Slashdot Mirror
DoJ Mulls Tracking Picture Uploads
Dominus Suus passed us a link to a C|Net article about a disturbing threat to privacy from the Justice Department. According to the article, a private meeting was held Wednesday between Justice officials and telecom industry representatives. With individuals from companies such as AOL and Comcast looking on, the officials continued overtures to increase data retention by ISPs on American citizens. This week, they were specifically looking to have records kept of photo uploads. In this way, and 'in case police determine the content is illegal and choose to investigate,' an easy trail from A to Z will be available. The article provides a good deal of background on the Bush Administration's history with data retention, with ties to events even older than the Bush presidency. "The Justice Department's request for information about compliance costs echoes a decade-ago debate over wiretapping digital telephones, which led to the 1994 Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act. To reduce opposition by telephone companies, Congress set aside $500 million for reimbursement and the legislation easily cleared both chambers by voice votes. Once Internet providers come up with specific figures, privacy advocates worry, Congress will offer to write a generous check to cover all compliance costs and the process will repeat itself."
And just who is going to pay for the ungodly amount of storage this would require?
Won't they have to outlaw https and ssh in order to track uploads to secure sites?
Henry J. Cobb http://www.io.com/~hcobb Any sufficiently cool technology is indistinguishable from religion.
At this point, I think the US Supreme Court should draw a line, once and for all.
The Bush administration is the most corrupt administration the U.S. has ever had. Here is my summary of the corruption: George W. Bush comedy and tragedy.
I find it scary how little U.S. citizens know about the activities of their government. Part of the reason is that the Bush administration uses the same method of abuse Microsoft uses. Both exploit the fact that it is difficult for people to defend against many, many abuses, each small in themselves. Both, in my opinion, use sophisticated public relations methods to sell their lies.
I hope you will write your own summary of U.S. government corruption and send it to your elected representatives.
--
Is U.S. government violence a good in the world, or does violence just cause more violence?
www.eff.org
The real goal of the whole thing is to some day maybe 5 years down the road be able to track uploads of sound amd video. That way they can bust people who upload viacom videos to youtube or put some movie out there. Of course they use childporn photos to set it up but how long till its tracking video too just in case. Sure it's not technically feasible now but it will be...
"... I think the US Supreme Court should draw a line..."
The U.S. Supreme Court already drew its line. It elected George W. Bush.
--
Will the U.S. government violence end 3,000 years of violence in the Middle East? Or, increase it?
Why stop at uploads? Let's track downloads too! And not just images - lets do web traffic, news, mail, chat. Let's record ALL on line activity. That's the most comprehensive solution. That way no criminals can possibly get away with anything. Unless they use encryption... Or other peoples insecure wireless AP's... Or TOR... OR - you get the idea. Well, OK criminals will probably still be able to get away with a lot, but the average American will be under tight surveillance and we can make damn sure that *they* don't do anything their not supposed to. That's probably good enough, right?
The article says it would be up to the web sites to store backups of the images with relevant date/time/source IP data, but what if you host pictures on your own ADSL or whatever connection, would you still be liable to store copies with the relevant source information?
To do something right, you often have to roll up your sleeves and get busy.
I know, 4 days old, but still rather relevant,from eff.org (http://www.eff.org/news/archives/2007_02.php#0051 40):
"Washington, D.C. - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) filed suit against the Department of Justice today, demanding records about secret new court orders that supposedly authorize the government's highly controversial electronic surveillance program that intercepts and analyzes millions of Americans' communications.
When press reports forced the White House to acknowledge the program in December of 2005, the administration claimed that the massive program could be conducted without warrants or judicial authorization of any kind. However, in January of this year, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales announced that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) had authorized collection of some communications and that the surveillance program would now operate under its approval. EFF's suit comes after the Department of Justice failed to respond to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for records concerning the purported changes in the program (...)"
Seriously.. I echo the former post; join the EFF. Changes are ONLY going to take place through efficient lobbying (but then it also works really well, Halliburton has proved that beyond doubt..)
Why should we have to write our representatives about civil liberties?
