems to be willing to adopt what it fought against not so long ago. It's so ironic ...
Freedom loving people of the world unite, and invade America to depose the current religious extremist government and to help them restore freedom and democracy to a once great nation.
New US passports have biometric information, correct?
So when a large % of US citizens have to get passports (for their own country! heh!) that means that the US has a large pool of biometric information. Smells of Negroponte.
10 December 1948.
Article 13.
(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
(2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.
The .PDF is just yet another person's assessment of this so-called proposal. It's not evidence that said proposal actually exists.
Anything short of an actual house or senate bill is just speculation.
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
It appears that President George W. Bush has made for himself a place in history.
He is creating a constitutional crisis that we will forever be able to point to as a turning point in the history of this great Nation. I happen to believe that there is still enough of the love of liberty alive in the hearts of Americans that they will turn back this would-be tinpot dictator, but not before we are brought to the very brink of existence.
I'm thinking of other moments in our history that the wonderful experiment in freedom, the fruit of The Enlightenment that is the United States of America has been in this much trouble. The first Civil War comes to mind, and the few years during which Joe McCarthy was terrorizing US citizens, but constitutional crises of this magnitude have been few and far between.
When fat loads like Rush Limbaugh and hysterics like Sean Hannity have long been forgotten, when harpies like Ann Coulter and the ugly bigotry of Michael "Weiner" Savage are long behind us, history will remember the Presidency of George W. Bush as a danger to America and a near-disaster.
But I trust the American Spirit and I believe even the stupid yokels who form their beliefs around slick TV preachers and AM talk radio will realize what's happening. Then, the authoritarian, cynical, neo-Soviet "neo-cons" who came to power early in the 21st century should be very worried.
You are welcome on my lawn.
First, another link to read this information. Read here
Second, I think this is sort-of FUD. I say sort-of because while one will require permission to fly, the selected quote from the law mentions nothing about the no-fly list. For all that we know, they could just be checking to see if a passenger is even a legal citizen or a citizen on a VISA here. If you are, then no problem. If you're not, then you get caught, which is what would happen to illegals anyway. It is possible that DHS might be searching for people on the black list, but this passage never makes it implied.
Does anyone have the statistic as to how many people were prevented from emigrating out of US (or into her) because of the "no-fly list" exclusion?
For a long time I have maintained that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) is just like the United States of America (USA), but with the intensity cranked to 11.
Although I wasn't able to read the article ("We should be back shortly."), the intro paragraph provided a reminder of the KSA practice of requiring all foreigners to obtain an exit and re-entry visa to leave and return to the country. However, not even the Saudis have such a requirement for their own citizens, so in this regard, could the USA take the lead from the Saudis?
RTFM; please, I beg you.
USA, love it of leave it! That is if you can get a permission, which you probably won't if you don't love it enough
I start wondering if something is wrong with the leaders of the USA. According to the CIA and the President of the USA there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Are they still looking to find them. If you are a suspected terrorist you can be tortured. Sorry you can be interrogated with special methods. It is forbidden to tell afterwards what these methods where. You can not enter or leave your own country without a security clearance. Strange country. Or are those two lines in the dollar sing the bars of the prison the USA is becoming.
I suppose I should expect this from the ever-ready-to do its research Slashdot, but where are the sources for this article?
If you look at this "news site's" front page, you'll see a lot of the traditional conspiracy rantings and, when you look particularly at the traditional Kennedy conspiracy nonsense so typical of sites that have completely fallen off their rocker.
This isn't a news site. There's no good sourcing (yes, I followed the URL at the end, see below). The reference stated to this document mentions no such restrictions as those found in the Slashdot summary or the article.
There are certainly privacy issues at stake, but nothing near what this ridiculous article or the Slashdot summary make it out to be.
This is just piss poor. I know Slashdot isn't a news site, so I don't expect it to research things as thoroughly as a journalist would (granted, I expect little of journalists as well).
The most pertinent part of the executive summary of the regulation proposal in question reads as follows:
The primary purpose of this proposed rule is to prevent passengers that have been
identified as high-risk on government watchlists from boarding aircraft bound for or
departing from the United States and to prevent passengers and crew so identified
from departing on vessels leaving the Unites States. On April 7, 2005, the Bureau of
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) published requirements for the transmission of
passenger and crew manifests for aircraft and vessels arriving from foreign
destinations or departing to foreign destinations (70 FR 17820). Implementation of the
"2005 APIS Rule" (named for the Advance Passenger Information System, the CBP
electronic system used to obtain electronic manifest information from carriers)
required that information on passengers and crew to be transmitted: no later than 15
minutes after departure for arriving aircraft passengers; no later than 15 minutes prior
to departure for departing aircraft passengers; at least 60 minutes prior to departure
for arriving and departing aircraft crew; at least 24 hours and as much as 96 hours
prior to a vessel's entry at a US port for arriving passengers and crew, depending on
the length of the voyage; and 15 minutes prior to departure for departing vessel
passengers and crew.
Are there privacy issues here? You betcha. And they've been discussed here at length. Do they approach what the article and its summary here state they approach? Not at all. Read the rest of the proposed regulation.
Come on, slashdot. Treat us like adults. Give us primary source materials and avoid the conspiracy mumbo-jumbo.
I will say this, though - If I'm wrong, and you find some nuance in the document I missed, please post and inform me.
and will you guys stop it? You're really starting to scare me!
This would appear to be unconstitutional, however I can't read the article and it looks like it would be good to have more specific laws to protect this right. Here's the wiki article on Freedom of Movement:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement
Here's a partial quote from the wiki article:
"In the United States, no specific law guarantees this right, but the Supreme Court of the United States has held in a number of cases that such a right necessarily exists. In Kent v. Dulles, 357 U.S. 116 (1958), the United States Secretary of State had refused to issue a passport, based on the suspicion that the plaintiff was going abroad to promote communism. Justice William O. Douglas wrote for the Court:
The right to travel is a part of the 'liberty' of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. . . . Freedom of movement across frontiers in either direction, and inside frontiers as well, was a part of our heritage. Travel abroad, like travel within the country, . . . may be as close to the heart of the individual as the choice of what he eats, or wears, or reads. Freedom of movement is basic in our scheme of values. "
I think I'm going to write my congressmen about this. If true, it's a ridiculous attempt to further curtail my rights as a U.S. Citizen.
>When are you going to realize it's not about, and never has been about, "hunting the terrorists" and "making us safe"
Exactly. This isn't a "tradeoff" between freedom and safety. This adds exactly zero security against terrorists in any of the following use cases:
Known terrorist, enough evidence for trial: should be arrested instead.
Known terrorist, not enough evidence for trial: should be put under surveillance, not tipped off by an unusual government action.
The only time blocking exit is acceptable is when someone has violated freedom of association in some way -- has gained entry under false pretenses or has acted as agent of a foreign association within your association -- in which case they are a supremacist aggressor and can be deprived of their very life. The historic acceptability of meeting out death for treason or espionage establishes such a clear standard.
The definition of "due process" is the real question here: What are acceptable inter-association definitions of "due process" to determine guilt or innocence of such espionage?
Seastead this.
Off-topic (well, sort of), but I wanted to give kudos to you for the editorial in your sig.
This poo is cold.
Interesting how the administration and friends keep coming up with these draconian measures to thwart 'terrorism', yet, our borders are still wide open. Any terrorist worth his/her salt can still move in and out of this country with ease and bring in just about anything (s)he wants.
Why dont they just build a giant plexiglass dome over the whole damn country, day pass out the airlock anyone???
>8 out of 10 people don't know and don't care what their government is doing.
So tell one other person who doesn't know, then ask one other person who does know to take a concrete action like donating to a useful organization or writing to a Congressional representative.
Anyone know where I can find this poem? It sounds like it would be perfect for a paper I'm writing.
It's a shame to build those expensive fences and towers along the Mexican and Canadian borders and only use them to keep people out. We can keep people in, too! It's a new iron curtain!
And vote for who? The democrats? It's already too late. The executive has the power to do as it wishes. They're pigs-n-shit despite their approval ratings thanks to their Diebold backing. Most of our military is overseas fighting to keep resources coming in (The executive just admitted to it the other day)... so now would be the best time for revolt. But these sheep will happily accept tyranny so long as McMansions, big, sexy automobiles, and WalMart are still available. The government knows most of us are unable to even understand this let alone put a stop to it. The fact that most don't even flinch at the slightest signs of this tyranny and the course this country is going just shows that they don't care. They deserve exactly what they get for history has warned them many times of this chain of events and yet we let it happen anyway. To think that we can counter an illegal government via the legal means (elections) said government is charged to protect is patently naive.
Let us not mention the fact that this economy is close to the breaking point with our lack of exports and accruing debt... the fact that our standing overseas is severely tarnished thanks to our aggressive imperial foreign policy... and now we have "proposed legislation" such as this? The fact that it has gone this far already only means the state could give three shits about our vote. The electoral process only exists today to placate us and convince us we are still "free". Have you all heard of the Civilian Inmate Labor program? The PATRIOT Act? The Domestic Wiretapping Program? The North American Union? The Military Commissions Act of 2006? The Defense Authorization act of 2007? Every freedom we have has already been eroded and these thugs only wish to go on decimating these fundamental liberties right in front of us. Have the democrats offered to repeal all of this legislation if they are elected? No. Have they offered to restore our liberties to exactly what was laid out in the Constitution? No. Hell, some of them even supported this usurping of liberty! It's the same bag of shit with a slightly different odor. Even the Nazi government was split into a few political parties... but they were still Nazi's none the less.
But I digress... This is just crazy talk! America is the greatest country in the world! We have freedom for which "Islamo-Fascist" terrorists hate us! Oh, and the American Dream! Yeah, we've got that, too! I'd better go back to sleep before the sheep think I hate America. They might start bleating at me!
"First they came for the Communists but I was not a Communist so I did not speak out;
Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists but I was not one of them, so I did not speak out;
Then they came for the Jews but I was not Jewish so I did not speak out.
And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me."
Martin Niemoller, 1892-1984
sarcasm:
-noun
1. harsh or bitter derision or irony.
Is anyone else reminded by the quote from a certain movie last year... Such as 'Remember remember the 5th of November"?
Haha, American Democracy, LOL, what a joke the USA is becoming!
Not only is your goverment annoying the entire world, there now annoying there own as well!, Shame they are so good at rigging elections!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came...
An unnamed DHS proposal will do this unspeakable thing? Right...
It's sad how many people are just sucking this up as if it's true, despite the source, and despite the utter lack of any evidence, or even references that could be verified.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Ten years ago when I lived in Japan they had something like this. Whenever people left the country there was a place like immigration (emigration?) where you filled out a form about where you were going, then they checked your passport and let you through. I think they stopped doing that recently, but it was relatively painless.
That outlines what bill bits might be or have found to been unconstitutional and where each of the 'elected reps' voted on that position?
If they can't be trusted to support bills that are constitutional, why vote for 'em?
Drive into Canada, then fly.
"linux is just DOS with a UNIX like syntax" -- Galactic Dominator (944134)
instead of spending money on, say, education, health, securing nuclear / chemical / biological / harbor facilities, we have an already over-funded bureaucracy proposing to make itself even larger. while i appreciate the obvious historical parallels, i really don't credit these fools with the kinds of reactionary paranoia that lead to travel policies in former eastern block countries, south africa (where documents were needed for travel within the country, unless you were fortunate enough to be white), etc. the reasons for this policy are far more base: all the dhs wants (like the rest of bush's gov't) is more raw power, plus the associated budget.
And from the executive summary:
In other words, people on terrorist watch lists should be prevented from entering or leaving the U.S. via commercial airlines until their threat status can be evaluated and corrected if necessary. That's a DAMN FAR CRY from requiring EVERY U.S. CITIZEN to ask DHS for permission to leave the country.
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
>any such proposal would have to pass both the House and the Senate, and somehow I just can't see that happening.
The agency that sets the regulations already has statutory power to make regulations. This is them saying "We're about to make a change in our administrative policies". Look up "administrative law" for more background.
Oh, and look at what the House and Senate have been passing lately.
Hello I am a Nigerian Bank Official, I will marry you allowing you a legit excuse to leave your country of the USA, and you will receive 20% of $10,000,000 upon our signing of our marriage certificate because it was left to me by my dear uncle Papa Ubuntu who was killed in a plane crash. His concern for my welfare and well being required however that I would not be allowed to touch such funds until such time that I was married to someone outside of my country. If you are interested please contact me at UbuntuJr@419eater.com
>Now, this rule makes it that your passport is checked leaving and entering. It's a small but important difference.
It's not your passport that would be checked under this rule. Valid passport, no valid passport, or diplomatic credentials from the Flying Spaghetti Monster, the airline or cruise ship won't be allowed to carry you unless the government gives a thumbs up.
There's a movie clip of people demonstrating in East Germany, this must have been sometime around 1989. They were shouting: "Wir wollen raus! Wir wollen raus!" - We want to get out!
Watching this sequence touched me deeply, because this was a moment where the people not longer were afraid of their government.
A world where people are afraid leads to, or is the cause of, a suppressive government.
this is an old anti-nazi propaganda film from the 40's. i think it's ironic how it was produced by the war department of our government. 65 years later things have really changed.
sarcasm:
-noun
1. harsh or bitter derision or irony.
Disclaimer -- I'm obviously not from the USA, nor am I living in the USA.
Doesn't this remind any of you of the old USSR, a place from which it was hard to leave -- unless you were a trusted aparachik? Doesn't this remind you of Yakov Smirnoff's old joke about the USSR, a play on this old TV ad, something that went along the lines of "You american say 'don't leave home without it', our government says 'don't leave home'"?
Isn't there an american that just can see the gradual build up here? At first it starts with "anything to keep us safe", and then a few years later you're being told that you have to get "clearance" to leave???
I know I will get Goodwin thrown at me, but Nazi Germany wasn't built overnight. Germany was a democracy that happened to elect people that made all the right promises... Little did they know what they were in for.
And the same is happening in the USA. How long before more laws are signed by Dubya that will essentially make dissent punishable?
Sell not virtue to purchase wealth, nor Liberty to purchase power.
- Benjamin Franklin
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety
- (Attributed to Benjamin Franklin, though may have been written by Richard Jackson, a diplomat at the time)
By giving up liberty, we may be safer from terrorists, but we are less safe from our government, causing us to have neither Liberty nor Safety.
All misspellings and grammatical errors in the above post are intentional and part of my artistic expression.
For those who are interested in what is really going on here is the original Document : USCBP-2005-0003-0003 Passenger Manifests for Commercial Aircraft Arriving in and Departing From the United States; Passenger and Crew Manifests for Commercial Vessels Departing From the United States
I suppose it's worth to read the document to really understand what it is all about.
P.S. CBR already have the right to divert any airplane going to the USA if they believe that there are dangerous people onboard.
There was a link to a federal website. There was a docket number. There is a search engine at said federal website.
The results of that search (should you choose to search all documents, not just those open for comment) will result in a link to said document. The search results do not seem to be good links themselves, so I'm afraid you will have to do a little bit of work yourself; however, anyone with a modicum of intelligence should be able to figure it out.
Good luck, Sir.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cg i?position=all&page=40035&dbname=2006_register
(on the next page, but that page starts the section)
"Sections
4012 and 4071 of the IRTPA require
DHS to issue regulations and procedures
to allow for pre-departure vetting of
passengers onboard aircraft arriving in
and departing from the United States
and of passengers and crew onboard
vessels arriving in and departing from
the United States. This proposed rule is
designed to implement these important
IRTPA requirements and to further
enhance national security and the
security of the air and vessel travel
industries in accordance with the ATSA
and EBSA (both of which formed the
statutory basis for the APIS regulations)."
"You will do foolish things, but do them with enthusiasm." - S. G. Colette
"So, historically speaking at least, the right to travel is kind of a limited right"
... it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all."
The US Supreme Court disagrees.
In U.S. v Guest, 383 U.S. 745 (1966), the Court noted, "It is a right that has been firmly established and repeatedly recognized." In fact, in Shapiro v Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969), Justice Stewart noted in a concurring opinion that "it is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association,
It has been firmly established as a nearly incontrovertible right for a very long time. Your attempt to argue otherwise is simply wrong.
In case anybody has already forgotten... a few weeks ago, King Bush just signed an order to spend 1.2 Billion to build a 700 mile wall between US and Mexico. That's 25 times as large as the Berlin Wall. Are they going to shoot US citizens that try to leave, now?
- I don't want my comp to be taken untill somone desides I can havit back.
- I don't want to sponsor a warmongoring government
- Getting a visa is a major PITA compaired to other countries.
While researchin I've found out some really funny(not) facts about US Citizens "freedoms". Did you know that it's a crime for an US citizen to smoke a cuban cigarr? _Anywhere_ in the world? You are an American, you are in Thailand a german _gives_ you a cuban cigarr and you smoke it. You are commiting a crime. Wow....Tbone is exactly correct. What has happened to this once great and free country? How have we allowed the Enemy Within when we have been forewarned for decades? The path we have allowed Emperor Bush and others who support his madness to take us scares me to death. A once free and powerful country for all who reside within its borders...being methodically reduced to an Orwellian like society. No one should now claim innocent ignorance to what has been allowed. We've seen the proof in the pudding; books, fiction, movies and debates for decades warned of the impending and coming darkness that is surveillance, deterioration of rights and the fundamental basis of freedom. Trade freedom for increased security...I don't think so. I choose to defend myself should invasion take place. I choose to defend my family and unfettered freedom with my own hands should the need arise. Alas dear friends we have begun to see the tides of change lap upon the shores of America in the form of the Enemies within who wrap themselves in the American Flag while speaking and acting in a most unAmerican way. God help us all for it is no longer "Morning in America" but "Midnight in the Garden of Evil."
"In the land of the free^h^h^h^hnot-so-free and the home of the brave^h^h^h^h^hparanoid.
What the fuck?
You obviously don't understand what has happened to our government. Do you think the reason the TSA still allows matches on planes is because the congresspeople are sitting around on their fat asses and haven't gotten around to passing a law to ban matches on planes since Richard Reid tried to set his shoes on fire? No, it's because Congress has abdicated its responsibility to set the law of the land by relegating it to bureaucracies like the FCC, FAA, TSA, and so on. Congress does not pass laws dictating what frequency your 802.11b access point uses, instead they created the FCC and gave them the power to establish "rules" with the force of law but without any of the review that laws are required to have. You do not elect the members of these committees, so the TSA can sit around on their fat asses and ignore the fact that there is no reason whatsoever to allow matches on planes other than to set things on fire while drawing their paychecks from your tax money. After all, what are you going to do about it, vote against them?