Except to enforce property rights for the elite few who can afford to buy them? It's certainly not for investigating corruption in government, nor upholding the Constitution, nor, really, for anything lately. After all, Habeus Corpus isn't actually MENTIONED in the Constitution. Nor the right to privacy. Nor is the right to breathe air. Therefore these things don't exist.
Oh, there was the one thing about the purjury of one President in an endless fishing-expedition investigation into a two-bit, decade old land deal, the evidence based on illegal phone-tapping by a Repubican hack. That was a good collar.
> DoJ Mulls Tracking Picture Uploads
There's still a great deal to be said for the dialup BBS.
1 in 4 Maine children in struggle with hunger.
I think this has already happened. I live in south-east Washington state, 60 miles south of the NSA's cowboy echelon site. About 6 years ago, a huge fiber install project seemed to cover every dirt road in the county. Population density here is 0-20 residents / square mile in rural areas. None of this build-up resulted in any change in the available phone service ( POTS only ). All the fiber lines seem to originate from the Fed's BPA fat pipe ( the same one The Dalles Google is attached to ) and run up these dirt roads. They seem to aggrigate at Goldendale Wa. and branch to Yakima down highway 97, Although some seem to head up into the unpopulated mountains. Urban dwellers are used to fiber on every street, but orange poles on every dirt road cutting through wheat fields seems strange. I probably should shut up now.
A few thousands, or even tens of thousands, of motivated criminals (outside of the ones who "own" the country, of course) are of no real threat to the established order - they will almost always prey on the populace.
A few million, or tens of millions, of motivated citizens are absolutely a threat to rule by the few - which is why anything that allows the populace to realize their predicament and then organize to change it must absolutely be stopped.
There's free as in speech, free as in beer, and free as in range. Americans are free in the latter sense.
And how will they block ascii art?
http://www.rense.com/general79/wdx1.htm
I know, our elected representatives are citizens too, and you would think that they wouldn't want to live under the bad law they make. I've come to accept that the profiteering that goes on in Congress is rewarding enough that it's worth moving the country in the wrong direction by leaps and bounds, and they must figure that, as powerful as they are, they aren't really subject to those laws anyway. For the most part they're right. Occasionally one of them gets sacrificed to make the plebs think that Washington is policing itself, but that has little apparent effect on the rest of them, fine-sounding speeches aside.
... and then they get within range of the D.C. distortion field. I believe that it's a lot like picking up a girl in a bar and going home with her. It all seems to make perfect sense at the time, but the next morning you wake up and go "Oh my God ... what have I done?"
People like to make jokes about Steve Jobs' "reality distortion field". I'd like to point out that a much more powerful version of the same effect permeates Washington D.C.. I was born there, as it happens, and even as a small child I could feel it, a little. I wasn't sure what it was, but something was definitely out-of-kilter even way back then. When we returned home (to another state) I felt an overwhelming sense of normalcy so I know our leaders are driving the country while under the influence of something.
So, our elected officials go to Washington with the best of intentions, perhaps with a sincere desire to make the nation a better place
But by the time you wake up, it is way too late.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Damn. Now I'm going to have to be careful to run traceroute before uploading anything to a server, just in case it goes via the US and some future law change makes uploading pictures of kittens illegal retrospectively. No way do I want my pictures sitting in a US government owned database, especially with their attitude towards applying US law to foreigners.
Republicans bring you smaller, less intrusive government.
--
make install -not war
Its all about terrorism, child porn, and piracy I am sick to death of them beating this dead horse. Why dont they just get right down to it and ...
1)put cameras in our homes. (They'll just check them when there is a suspicion of a crime)
2)ban all sex out side marriage
3)ban all non secular music.
4)ban all non missionary position sex
5)ban all violence on TV
6)ban all gay people
7)ban the GPL
Use installed camera to enforce all banned.
8)tag us and record where we go with gps ( they'll only check it if there is suspicion of a crime)
10)mandate car manufacturers to install tracking devices. (they'll only check it if . . . )
11)build a berlin wall around USA (to keep out terrists and drugs, and illegals and..) keep us in?
12)ban all weapons but handguns which are useless when the people wake up from Shitney Shears and Anna Dickhole Sith and try to rise up and take back their country.
I wonder who really fooled us Americans that we have the right to any semblance of privacy any way.