In this case, the FULL DOCKET IN PDF FORMAT (which you didn't read since this is straight from the government, not "yet another person's assessment of this so-called proposal") the grandparent linked to shows how the is using the power granted to it by Congress to create a rule that could cost "from $612 million to $1.9 billion" over 10 years, but is apparently a really good deal because one "incident" could have costs that "exceed $790 million", even though "this rule may not prevent such an incident."
Personally, having read through it myself now, I'm not seeing where this constitutes requiring a "security clearance" any more than the (highly inaccurate and controversial) no-fly list does, except checked an hour in advance instead of at check-in time. The rule states that it affects both domestic and international flights, making discussions about how we currently use passports internationally and find that "okay" a red herring.
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
Here is the actual quote;
"In Germany they first came for the Communists and I didn't speak up because
I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up
because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't
speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant."
"Then they came for me --- and by that time no one was left to speak up."
German Pastor Martin Niemoller
If you don't support this country and this president, then why don't you just leave!
Oh, wait...
Or are you too lazy to post it?
What about those who aren't citizens but are legal US residents? I hold permanent resident status here in the US (my wife is a citizen). That basicalluy means I have a US green card and a british passport. I have most of the rights here that citizens do with the exception that I can't vote (not in Utah anyway) and I can't get any high end security clearance. So where does this leave me and my family? Say one of my family back in the UK gets seriously ill sick. Do I now have to go through more hoops to go and see them?
Be gone from my sight or prepare to feel my flaming wraith!
Please go here. Click the radio button for "all documents." The search for this document ID:
USCBP-2005-0003-0005
Happy hunting.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
Requiring any sort of "approval" for leaving a country (your own or any other) is a blatant violation of the human rights. Article 13 (2) says:
Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.
That is pretty straigthforward, don't you think ? Notice how it specifically does *not* say that everyone has the right to enter any country, other than the one you're from. In other words, if you're a US citizen you're guaranteed the rigth to leave any country you wish, including USA, but guaranteed only the right to *enter* the USA.
11-Nov-2001
You don't get to comment about this subject again. Ever.
Why are so many posts with factual errors modded up?
So when does the rest of the world invade America to spread democracy?
The government may put *anyone* on this list, you or me or your mother or Cat Stevens or anyone with a strange name. They don't have to tell you why, nor do they provide a method of petitioning to have your name removed from this list.
The DHS already has the ability and responsibility to screen people before boarding. That is why, during check-in, I am unable to use the electronic kiosks. Somebody with my name (perhaps me) is on a watch list. So, this requirement both delays takeoff of the flight, and effectively gives the government final say over who flies and who does not.
The regulation provides unfettered governmental control of ingress and egress via commercial carriers. The stated goal is to catch terrorists; however, there is nothing in the wording to restrict use and abuse, nor any method of US (or other) citizens to seek relief.
You seem to trust our government. That's great. But what will happen when President Hillary Clinton and Vice President John Kerry have this kind of unfettered control of your life? Remember, the power we give this President is the power the next President inherits.
At this rate, I don't believe Americans are going to vote for a Republican president for a long, long time.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
You're already under surveillance, and the degree of surveillance is increasing. What? You're not a known terrorist? Guess what: the old, cynical cop statement, "Everyone is guilty of something," is turning into "Everyone is a potential terrorist" in the government's perspective.
Find environmentally and socially responsible products on http://buy-right.net
already !
"far left" says that, "far left" fears that.
This has long gone out of something that is "far left" annoyance. This is now a MAJOR problem, bush & co is.
What do you need to realize that they are turning u.s. to a ransomed kingdom ? Declaration of Lifetime Presidency ?
Read radical news here
...the Soviet Union and the eastern block. Next step will be when they tell you that you don't need to have your passport at home... and last step is when they tell you that you don't need to vote.
--
This has been screened by the NSA.
The Maginot line was a military line created by the French before WWI, designed to stop an invasion from Germany. And as a note to all the people making fun of France it worked in WWI, even though it failed in WWII when Germany was better prepared and had vastly improved panzers. Unless I've missed something fundamental, the fence the US is building is a simple fence designed for border cpntrol and not designed to withstand an invasion by the Mexican military.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Xenophobia is a significant problem of any place where humans(or animals) live. It's basically an instinct.
Hehehehehehehehe!
Welcome to the Soviet Union, gentlemen. Sans universal health care and free education of course.
I wonder when they start sending ideological deviants to mental institutions. Should be real soon now.
Actually, the document linked by the other guy isn't the whole story. Unfortunately, the gov site seems to make heavy use of sessions so I can't link to the results page, but go to http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/ma in and search for "All Documents", "Department of Homeland Security - All", "Any Word" and search for Keyword: "USCBP-2005-0003"
e r?objectId=090000648019da96&disposition=attachment &contentType=pdf
Then, click on the Docket ID of USCBP-2005-0003 to switch to the Docket View, you can see the original proposal is
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentView
The original proposal uses the "clearance" language that seems to have started this.
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
Please do not insult the Neandertals by comparing them with the Bush administration!
Its great to know that there still are intelligente people in slashdot that ACTUALLY READ the articles COMPLETELY and not falling into the jedi-mind tricks of the conspiracy monkey-brains that control these topics. It's sad to see that slashdot has been slowly falling inot the hands of a group of people that love to give opinions without even reading the whole articles; but its refreshing that some still take the time to read the whole thing and give INTELLIGENTE POSTS.
Just because I hate how you run your idiot mouth, lie and generally act like a stooge for attention. I hope you like how that tastes.
Yes Doc, YOU are the reason I will be voting Republican, because having a bit of fun with some toolbag on the internet IS more important than the direction of my country.
Excuse me while go back to my college football and beer.
But I'll still be voting Republican.
And what makes you think that if we take the House and the Senate and eventually the Presidency back in 2 years that they'll reverse or change any of this? Why would they want to give up that kind of power? They might alter it a bit to tone it down a little, but I'm willing to bet that things like these will remain as laws in some form of another even after we get rid of the damn neocons....because eventually they'll be back, ready to pick up where they left off.
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
It's not so much a non-story, I think, as one story among many illustrating the expansionist tendencies of the government. They are redefining current policy, and like a sketch of Hell, even the tiniest of lines indicate something completely evil.
Does that mean we should ignore this? Should we stop resisting every little step towards totalitarianism?
If we had a true plan for reforming our morally-corrupt government, I would follow it. If there was something else we could do, I would do it. But for the moment, the only real solution is education and the ballot box. The first is effective; the second less-so, because those vetted for the ballot seem to be clones of those already in office.
Great. Now I'm just depressing myself.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
Sorry if you misunderstood. I wasn't correcting you, I was drawing attention to the fact that you were sharing an opinion about an event that is KNOWN by it's date, yet you got it wrong.
Why do you think anyone would listen to what you have to say if you can't even get the date right, when the event itself is known by nothing more than the date? What level of ignorance does an oversight like that require?
A level that I suggested disqualifies you from sharing your opinion. I agree with my previous assessment.
Why are so many posts with factual errors modded up?
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
-a motto on the title page of An Historical Review of the Constitution and Government of Pennsylvania. (1759)
"Land of the Free, Home of the Brave"
OK, Zimbabwe I understand, Mugabe has completely lost his nut and driving the society toward suspicion and fragmenting, but South Africa? I had heard good things about it, though I haven't been myself. What isn't making the headlines here? (besides the obvious). Thanks
I have nothing to hide. So, why are you spying on me?
Ah. So I see you trust our government will follow the regulation in its stated purpose, rather than the regulation as written.
The regulation *as written* will allow the government to place anyone at all the watch list. You. Me. Anyone they want. The great thing: they don't have to tell us we are on the list, nor explain why we are on the list once we are taken from the plane or boat, nor give us any means of appealing our inclusion on the list.
The wonderful thing about this is, instead of following current screening procedures during check-in, they can wait until the plane is about to take off, come haul us away, and we have no chance of rectifying the issue.
As it is, it takes me about 20 minutes more to check in than others, as my name is on a watch list. Imagine if they come take me off the plane just as it is about to take off. I have no chance of clearing up the issue as I do now.
There was once a requirement for "due process" in the Land of the Free. This is one more regulation (not even a law!) that subverts due process and gains us nothing.
When interpreting the intention of a regulation, you must look at the restrictions in the regulation. For this one, in spite of the stated purpose, there is no restriction on its use or abuse, and no method to redress abuses. Even if the people who drafted the regulation did not mean for it to be abused, it is completely open to abuse, and so it shall be.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
Just for kicks, I decided to look at the proposed rule change as published in the National Register. It is about changing the time that airlines, cruise ship operators, and the like send passenger manifests to the US government (for flights entering or leaving the USA). For example, rather than airplane passenger manifests being sent within 15 minutes of wheels being retracted after takeoff, the rule change says at least 15 or 60 minutes before boarding. It does not mention new requirements for collecting passports or other identification.
So what's the big deal? I understand that Slashdot editors are too busy and/or lazy to fact-check the stories they post, but let bygones by bygones, and let us talk about the actual rule change rather than some interpretation spun up by politically motivated hacks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_travel
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/U
Gotta love that. 20 minutes of preaching about freedom and liberty, and then the punchline:
"This film will not be shown to the general public without permission of the War Department"
== Jez ==
Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
Do you have any idea how stupid you sound with your explanation of why Bush is "an" anti-christ.
By it's very definition, the is only ONE anti-christ. Watching you flail about in a transparent attempt to contrive an exception so you could slam Bush was fun though.
"An" anti-christ. I love how you make up new definitions just so you can insult people.
Just so I'm clear, how many Jesus Christ's were there? Right, so now that you see why what you said is ridiculous, proceed to twist reality and logic in a pathetic attempt to discredit me and save face in th eonly place where you get any meaningful social interaction, a web board.
I've watched you for some time, and If I weren't sure you were going to do it anyway because you're obviously mentally ill, I'd suggest suicide. You'd be making a lot of people very happy, and saving us mile of bullshit to wade through.
But JUST IN CASE you're too proud to examine the flaws in your argument, I'll help you out.
If one has some degree of "antichristianity" that makes them antichristian, NOT the anti-christ. Your logical jump here is completely baseless. And that's why you're wrong, but won;t EVER admit it.
Okay, we have a two-party system in this country. It can be accepted as a given that the chances of a libertarian being elected to national office are very slim. That being the case, the libertarian candidate will likely siphon votes from the challenger, thus handing the race to the incumbent. This is true of any third party. Don't believe me? Ralph Nader got something like 15,000 votes in Florida. Had those people instead voted for Gore, Bush never would have been elected and we wouldn't be in the mess we're in.
Wasn't there a discussion about a draft to military service not too long ago?
You may or may not be a troll, but you are definitely a dumbass.
The primary purpose of this proposed rule is to prevent passengers that have been
identified as high-risk on government watchlists from boarding aircraft bound for or
departing from the United States
I think the problem is that getting onto one of these "watchlists" is not particularly hard. Who decides who gets on the list? If you are on such a list, would you know it? Would you have any opportunity to challenge your presence on the list? How hard would it be to declare someone on such a list to be an "unlawful enemy combatant," and thus make them eligible for torture, a military court trial, etc.?
I am not sure how we are going to repeal all of these laws once the current administration is out of power. It's going to be nearly impossible.
Spoon not. Fork, or fork not. There is no spoon.
Sorry if you misunderstood. I wasn't correcting you, I was drawing attention to the fact that you were sharing an opinion about an event that is KNOWN by it's date, yet you got it wrong.
Oh, I kind of skimmed over this. I didn't misunderstand you. I grew up with an ignorant asshole for a brother.
You misunderstood me: my post wasn't about 9/11. It was about G. W. Bush and his cabinet rushing us into a war against a country that had nothing to do with 9/11. It was about how G. W. Bush had a responsibility as President to make sure his evidence was solid. It was about how the evidence wasn't solid, and he chose to ignore that.
Just like you choose to ignore the point of my post. That's all well-and-good. This is ostensibly a free country, after all.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
People have been voting republicrat for decades. It hasn't worked yet. Why would I want to throw my vote away by voting for republicrats again?
paintball
As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air however slight lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness.
---
William O. Douglas, Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court
I fought the corporate America, and the corporate America bought the law.
War department educational film Don't be a sucker
I suppose it is time to show these videos to the kids, before it's too late.
You forgot that for many slashdotters, its irrelevant - they still need permission to leave their parents' basement or install any browser but internet exploder.
From the document:
Pretty clear, isn't it?
What if I want to get on a boat or plane and leave ameriKa forever?
I just want to sell everything and flip off the entire country as I board for a one way trip to anywhere but here.
Welcome to the USSA...
There are two different types of control. When controlling an airplane, for example, you can fly by using signals provided by sight and ATC, or you can control an airplane by putting it in a hangar, posting guards and putting fences around it. I can use as much of the former type of control as I can get, and want as little to do with the latter as I can have. Unfortunately this proposal seems to be of the latter form of control.
I'm suspicious about this truthfulness of this article. We have what looks like a homebrew news web site. No sources or references are provided so that one can verify the claims, except for a questionable PDF file hosted on a personal web site. How about some more facts that we can independently verify?
Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
Roger Murdock: We have clearance, Clarence.
Captain Oveur: Roger, Roger. What's our vector, Victor?
Tower voice: Tower's radio clearance, over!
Captain Oveur: That's Clarence Oveur. Over.
Tower voice: Over.
Captain Oveur: Roger.
Roger Murdock: Huh?
Tower voice: Roger, over!
Roger Murdock: What?
Captain Oveur: Huh?
Victor Basta: Who?
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
full freedoms. The only way to have both is to get the bad guys. Problem is the bad guys are mixed in with a large population of people with different degrees of threat. It seems the US has chosen to give up some freedoms, kill some of the bad guys, and live with some risk. A balanced approach. So depending on the value of freedom, security, and preventing collateral death you set the balance point.
All the two major parties do is divvy up how you are going to get screwed. That's it, that is all they do, trade off with each other how to put the squeeze on people and further work on establishing their "vendor lockin". They now own government,lock stock and barrel, yet I see no place where it says two political parties can own government, in fact, back at the founding of the nation there was a lot of talk against political parties in general, because they said it would lead to crap like we have now, and it did (along with warnings about private banks taking over the economy, but that's another discussion)
I guess there are a lot of younger slashdotters here, so let me tell them a story to put this into exact perspective. Not too long ago we had a huge war, based on mostly lies, that insider corporations profitted from immensely, that resulted in thousands of deaths, civil and military, in the US and over in mostly-different color land, with allegations of torture,massacre, genocide, plenty to go around, and the presidency (with that goof from Texas no less) and both houses were big D party. We had a lot of police state-styled action, secret data bases on "dissenters", police infiltration into peace groups, arrests on bogus charges, beatings, etc-all of it,all of the above, up to whatever level of technology was available at the time to the establishment.
There's no difference. Vote the crooks and liars out. Don't wait. don't think "this time" it will be better, that's Charlie Brown falling for the Lucy holding the football trick. I have had people telling me to only vote D or R for decades-they are wrong, nothing really changes.
The only wasted vote is one not cast.
SA is going down the tubes fast, following the *exact* same model that happened in zimbabwe. The crime there is unreal, simply amazing,a ton of it is heinously racist and barbaric, and now they have started taking over the productive farms and giving them to party hacks..and so on. Think SA in ten years what zimbabwe is now, something like that. They have more natural resources so they might last a little longer, but not much more than that.
The following list of people voted to suspend the writ of Habeas Corpus and must NOT be allowed to violate their oath again.
Don Young (R-AK)
Robert Aderholt (R-AL) Spencer Bachus (R-AL) Jo Bonner (R-AL) Robert Cramer (D-AL) Artur Davis (D-AL) Terry Everett (R-AL) Michael Rogers (R-AL)
John Boozman (R-AR) Mike Ross (D-AR)
Jeff Flake (R-AZ) Trent Franks (R-AZ) J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ) Jim Kolbe (R-AZ) Rick Renzi (R-AZ) John Shadegg (R-AZ)
Brian Bilbray (R-CA) Mary Bono (R-CA) Ken Calvert (R-CA) John Campbell (R-CA) John Doolittle (R-CA) David Dreier (R-CA) Elton Gallegly (R-CA) Wally Herger (R-CA) Duncan Hunter (R-CA) Darrell Issa (R-CA) Jerry Lewis (R-CA) Dan Lungren (R-CA) Howard McKeon (R-CA) Gary Miller (R-CA) Devin Nunes (R-CA) Richard Pombo (R-CA) Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) Ed Royce (R-CA) William Thomas (R-CA)
Bob Beauprez (R-CO) Joel Hefley (R-CO) Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO) John Salazar (D-CO) Thomas Tancredo (R-CO)
Nancy Johnson (R-CT) Christopher Shays (R-CT) Robert Simmons (R-CT)
Michael Bilirakis (R-FL) F. Allen Boyd (D-FL) Ginny Brown-Waite (R-FL) Ander Crenshaw (R-FL) Lincoln Diaz-Balart (R-FL) Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL) Tom Feeney (R-FL) Mark Foley (R-FL) Katherine Harris (R-FL) Connie Mack (R-FL) John Mica (R-FL) Jeff Miller (R-FL) Adam Putnam (R-FL) Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) E. Clay Shaw (R-FL) Cliff Stearns (R-FL) Dave Weldon (R-FL) C.W. Bill Young (R-FL)
John Barrow (D-GA) Sanford Bishop (D-GA) Nathan Deal (R-GA) Phil Gingrey (R-GA) Jack Kingston (R-GA) John Linder (R-GA) Jim Marshall (D-GA) Charles Norwood (R-GA) Tom Price (R-GA) David Scott (D-GA) Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA)
Leonard Boswell (D-IA) Steve King (R-IA) Tom Latham (R-IA) Jim Nussle (R-IA)
C.L. Otter (R-ID) Mike Simpson (R-ID)
Melissa Bean (D-IL) Judy Biggert (R-IL) J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL) Henry Hyde (R-IL) Timothy Johnson (R-IL) Mark Kirk (R-IL) Ray LaHood (R-IL) Donald Manzullo (R-IL) John Shimkus (R-IL) Jerry Weller (R-IL)
Dan Burton (R-IN) Steve Buyer (R-IN) Chris Chocola (R-IN) John Hostettler (R-IN) Mike Pence (R-IN) Mike Sodrel (R-IN) Mark Souder (R-IN)
Dennis Moore (D-KS) Jim Ryun (R-KS) Todd Tiahrt (R-KS)