As far as the DOJ and law enforcement goes who needs to investigate anything anymore All we the righteous people of law-enforcement need is a great big control panel that we can monitor everyone and when we suspect them of a crime we just push a button and voila they are in prison. Who the hell needs due process anymore
Welcome people to the United States Socialist Republic. The USSR.
In Capitalist West government demand picture easy to trace back to you.
In Soviet Union government demand airbrushed picture leave no trace of you.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
One peculiarity of US law is its way of breaking down different forms of communications, a system that is based on archaic technologies.
IANAL, but this is pretty much my understanding of the situation.
Privacy of electronic communications is protected mainly by the Electronic Communication Act of 1986, which consists of three parts:
Title 1, Wiretap Act: protections communicaiton that have some kind of audio component (paradigm: phone calls)
Title 2, Stored Communications Act: protects electronic communiations while they are in transit or in temporary storage (paradigm: email held in spools, e.g. the old arpanet mail which often sent email through UUCP over 300 baud phone links to reach computers that weren't directly connected)
Title 3, Pen Register Act: prevents placing devices on phone lines to record phone numbers.
Each title of ECPA was written with electronic communication technology as it stood ca 1985, which means that by 1990 it was clearly obsolete. But there is no such thing as an obsolete law, or at least obsolete laws continue to operate in unexpted ways. In this case, the provisions of ECPA have been extended by process of analogy to many situations that weren't even considered in 1985. Many curious questions arise. For example, it would appear that the government cannot rifle through email spool directories without a warrant. But what about when it is delivered to your in box? Many people use their in boxes as filing systems. It would be one thing if it was stored on your computer, but what if it is stored at an ISP?
Or this: the government can't put a pen register on your phone lines -- basically a mechanical device that records the electrical singals on your phone line and makes a paper tape of the numbers you call. Constitutionally they are not prevented from doing so because you are disclosing the phone numbers to a third party -- the phone company. So what about email logs? They are covered by the same constitutional doctrine, but don't appear to be covered by ECPA, which envisions installing a device to reocord transient signals.
Or this: what if there were an image format that included audio commentary? Would this trigger the Wiretap act? Is this why the AG is talking about picture uploads and not movie uploads? Note once again the capriciousness of US law.
As a non-lawyer, I don't really follow all the ins and outs of the developments in information privacy law, because it's not really worth my time. There's no way a nonspecialist can keep track of the twists and turns of case law. The bottom line is this: unlike the EU, we do not have a fundamental, legally protected right to information and communication privacy in the US. The strategy of US lawmakers has been to avoid the recognition of any new rights, but to curb specific abuses when they reach the outrage level.
The result is the capriciousness we have seen. A non-lawyer can't really know what is rights are vis a vis the government, because it depends on a rather haphazard patchwork of statues, viewed through the series of lenses that are judicial analogizing.
The courts have to operate this way, because people who feel outraged by violations of what common sense tells them is a right of privacy keep bringing lawsuits trying to employ a broken down system of statues that implicitly assume those rights, but don't explicitly secure them.
We have reached the point in the US where an ordinary person really can't know what his rights are. Special interests, and officials of a statist bent, have found so many ways to violate the spirit of individual and community liberty embodied in the Constitution, while avoiding technical illegalities. Constitutional law has been stretched to its limits to cover rights clearly implied by the Constitution (e.g. substantive due process), but this process leaves protection of individual and group rights thin and patchy.
I believe is time for a new declaration of human rights in the US along the lines of
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Is that none of the big political blogs care one bit about this. Sure, they'll write volumes about things like the NSA wiretapping program, but it's so far been largely up to smaller blogs to track this issue. I've been following it now since the first serious proposal about a year ago. What gives? Why is it so hard to get non-geeks to care about an issue that amounts to one of the biggest police state advances in the last twenty years?
The only problem with this issue is that it will cost them a lot of money to support all of the services affected by it. It won't be like the telecoms with just a few companies affected. Potentially tens of thousands of businesses will have to be compensated if they want similar compliance.
RTFA, they already want to track videos as well.
If you ever work with the feds esp the DOD or other organizations, you will find that the best way to hide things is in the open as something else. In addition, leave all sorts of nonsense data to make it hard to find (steganography). It is actually how we do the bulk of our work. Such as most secret facilities are amongst the general public and looks like a store or a general building.