Ben Chandler (D-KY) Geoff Davis (R-KY) Ron Lewis (R-KY) Anne Northup (R-KY) Harold Rogers (R-KY) Edward Whitfield (R-KY)
Rodney Alexander (R-LA) Richard Baker (R-LA) Charles Boustany (R-LA) Bobby Jindal (R-LA) Jim McCrery (R-LA) Charlie Melancon (D-LA)
Michael Michaud (D-ME)
Dave Camp (R-MI) Vernon Ehlers (R-MI) Peter Hoekstra (R-MI) Joseph Knollenberg (R-MI) Thaddeus McCotter (R-MI)
Candice Miller (R-MI) Michael Rogers (R-MI) Joe Schwarz (R-MI) Fred Upton (R-MI)
Gil Gutknecht (R-MN) Mark Kennedy (R-MN) John Kline (R-MN) Collin Peterson (D-MN) Jim Ramstad (R-MN)
Todd Akin (R-MO) Roy Blunt (R-MO) Jo Ann Emerson (R-MO) Sam Graves (R-MO) Kenny Hulshof (R-MO)
Charles Pickering (R-MS) Gene Taylor (D-MS) Roger Wicker (R-MS)
Dennis Rehberg (R-MT)
Howard Coble (R-NC) Bob Etheridge (D-NC) Virginia Foxx (R-NC) Robin Hayes (R-NC) Patrick McHenry (R-NC) Mike McIntyre (D-NC) Sue Myrick (R-NC) Charles Taylor (R-NC)
Earl Pomeroy (D-ND)
Jeff Fortenberry (R-NE) Tom Osborne (R-NE) Lee Terry (R-NE)
Charles Bass (R-NH) Jeb Bradley (R-NH)
Robert Andrews (D-NJ) Michael Ferguson (R-NJ) Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-NJ) Scott Garrett (R-NJ) Frank LoBiondo (R-NJ) Jim Saxton (R-NJ) Christopher Smith (R-NJ)
Steve Pearce (R-NM) Heather Wilson (R-NM)
James Gibbons (R-NV) Jon Porter (R-NV)
Sherwood Boehlert (R-NY) Vito Fossella (R-NY) Brian Higgins (D-NY) Sue Kelly (R-NY) Peter King (R-NY) Randy Kuhl (R-NY) John McHugh (R-NY) Thomas Reynolds (R-NY) John Sweeney (R-NY) James Walsh (R-NY)
John Boehner (R-OH) Sherrod Brown (D-OH) Steve Chabot (R-OH) Paul Gillmor (R-OH) David Hobson (R-OH) Michael Oxley (R-OH) Deborah Pryce (R-OH) Ralph Regula (R-OH) Jean Schmidt (R-OH) Patrick Tiberi (R-OH) Michael Turner (R-OH)
Dan Boren (D-OK) Tom Cole (R-OK) Ernest Istook (R-O
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
...between communism and capitalism again? I mean, besides the one in my sig?
Surveillance and distrust of your citizens? Done.
Making a farce out of voting? Done.
Detaining "uncooperative" people without trial or attorney? Done.
Putting the press under surveillance and making sure they don't publish "unwanted" stories? Done.
So what's the difference? Is capitalism just communism with more hamburgers and better TV program?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I think he means that everyone should have the opportunity to try to rise to the level that matches their ability. Isn't that the american dream?
The subject says it all....
I've been wondering for a while when the international finance markets will get the idea that you will not get the money back you lent to the USA. Not if, but when. Because the USA simply don't have the necessary amount of dollars, except maybe if they go wild printing them ;-)
In which case, the lenders will get their money but it will be seriously devalued through inflation.
Either way, US bonds will be considered worthless. Good luck then trying to buy any more oil with dollars.
And BTW, the countries of European Union (where I live) don't have the most healthy fiscal policy either. Under Clinton, the USA looked better than the EU in this regard. But with the crazy spending of the Bush administration, the USA are back in leading the way to the big crash.
C - the footgun of programming languages
I understand that Bush was reluctant to sign that law, but doesn't he have at least veto power?
. html
Here in Uruguay, if a law is vetoed, the General Assembly (that would be the Congress-equivalent) has to enact it by a 3/5ths majority. The governing party usually has close to half the seats anyway (and, unlike the US, legislative elections are held the same day as presidential ones), so a law the president dislikes is unlikely to be passed.
http://www.senat.fr/senatsdumonde/english/uruguay
According to Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veto the US has Veto too... doesn't Bush command at least 1/3rd of the Congress?
I never expected Bush's inmigration policy to be labeled enlightened, but after some reading, I have to concur that it is indeed much better than the alternatives proposed by Congress.
There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
Exactly. Does the fetus / baby / whatever-you-want-to-call-it have Rights in and of itself and not related to the mother's?
The problem with that approach is that it completely invalidates any question of abortion.
If the fetus (etc) does have Rights, then the circumstances of its conception do not matter. Abortion would be illegal even in cases of incest and rape. But the moralists cannot stomach the scenario of their lily white virgin daughters having to bear some crack addicted minority male's baby.
If the fetus (etc) does not have Rights, then abortion would be legal up to the moment before birth (or suitable medical procedure to remove it from the mother without injuring it). And those moralists cannot stomach that scenario.
So both sides retreat to "choice" and the woman's "actions" prior to conception. It's the old whore/madonna dichotomy. And because the decision point is no longer the fetus (etc), the fetus (etc) is no longer the deciding factor. It's pure emotion based upon the reprehensible actions or untainted innocence of the woman.
I work for a company that makes airline reservation systems and most of the comments here are off base.
This is how the system works today: anyone departing from the US to another country on a commercial flight has to submit identity documents to the airline. Identity documents usually means a passport of some sort. The airline has to transmit the data to the federal government electronically before departure. This data includes name, date of birth, passport number, passport country of origin, etc.
The government can respond to these messages by telling the airline that a particular individual is not allowed to fly. Yes, that's right, the government gets info on all outogoing passengers and can remotely veto their departure. Today. Now.
Whether this system is a good idea or a bad idea, I'd rather not say, but I will say this is the system that has been in place for several years. I will also say that several other countries have the exact same requirements.
Now, for a solution that makes noone happy, but might actually work. Let the anti-abortionites sign up for an "I'm willing to adopt list". If a woman goes for an abortion, and there's a name on that list, then she carriest he baby to term and the name on the list gets the kid and is taken off. If there isn't a name on that list, then, well, the public obviously doesn't care enough, and the abortion is allowed to happen.
Er, no. While I'm all for making the pro-lifers put their 'money where their mouth is,' that solution completely ignores the fundamental reason why many people are pro-choice (myself included): a child should never, ever be a punishment. Pregnancy should never be a punishment.
The responsibility of raising a child, even just being pregnant with one and carrying it to term, is far too great to be foisted off on someone who doesn't want it. If someone doesn't want to be pregnant, they shouldn't be; end of discussion. Nobody can make that decision other than them, and they should never be forced or coerced into it.
I am sickened by the attitude of many "pro-life" supporters, particularly in the Christian Right, who seem to relish the thought of punishing women who have a momentary indiscretion, with a lifetime of caring for a child they don't want. Wrapped up in their jealous veils of moral superiority, they castigate pro-lifers for not respecting the dignity and sanctity of life, but have no problem using that same life as a weapon, a fitting albatross to hang around the necks of the sinful, the fornicatory, sinfully irresponsible.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
The exact original quote (note a poem) is lost, but here's a page with a very thorough review of the various known versions: Martin Niemöller's famous quotation: "First they came for the Communists".
It doesn't smell as bad as your mother.
"While this certainly is concerning, it isn't exactly new, as a passport is already required for circumstances covered under the proposal."
This is EXACTLY the type of mentality that takes the US further down the surveillance slide. our complacency allows the next draconian policy will be met with the same cavalier attitude.
"The passport already does something like that... the human check-out proposal doesn't sound too bad..." will eventually turn into "The human check-out system already does something like... the new proposal doesn't sound too bad..."
Where does it END?
The terrorists *have* already won.
:= Bush and pals.
terrorists
Theory is often inaccurate(TM)
If the U.S. institutes another draft, I might just not come back.
Not sure whether to put the smiley up there or not. It's been hard enough keeping my income low enough to basically avoid funding this war (still have to pay payroll taxes, but allegedly that money goes to the SSDI fund). If the government went all out and tried to force people to participate in the war, I'd have some really tough decisions to make.
I don't know that, if non-Republicans ake over the House and Senate, and the Whitehouse in 2 years, that all of this will be undone.
I'm almost positive, though, that if the current crop of "Republicans" (quotes intended, as many of our parent's Republican friends will tell you that these people are not Republicans) stays in office, this type of "If you're not with us, you're for the terrorists" mentality will only get worse.
This space for rent. Call 1-800-STEAK4U
Looks like good ol' US of A is slowly turning into something like USSR, except capitalist. Or maybe into China. Pretty soon the laws will be passed to freakin' execute dissenters on the spot for just disagreeing.
How can these laws pass at all? So, is it a matter of time before they pass a law against some religion, and invade alternative of Poland?
Dear Mr. Slidersy,
I understand your question so that there are people in Canada who wish that we mobilize the building workers of the USA to build a wall. I am not aware of such an intention. The building workers of our country are mainly busy with house building and their manpower is fully used for that. No one has any intention of building a wall.
Sincerely,
George Walker Bush
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
I think it's about time to get out of this FUCKING country and go live in a 3rd world country where you can do as you please. This fucking hell hole has become too strict!! The fucking government isn't going to tell ME when I can leave and when I can't. FUCK THEM!!!! I've had enough of this shit!
Ted Kennedy found himself on one in 2004. Couldn't board a plane one day.
0 73-2004Aug19.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17
Now, the GOP have long considered him a terrorist - at least since July 19, 1969 - but I think it's safe to presume that it's very easy to find yourself on such a list when the senior Senator from Massachusetts has landed there.
For some reason, I keep thinking of this book lately...
Integrate Keynote and LaTeX
You have to get permission from the State to leave.
I know, its not even the slightest bit funny anymore...
When the country falls into chaos, politicians talk about 'patriotism'. Lao-Tzu
from the site:
Could it be any worse?
"She's furniture with a pulse"
As someone who is neither citizen or resident of the USA, I've been watching it eat itself for nearly a decade now. Part of me understands your frustration and desire to give up on it all, and part of me has to ask, 'what makes you think we want you?'
No offense intended, but you've let your own country fall apart. Don't just assume that you can pack up and move somewhere else without asking first.
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
Hey, this is our country you're bashing. Love it or leave it.
... oh.
That said, a pox on all of them, and on George Bush too.
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
How do you pay for the fuel to get you anywhere safe? And the food?
I wish the state department would screen you turds more carefully before letting you in? Do you expect living in America to be like collecting lottery winnings?
Why don't you ask the Ruskies or the Chinese about communism? You wouldn't get an answer because they are busy making money, perverted as their versions of capitalism are.
Toss a dollar or a Euro on the ground in your home country and see which one gets picked up. The current weak dollar is the inevitable result of the export nature of most of the world's economies besides the us. Our way of screwing you back.
I imagine most of them are from elsewhere.
Is there any other real measure?
Really? How is it in your home country?
Is it a surprise with people like you in our midst?
45% or my income is not enough?
Unemployment is 4.4%. Home/equity ownership is at record levels. K-12 public schooling is a right. The US university system is *by far* the best in the world. Thanks President Bush!
an ill wind that blows no good
finally someone was in his mind and decided to put all you crazy americans in prison... it was about time...
The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
Fewer obnoxious American tourists...
..Our Packets.
Hardly a "new definition" - The Sex Pistols coined it in 1977
http://www.lyricsfreak.com/s/sex+pistols/anarchy+
First Line: "I am an antichrist"
"She's furniture with a pulse"
Airlines currently have to send a passenger manifest 15 min after departure. As far as I can tell the proposal would just change the deadline to 60 min before departure.
Hmm. That doesn't sound quite as scary.
Thankfully, I won't need their permission to give up my America citizenship. Actually, screw that. This is _our_ country, not theirs.
The revolution is happening _now_ folks. Speak out and let your voice be heard about how unhappy you are with the current direction of this country.
Don't think that a small group of dedicated individuals can't change the world. It's the only thing that ever has.
"I will say this, though - If I'm wrong, and you find some nuance in the document I missed, please post and inform me."
e r?objectId=090000648019da96&disposition=attachment &contentType=pdf ).
Fair enough.Consider this a lesson, next time you want to post an inflammatory comment on something which you obviously haven't taken the time to read, be certain it's got a modicum of objectivity.In point of fact the title of the article is irrefutably accurate to the nth degree.However absurd the notion may seem to you or me the fact remains that it is true.Had you bothered to read in full the government document in question you would have realized this.
The following phrase appears four times in the government document in question (see page 12 page 13 and page 14 of USCBP-2005-0003-0003.pdf available at http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentView
"A carrier must not board any passenger subject to a ''not-cleared'' instruction, or any other passenger, or their baggage, unless cleared by CBP."
Take the time to let the phrases "or any other passenger" and "unless cleared by CBP" sink in and realize what that actually means.It means that before I or anyone else is to board a mode of commercial transport destined for another nation we must be granted permission to do so by a government agency.It also means in essence that everyones rights are being trampled on in the name of security.No checks or balances here buddy, just pure unadulterated contempt for the foundation on which our nation was built.The First Amendment of the Constitution guarantees us the right to assembly.To assemble requires travel regardless of where the destination is it is our right to do so peaceably.
Did you think they would highlight it for you or perhaps put it in bold italics so it would be easier to spot? This is how it's done, discretely and without fanfare.To those of you who would cry foul and claim this is nothing but politics shame on you.What does it have to do with "The price of tea in China" how this comes to our attention? The fact remains it's an egregious error on the part of our government that needs to be rectified.
Since I posted this as AC I expect that it won't get modded up and no one will pay it any mind but unlike the parent at least I took the time to read the document in question and I am much better off for having done so.
Ah, so that wall beside Texas isn't to keep Mexicans out.
Where's your liberty now, comrades? Better rock the vote.
I wish I had mod points for the parent.....
I vaguely remember being 'taught' somthing similar to this by a poli-sci major I dated college.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
'nuff said...
How sad and empty is your life that you have time to spout crap like this, and TAKE IT SERIOUSLY?
God, you're such a douche, I have a hard time not feeling pity for you.
Get a life guy, or shut up. You've embarassed yourself more than you could possibly know.
I mean fuck man, you spent the whole morning jamming your idiotic opinion down our throats, only to top it off with bigotry. I don't kow what you have a against gays, but it looks exactly lkike what people do when they're secretly gay and hate others because of it. Is that why you're a homophobe? Is that why you had to slam gays so much? I really had no idea you were a gay basher until today.
What a fucking loser.
Why are so many posts with factual errors modded up?
To people in Europe, this is absolutely nothing new. OTOH, we have somewhat more experience about the dark sides of certain "mass pilot" feelings. This is what I had to say about it shortly after 9/11 to a US citizen who, grappled by fear, had fallen in the trap of blindly following whatever the Leader said about external threats. (Yeah, the blog post is from 2004, but the text is older, and was a post of mine on what is now the alt.corel newsgroup.)
"I'm never quite so stupid as when I'm being smart" (Linus van Pelt)
Just remember, this is the 3rd George....
Great post flyingsquid. I HIGHLY recommend to you Webster Tarpley's new book: 9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA, Third Edition
There are a number of good 9/11 books in print, but none compare to Tarpley's, IMO. Webster Tarpley also has a few lectures on Google Video (based largely on the content of his book with minor additions), but this one I found very good in particular.
You can also find this book on the eMule network (second edit. only I think), but please support the author if you find it enlightening as I did.
About his book:
Though the government may stop giving you tax breaks for doing so.
Could it possibly be that this regulation would not have the effect that the far left claims that it would have?
Yeah, it could be, in the sense that this regulation is just another step in a gradual ratcheting up of restrictions. But that doesn't change the fact that there has been a profound change since the Republicans have come to power, with little oversight, review, or understanding of the consequences--and with no indication that these regulations improve security or help curb illegal immigration.
I have flown to and from Europe for several decades now. The level of control that the US government has obtained over travel over the last few years is absolutely unprecedented in US history, and unparalleled among democratic societies. Today, every departure by any vessel to and from the US is recorded and analyzed, and the US can intervene on either end to prevent people from boarding, with essentially no legal recourse, or even any information about the reason. The change is absolutely mind-boggling.
http://worldcantwait.net/index.php?option=com_cont ent&task=view&id=2818&Itemid=223
Air America national radio network, September 2, 2006, 11:30pm
Peter Werbe opens by asking Ray to tell the story of how he confronted Rumsfeld on his lies about the WMDs on national television last May, and the all the media fall-out from it.
* * *
PW: ...Looking at an effort called World Can't Wait, and these hugely expensive full-page advertisements in the New York Times, one I believe on Wednesday. Tell us about the organization, what it's all about and what they're trying to accomplish.
RM: We all scraped our piggy banks to get that ad out there. We had no rich gurus to support us. The attempt is to do something new and different. Something akin to what the Polish dissidents did to eventually throw down a very unjust and illegal government. The idea is that something extraordinary is needed because these are indeed extraordinary times where the president is acting as though he were king and the other two branches of government seem to be acquiescing in that. There are also hopeful signs but without massive-- massive participation -- massive demonstration of interest in this whole thing like we had during Vietnam, it's not going to be easy to turn the tide. Unlike some of my colleagues I have a lot of hope for what will happen in November and that hope is that you can fool a certain percentage of the people some of the time, but I have great faith in the basic common sense of the American people. And assuming the voting machines are not fixed as they have been in the past, I have hope that things are going to change. But that hope at the same time gives me great fear of the period of the next two months because God knows what this crowd will come upon as a September or October Surprise. It may begin with Iran.
PW: Yeah. The slogan here is Drive Out the Bush Regime, which has a very strong, almost-- well, I won't use the word I was gonna use because it's misused by the Bush regime. But it's very strong, it almost sounds extra-parliamentary, if you will, and yet so many people that I have great respect for like yourself and other people have signed on to this-- Daniel Ellsberg, Gore Vidal, I mean I could spend another 5 minutes naming all the names who have signed on to this. Tell me what the process was-- and actually if you can, what would it mean to drive out the Bush regime.