One of the problems with TIA(Total information Awareness) was the idea of taking in ALL the data and processing it. What is needed to make it work is to have groups store part of it and then process it as needed (data a implies b implies c). But to do it openly will mean that groups will fight it. So tie the military and the doj together closely and then make it happen. What is interesting is that member of congress have to know that this happening or W. is operating totally rouge. If so, then he has other plans then simply info about terrorism.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Unfortunately the Supreme Court isn't going to help us.
We live in an authoritarian capito-fascistic state. You can choose to ignore it, you can tell yourself that it doesn't affect you personally (yet); but that won't change the fact. We have government that reinterprets laws and standards to mean what they decide they need to mean to fit their agenda at the mmoment (which usually, in all moments, is CONTROL), it's a system of institutionalized corruption.
Electing someone from the either large party isn't going to help us - I mean, there are a few exceptions in both major parties, but none of the big names really.
I think that the people are going to have to find a way to organize and save our constitution. The system will not save itself because it is compromised. It could be hacked or manipulated and forced to work for us should large groups of people be willing to stand up for their rights - but unfortunately that's not going to happen by voting or by any of the rigged or tilted mechanisms in place.
What people who say things like "I don't mind, I'm not doing anything illegal" fail to realize is that it doesn't matter - because once the entire system of surviellance and control is in place, once you have no privacy or anonimity it is too late - because then the definition of what is legal and what is illegal can be changed.
It's not like they ever give your rights or your expectations of personal liberty back once they have been taken away - even when these things are promised (like sunset provisions) at the time such legislation is proposed.
Aside from that, what if you were at one time in drug rehab - or are a member of a group like AA and all of these records are stored forever and then down the line the whole world can find out all of your private personal stuff.
The slippery slope is no more - we're almost in freefall.
This is ridiculous and doesn't make any sense. "Girl", "bar" and "morning" are not even words. I believe you wanted to say:
So, our elected officials go to Washington with the best of intentions, perhaps with a sincere desire to make the nation a better place ... and then they get within range of the D.C. distortion field. I believe that it's a lot like downloading a keygen from the internet and running it under your admin account on your main machine. It all seems to make perfect sense at the time, but after the next reboot you wake up and go "Oh my God ... what have I done?"
My favorite part of the article: Only universities and libraries would be excluded, one participant said. "There's a PR concern with including the libraries, so we're not going to include them," the participant quoted the Justice Department as saying. "We know we're going to get a pushback, so we're not going to do that."
They don't have time to deal with entities which give a "pushback" when there are so many companies, politicians, and citizens who are ready to roll over, bark, and beg on command. Terrorism and kiddy porn are such effective justifications because most people don't even bother to examine the issues, much less debate a proposed law.
The U.S. has been whipped up into such a senseless frenzy over terrorism and kiddy porn that it's going to be a long time before Congress becomes rational about the subjects. Privacy and (pseudo)anonymity are some of the things that made the internet so popular, but unfortunately this type of emotional hype and scare tactics will make the internet far less private than the postal system and telephone network.
DRM would fix this.
When you get down to it, if I have to name the nation's most Corrupt Administration off the top of my head, I'd say Andrew Jackson. Good old "To the victor belong the spoils" Jackson. Good old "Trail of tears" Jackson. Mr. "John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it!" Jackson. Good old "man-of-the-people" Jackson. Good old man-of-the-people Bush is at least trying to work something positive in Iraq (though one can easily question its effectiveness) - what was Jackson doing with the Indian Removal business? That's far more criminal than the Iraq war ever was or will be. And if you wanted me to name the President that did the most to restrict civil liberties during his term in office, that's easy. Abraham Lincoln, yo. Writ of habeus what now? That's right. And the Great Emancipator walked all over freedom of speech and such, too.
The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
Look, congress will do nothing just because you wrote a letter. If they were really wanting to clean up, then they would doing such things as push to have Sibel Edmunds ungagged.