RM: Well, I used to say that the Bush regime is arguably guilty of perpetrating a war of aggression. We know now it is not necessary to use "arguably." Nuremberg defined war of aggression, saying that those who initiate such are perpetrating the most serious international crime, differing from other war crimes only insofar as it contains the accumulated evils of the whole. That's a direct quote. Think torture, think kidnapping, think putting people in black holes without even telling the Red Cross, think of illegal wire tapping. Think of the whole gamut. Now on two counts the king -- oops, isn't that interesting-- the president is demonstrably guilty. Hamdan [v. Rumsfeld] says that he has violated the war crimes act of 1996 passed by a Republican-dominated Congress which says you must tie U.S. criminal law inextricably to the Geneva Conventions. Now, on the advice of Cheney's lawyer, Addington, and Gonzalez, [Bush] prescinded -- he set himself apart-- from Geneva. And now he's been told that that was unconstitutional and that was illegal. [Hence the legislation trying to "correct" this illegality] And that was the Supreme Court telling him that-- the Hamdan decision. And more recently, just 3 weeks ago, we had Judge Taylor in Detroit saying he violated the 4t
In Spain during Franco's dictatorship, spanish citizens needed a passport to leave Spain while Common Market tourists could enter and leave without it. We used to say it was like a jail.
When I was a kid, I used to dream about living in the United States. Today I'm not even sure I want to see it again before I die.
Like the old lonely wolf howled: "America where are you now?".
--
El Guerrero del Interfaz
>Wanna just light that annoying "Bill of Rights" on fire? Seems more direct.
Yes, perhaps they should just rename the damn thing "Bill of Wrongs."
Fuck You Bush.
I am sure this is redundant but I got here late and want to say my peace.
If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
> In an airport, you do not under any circumstances mess around with security.
:-)
Yes, because in Soviet America security messes around with you
So that the farmer gets in trouble 24hrs later and his other 900000000 chicken friends get a free ride to Farm #2.
But seriously, this 24hr thing, how do they know WHEN a chicken escapes? Do they scan the whole farm house RFID
and if ones missing its loose? Do you report a roll call every 24hrs or every week? This is red tape gone mad.
Who takes care of the scanners, data cables, server data upload and management?
What if there is a storm?
I think spp.gov is a bigger worry.
Btw this new slashdot beta viewing mode is really sucky on firefox and its cpu load!!! either bad code, or firefox is lousy at javascript execution.
I mean try even www.heraldsun.com.au and you'll see FF2 use like 100% cpu, its really sad.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
Abortion is the biggie because many of us cannot in good conscience vote for "pro-choice" candidates, although we might be in favor of the more compassionate liberal agenda as it pertains to social programs and civil rights. This leaves us with a no-win situation and we just end up choosing the lesser of evils, which is often a "pro-life" candidate.
I feel the same way when it comes to some elections. For instance in 2000 instead of voting for Harry Brown like I wanted to vote I specifically voted against Bush. I didn't want Gore to be president either but I felt he was the lesser of two evils, ie I felt Bush was more evil than Gore. And he has come to be worse, knocking one right down after another, this proposal being one more example.
FalconShould there be a Law?
In Soviet Russia, border guard detains
oh wait....
I would like to know who are these cops who would stop a revolution, and the army guys who would
act against their people.
What makes them cops, do they fail in high school and know no history, are they football jocks?
why dont they join the revolution too? or will their daddy get angry at them.
I often wonder what happened to all those cops who protected the govt during the eastern Europe revolutions, do
they regret not helping the people and shooting at them or bashing them in the head?
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
Given the way that many religious people have shown disrespect for others of differing viewpoints, I understand your reaction, but I also would hope that you could see that I have a right to practice my religion in public. I only ask you to be tolerant of it--not to agree to it, enjoy it or pay for it.
I respect others rights to practice their religion. I disagree though in how others try to force others to live by their beliefs. I still recall having a ruler forcibly applied to kids hands when they refused to say the pledge of allegiance with "under god" in it when I was a kid in a public elementary school. I wonder how those who want it used or have prayers said would feel if they were made to recite the Four Noble Truths, or the Wiccan Reed, "An ye harm none, so mote it be."
FalconShould there be a Law?
The big difference between passports and what Homeland "Security" has been doing, is that passports are issued and have worked with relatively few messes. Homeland Security's no-fly lists even had Ted Kennnedy on them, the Senator from Massachusetts. Whatever you may think of Ted, the likelihood that he's a front man for Ansar al-Islam is nil. They've got dead people on their list, including one of the 9/11 hijackers. They've got toddlers. And nobody seems to be able to get off their damn list. So I can just see it: Homeland Security misspells your name once, you spend the rest of your life filling out forms.
Another interesting article to read on the current state of affairs is on "Ur Fascism" (PDF warning, page 5 is where the defining 14 features start) by Umberto Eco. A very interesting description on the current state of affairs.
Great article ; thank you for the link, it's so enlightening for our times - wherever we're from, as the pressure of neo-fascism is really creeping from everywhere, be it blairism in england, sarkosysm in France, bushism in the USA, and all those I forget here or don't know about yet. Your post desserves a better ranking.
It died a long death from a thousand slashes years ago. However if you want it brought back then you should check out the Free State Project which in basd in the "Live Free or Die" state, Vermont.
FalconShould there be a Law?
...I already did. With the bureaucratic machinery in place that creates this sort of abomination, it's not even likely that an electoral landslide in favor of the less worse alternative next week would help.
Many business associates of mine are already avoiding all unnecessary travel to and interaction with the US for this sort of reason, so wa-hey, go ahead, shoot-in-foot-and-reload.
Cole's Law: Thinly sliced cabbage
The US university system is *by far* the best in the world. Thanks President Bush!
Not only is Bush not resposible or can take credit for the higher education system in the US but he has also cut financial aid.
FalconShould there be a Law?
...read the actual proposed rules at
e r?objectId=090000648019da96&disposition=attachment &contentType=pdf
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ContentView
The submitted link goes to a reaction to a submitted comment regarding the proposal instead of the actual proposal itself.
No, I haven't read it in its entirety yet, but might as well read the proposal and draw your OWN conclusions instead of relying on somebody else's reaction to an interpretation.
Government's idea of a balanced budget: take money from the right pocket to balance...oh who am I kidding?
Recently we have been to South Africa, Zimbabwe, Botswana, Cambodia, Thailand, Brazil and Peru. Outside of South Africa & Zimbabwe I wouldn't have any serious objections to raising my family in any of these places.
President Mugabe has virtually distroyed Zimbabwe. He took the bread basket of southern Africa, Zimbabwe used to grow enough food for itself as well as for neighboring countries, and turned it into a place that needs foreign assistance. When he kicked off the mostly white farmers off the farms and gave the farms to his cronies the productive farms became fallow land where hardly any food grew.
FalconShould there be a Law?
I can agree with that.
I would say that the mother's Right to the sanctity of her own body is higher than any Rights the child has (until birth).
Check into the history of that. Opium was first criminalized to prevent white women from being corrupted by Chinese men. Cocaine was criminalized to prevent "cocainized negroes" from assaulting white women. And so forth.
Personally, I am in favour of legalizing all drugs. With one extreme caveat.
Any crime committed while under the influence of any drug is judged as the next higher offense. If you cannot control yourself under the influence of whatever drug you use, and you become a threat to other citizens or society in general, you will be jailed. The taxes on the sale of such will pay for the treatment.
Thanks,
It is one of 5 short essays in a book by Eco called "Five Moral Pieces". It is a really good read, and I am trying to get my hands on some more of his work. The Chapter on "ur-fascism" and the one on the media are the most interesting though the book raises many good points. Ironically enough, using the baseline of "ur-fascism" current Democratic governments are MORE Fascist then some of the well-known "original" examples.
I am slightly concerned over the fact that there are so many Anonymous Posts in this article's discussion - take a quick look. I wish to be able to post with my account; though Governments should fear their people, they are inspiring it, in their citizens, instead.
Don't worry, if the goverment doesn't let you back into the country, you can always fly to Mexico and walk back in...
Or walk from Canada.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Has anyone else noticed that this is one of very few articles reporting this story? Almost nothing findable on Google News. It couldn't be that no one else would be interested in this story---I suspect it is inaccurate.
Reading your post I just News Googled travel passport homeland and came up with 342 results. Guess what the first one was?... Slashdot. The second is from Nigeria.
FalconShould there be a Law?
It's time to bust up the joint if we don't have a change in government after next tuesday. Seig Heil the Dept. of Homeland (der fatherland) Security. Heil Nero Bush.
The only other country that didn't require a passport was Canada, though that has since changed.
When did it change for travel to Canada needing a passport? It must of been after 911, the month before, in August 2001 I drove from Detroit to New London without needing one.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Mainly from the media, and listening to the US political leaders.
Hollywood and US TV dramas treat justice in a comic strip manner: obviously most people know these are just fictional over the top interpretations but the repetitions of some themes are worrying.
The US political leaders however seem to have watched rather too many of such films and tv programmes and seem to see the world in those terms, or at least articulate their policies in Hollywood ethical frameworks. Very frightening. OK for children in playgrounds, but not for world leaders with massive military forces: George Bush on Iraq "I said a long time ago, one of our objectives is to smoke them out and get them running and bring them to justice". Please, this is not a John Ford cowboy movie.
Ra Ra Ra
Root Root Root
Gooooo Team!
Seriously, this kind of mentality is the same as the 'root for my sports team or soft drink mentality' with no more thought. The Germans can tell you : decades or centuries of honorable behavior does not prevent one's honor from being swept away after despicable behavior.
Someone told me recently that the Nazis were actually Zionists and the entire scandal behind WW II was that it was directed, behind the scenes, by Zionist central bankers (who funded the war) in order to create circumstances that would enable the creation of the state of Israel. It is historical fact, apparently, that Zionist flags were flown in Nazi Germany as the *only* other flag allowed to fly in that country. In this revision of history, while the holocaust did occur, it was targeted at those Jews who the Zionists didn't want in Israel as well as other groups that the Zionists wanted to be rid of. Meanwhile, acceptable Jews were transported to Palestine on joint Nazi/Zionist cruise ships (yes, both flags painted on the ship) that merrily served cosher food. If you examine Hitler and his administration, apparently, many of them were of Jewish ethnicity. The whole thing was a really warped, brain-twisting exercise in juxtapositioning propaganda and even the act of investigating it was made illegal in Europe after the war.
As I said, this was told to me and I don't really have a position on it as it is real heavy tinfoil hat stuff. But it is interesting. I post as AC for obvious reasons, cuz people tend to get pissed off whenever anyone mentions jews or nazis, especially in the same post.
comments?
Yet another news item suggesting that the United States is being slowly but surely transformed into a carbon copy of the former Eastern Bloc (if not Oceania), all in the ironic guise of "safeguarding our freedoms". Monitoring citizens' telephone calls without a warrant in the name of catching terrorists, constructing a wall across our southern border in the name of stemming illegal immigration, making it possible and perfectly legal (through the Military Commissions Act) to detain even US citizens indefinitely without access to proper legal recourse -- need I go on?
I'm sure that wherever you come from you have much more "input" into
government than a vote every four years or so, don't you? Shut up.
What's more I don't think wherever things are any better, and no to
forestall any objections all of the Eurosocialist Union sucks just as
bad, not to mention "Airstrip One" Britain and the rest of "Oceania".
There is not one free country in the world.
No offense, but just because you're not sitting in a frying pan but
then maybe in a wok: use your brain, because no matter which regime
you're under: YOUR ass too is no longer just frying, it's on fire.
My father graduated from McGill dental school. My sister got her degree in literature from there. I share your high opinion of that institution. Montreal is a fabulous city.
an ill wind that blows no good
Nah, my life is pretty meaningful. Just because hitting Slashdot and replying to a message is difficult for your limited capacity doesn't mean it's hard for me.
It's taken me about 10 minutes total in the past day to get you to barf all over your concern for my life. Since replying is so hard for you, then I'm having a little fun with ease, while you're getting all twisted.
What a sad person you are, to spend so much time complaining that I'm spending so much time spitting in your face, when it's nothing to me.
--
make install -not war
Exit visas, huh? Many countries in Central Asia have this wonderful little practice
America now neatly fits all of the criteria for facism as documented in many textbooks: ...) For a country that will probably become majority Spanish speaking, this is obviously a serious problem.
- permission required to leave & enter country
- corporate dominance and control of government with no real alternatives possible ('Democrat' and 'Republican'). Both recieve massive commercial funding to 'win' the 'elections' and run their advertising campaigns. The American people are too brainwashed to know any better, or too lazy to vote.
- racial supremicy of whites. ok, there are now a few token 'blacks', but they are all rich or connected (eg. Condoleza Rice - oil companies, Colin Powell - military,
- combination of religion (at least some extemists' facistic interpretation of it) and the state
- extreme nationalism. flag waving, flags everywhere, bumper stickers, daily pledges to the flag....
- ignoring human rights (torture, long incarceration, assassinations, military tribunals, 'special' categories of prisoner who are not subject to due process)
- identifying enemies as a unifying cause (eg. fake enemies like Iraq as 'national security threats')
- supremecy of the military - massively funding, even in times of domestic crisis - in favour of basic human rights like universal free healthcare and education.
- controlled mass media (how many major media companies are not run by the establishment/republicans?)
- obsession with national security
- supression of labour power
- opposition to science and intellectuals
- fradulent elections, and use of the judiciary to achieve the aims of goverment (eg. appointment of pro-regious zealot judges), companies owned by politically connected individuals that make voting machines, widespread fraud)
- cronyism and corruption (who got all the contracts in Iraq? which regime members had connections to Enron? etc.)
- obsession with crime / punishment (which country has proportionally the highest prison population)
- power only available to the rich or connected (eg. patent system, buying government influence through lobyists / campaign donations)
- abuse of military power to expand imperial interests abroad in defiance of the majority of the international community
The left/right divide comes fromn the fact that human beings love a dichotomy, and it's a lot easier to get elected if all you have to do is point at the other guy and blame all the bad things on him. It makes campaigning so much easier. If you're a Democrat, you blame the Republicans, and vice versa. No need to actually address any issues. No need for the voting public to actually learn anything about the issues. Just blame the other guy.
Water follows the path of least resistance; I've noticed that culture does, too.
dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
South Africa is a functioning democratic state, with a political system which ensures minority representation in Government despite the party in overall control having almost 70% of the vote. Redistribution of land has been on a willing buyer/willing seller basis until recently, when a small number of farms have been compulsorily purchased (not simply annexed) at about half what the farmers were holding out for. One recent piece of land redistribution involved a privately-owned game reserve which came to an arrangement with a tribal group to return to them a part of the reserve which had traditionally been their land: the existing owners of the reserve provided the capital funding to build a tourist hotel and game lodge owned by the new owners of the land, and training them to operate it, in return for a percentage of the profits for the next 20 years - effectively a private mortgage arrangement. That's a very different proposition from handing land to political cronies.
Crime is a massive problem, with the emerging black middle class being the main victims of local criminals, and large gangs operating (originating from other sub-saharan african countries) carrying out crimes such as car hijack and cash-in-transit (armoured van) robberies; HIV/AIDS (with up to 70% infection rates in some local communities, although other areas have single-figure percentage rates) is also an issue: but I moved here from London four years ago, and you would have to drag me out of South Africa kicking and screaming all the way.
And if this proposal comes into effect, it's clinched.
I once asked what "curtain" will the future designate to the USA?
Nazi Germany was called the Iron Curtain... China the Bamboo Curtain...
My wife perhaps not so jokingly said it would be the "Bush Curtain".
Get out. Get out now.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
We will win
You will lose
despite how many ignorant minority "voters" you bring to the polls
And then you will have to do things on your own instead of having the government tell you what to do
perhaps you could even share a good cry with those traitorous cunts the Dixie Chicks
Your reply was long on heat, short on argument. But I'll have a go.
Cornell '86
Another nitwit swayed by his Georgetown/Yale populism. I do believe you have spent time in Europe.
Did the communists average 5% economic growth? Did they consistently lower taxes and increase properity at all levels? If that is communism, give me more!
??? It is morning in America. Thanks President Bush!
an ill wind that blows no good
I am no fan of deficit spending. As a percentage of GDP the current deficit is manageable. The idea is to keep deficit growth at or below rates of economic growth and gradually growth out of the debt. As much as a genious as you fancy yourself, do you choose to ignore this simple idea, or are you unaware? In the past the democrats used inflationary monetary policy to devalue the debt. That would be a pisser for the Chinese whose matresses are stuffed with our treasury notes, but it would serve them right for their own currency manipulation. Such a policy has bad consequences for growth though. People like me still remember Carter's misery index and do not want to revisit them. I am tired of this thread. Just stay pwnd!
an ill wind that blows no good
Umm, currently Customs & Border Patrol runs "interior checkpoints" throughout San Diego County, part of their "defense-in-depth" approach.
See
GAO report (pdf)
Northeast interior checkpoints to become permanent
CBP Border Patrol Checkpoint Seizes Arsenal of Weapons (google cache)
Start new parties, support candiadates outside the system.
Apathy is the problem of democracy.
Too many people don't giving a toss.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
I for once.
I will not go to a country wich such draconian measures.
My tourist dollars are better spent elsewhere.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Any person in the US can be spied upon without a warrant, send to jail in faraway places with disregard to his citizenship and his rights and even tortured.
But here you are, saying that all this is far left fantasies.
Oh well, it is your country, not ours.
Enjoy it while you are allowed to.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
We've got the monkeys running the zoo... these are small, foolish, and dangerous little men- Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld. And they are tearing the country apart. They've got the left hating the right and the right hating the left.
And look who's fanning the flames...
It's sad, really. Yakov Smirnov's joke, "In Soviet Russia, we don't have American Express; instead we have Russian Express: `Don't Leave Home'," just isn't funny anymore.
He really should update his act and get out performing it now about how everything he fled from in the USSR is now happening here.
Except he probably couldn't do it here and instead would have to start his new act by fleeing the the US for Canada.
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
if you are scared now, just imagine how scared you would be for your democratic freedoms if you actually knew anything about the current state of constitutional rights. As a law student i was quite shocked, but in fact the 4th amendment against search ans seizure has all but ceased to exist under the weight of exceptions that have built up over the last 20 years. the Patriot act which among other things allows "roaving wiretapping" and break and peek searches that allow personel to enter the home and search without a warrant or probable cause and without having to notify the owner have further damaged american's freedoms. on top of all that the exclusionary rule no longer applies in many cases whether it comes to immigrant rights or drug related offenses. the result is that the only legal remedy to a violation of your constitutional rights under the 4th amendment, ie the exclusion of illegally obtained evidence in a trial, is now void, meaning that your "right" is no longer a right, but more of a suggestion. Welcome to this brave new world, and dont speak too loudly into the microphone.
Fool me once...shame on you, fool me twice...won't be fooled again (our president)