But what congress can not handle is having light put on them. If you send an e-mail to the congress man, send it to a reporter. In fact, the smart thing is to target several investigative reporters and let them know of any response from the pol. Once a congressman is looking at the media, they tend to get nervous and will push harder. Want to really make it happen? Put up a web site devoted to the letters AND the response. Now you are putting pressure on the media to respond.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
"Girl", "bar" and "morning" are not even words.
Maybe not to the average Slashdotter, but you just try and explain "rooting" to a politician: you have to speak to people in terms with which they are familiar. Believe me, our Congressional representatives are very familiar with girls, and bars, and mornings after.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
When were you a kid? I've been around a while, and I can't remember a Republican government (Congressional majority or president) that actually did even one of those things. Lots of talk about them, but never any action.
--
make install -not war
...that we're being naive if this sort of thing isn't going on already. What with the vast amount of our telecommunications that are already surrepticiously monitored by our government, why are they even bothering with public discourse?
I guess my point would be: how are digital photo uploads any different from any other form of digital media?
On one hand, I find myself thinking, go ahead and look all you like at anything I have put online, I've nothing to hide. On the other hand, this could count on the running (and unfortunately growing) list in my head of things that I used to consider private which now my government would say is not.
Fine, whatever. So long as this sort of thing is only used to fight crime, then I guess I'm all for it. Just don't get all uppity at my anti-establishment fark chops and my uber-leet gaming website forum signatures in Photobucket.
There is simply too much glass..
Maybe it's the "everything is bigger in Texas" mentality; look at what LBJ did to JFK's little scrimmage in Viet Nam.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
Make Gonzales look stupid. What terrorist who's a real threat is going to upload pictures to a web server. Hello? Write to your congressman.
Anonymous slashstalker Coward tilts at the Doc Ruby windmill.
--
make install -not war
I'd have said Woodrow Wilson, but it's pretty much the same idea.
"The use-mention distinction" is not "enforced here."
One interesting thought: If they are ignoring text, can I yEnc or uuencode my p0rn before posting it and be exempt from these tracking requirements?
Have gnu, will travel.
The more you tighten your grip, the more people will learn about Tor (The Onion Router), the more they will setup proxies, and the more that the Internet will get clogged with useless extra traffic that didn't need to happen if you just left people more alone.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
I'm so terribly sorry that those horrible hackers planted a script on my server (which happens to use ext2fs) that corrupts my bootloader then runs "shred -z -n 40 /var/log/httpd/* /var/log/*; reboot". It's even worse that the bastards made it execute if I type "oh shit feds" into a terminal, as I'm prone to do when suprised... I wish I could help you find the SOBs, but all my logs got erased. Here, look for yourself:
[screen flashing 'PWNT BY CHINESE']
Fuck fascism.
It seems in our country that whichever party is in power becomes corrupt and eventually the other party calls them out on it and things swing back the other way. The problem is that then the very same party that called out the corruption then becomes corrupt themselves. It seems the old adage, "Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely" is still as true as it ever was. The only difference between communism and our current system is that we have two corrupt parties to choose from instead of just one.
Time makes more converts than reason
When you get down to it, if I have to name the nation's most Corrupt Administration off the top of my head, I'd say Andrew Jackson.
Agreed! When Jackson forced the Cherokee living in the Carolinas, and northern Georgia, west on the Trail Of Tears he was sued in the USSC. When the Justices ruled against him Jackson said he was the commander in chief and if they wanted to stop him then they'd have to get their own army.
Mr. "John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it!" Jackson.
Yeap! That's what he said.
Abraham Lincoln, yo. Writ of habeus what now?
The Justices ruled against him too. It may be ironic, in that he was a slave owner, but Thomas Jefferson was against slavery and may of tried to do the most for liberty. In early drafts of the DOI, Declaration of Independence Jefferson wrote everybody including slaves and women had the same rights. However because some who believed in slavery eventually signed the DIO this was taken out.
FalconShould there be a Law?
There can be no surer way to popularize TOR(The Onion Router) than to implement this sort of surveillance.
Look, congress will do nothing just because you wrote a letter. If they were really wanting to clean up, then they would doing such things as push to have Sibel Edmonds ungagged.
It would be nice if Sibel Edmonds were ungagged however as with many other dreams I've had I doubt it will ever happen. If people knew just how bad things were in the FBI's translation unit they'd loose all belief in the FBI. Not having read or heard about her for some months I went ahead and News Googled her and there was all of five results, and what was the first one? Narconew's Narcosphere, besides /. one of my fav websites.
FalconShould there be a Law?
We could make sure no 'normal' person, in the world, emails pictures of their kids, gets a bit to 'extreme' in their home made porn, or wears the wrong colour tie in photos.
Remindes me of a case that came up a few years ago while taking a photography class in college. Some parent took photos of their child(ren) whiile in the bathtub. They dropped off the film and went to pick up up later. When they claimed the photos they were arrested for child pornography. I find this sad, growing up it was common for a parent to take a photo like this and no one thought bad of it. Years ago I used to be a member of a naturalist, also called nudist, group and with the way things are today I wonder what would happen if parents who were members of such a group brought their child(ren) to meetings or get togethers.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Constitution
Maybe not but at least one USSC ruled Habeas Corpus is a right and that denying it is unconstitutional:
1861: Abraham Lincoln detains thousands, ignores court
During the Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln suspends the writ of habeas corpus, arresting anyone who expresses sympathy with the South and holding them without presenting evidence against them or giving them a trial. Hundreds of draft resisters are imprisoned, along with newspaper editors, judges, lawyers, and legislators. By some estimates, more than 13,000 people are arrested overall. When Chief Justice Roger Taney declares the president's actions unconstitutional, Lincoln blatantly ignores the ruling. He also shuts down newspapers that express pro-South views.
Nor the right to privacy.
Again, at least one USSC ruling affirmed privacy is a Constitutional right. I don't have a handy link but in the early 1800s the USSC ruled that the right to anonymity is an important part of the freedom of speech, if people couldn't remain anonymous then they weren't able to enjoy political speech freely, that if they had to give up anonymity what they say could be used against them they couldn't enjoy free speech.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Michael Badnarik.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Who said I was joking.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
If you read the link that he points to, it shows that Sibel Edmunds may finally be able to testify by simply connecting the dots between known info. If she does, this will probably cause Congress to act and finally push to have her gag order removed (even if it takes down one or two top dems).
Gads, I hope it is true.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
it shows that Sibel Edmunds may finally be able to testify by simply connecting the dots between known info.
Maybe I missed it but I went up to the top and didn't see a link about Sibel Edmunds, except the one I posted, which says this. Maybe someone else posted another one.
Gads, I hope it is true.
I'd love to see Sibel being able to speak out without a sword hanging over her head.
FalconShould there be a Law?
I don't know what ACMENEWSLLC means so I can't say whether I am or am not.
But I am curious. Were you a registered Republican in 2004? Did you vote in the primaries? For whom?
Since the first tyme I registered to vote I've registered as independent or no party affiliation. I prefer to do my own thinking and not what some party wants. I've voted for candidates from 5 different parties, Democrats, Green, Libertarian, Reform, and Republican. And as I've only been registered in two states and both require party affiliation to vote in primaries I've never voted in them. However if come next year Ron Paul is in the Republican primary I will change my affliation to Republican just to vote for him, of course afterwards I'll change it back to no party affiliation. I've already voted for him once, in 1988 he ran for president as the Libertarian Party candidate and voted for him then. Actually it during that election that I heard of and learned about the LP, and been a supporter since.
Did you support Badnarik's lawsuit challenging the Ohio results?
I don't ever recall hearing about a lawsuit Badnarik filed. I would support such a lawsuit though, especially after Deibold's CEO pledged to deliver Ohio's vote to Bush after the state bought Deibold voting machines.
FalconShould there be a Law?
I'd think a true independent, who'd even temporarily join parties just to promote individual candidates, would have heard if their candidate were suing for a recount.
I don't pay as much attention as I should I admit. Right now I'm just trying to live day by day, it's been a struggle for me since I survived a terrible accident which left me with a diability. While I was in a coma the docs told my family it would be a miracle if I lived but I'd argue with them now.
FalconShould there be a Law?
and eventually thrive. Sounds like you've already gotten thru the worst. Good luck.
Thanks. In a sense some say I was thriving, after going through my medical records the docs and therapists I saw said it was amazing I was doing so well. However most things are a struggle for me.
FalconShould there be a Law?