DHS Sends Tourists Home Over Twitter Jokes

itwbennett writes "In a classic case of 'we say destroy, you say party hard,' the U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security detained a pair of British twenty-somethings for 12 hours and then sent them packing back to the land of the cheeky retort. At issue is a Tweet sent by Leigh Van Bryan about plans to 'destroy America,' starting with LA, which, really, isn't that bad an idea."

Comments

Zeig Heil

[MitchDev]

herr DHS. DHS and the Patriot Act, destroying a once great nation one bit at a time.

Re:Zeig Heil

[betterunixthanunix]

We have been going down this road for a long time now, long before the patriot act. Remember CALEA, the act that required phone companies to give the police easy wiretapping access? How about the War on Drugs? The United States has been taking baby steps toward tyranny for decades.

Re:Zeig Heil

[Commontwist]

Nah, it's just that common sense is a superpower.

Or both. *shakes head*

Re:Zeig Heil

[siddesu]

You are obviously forgetting McCarthy, who was doing his best to protect America from subversive elements long before CALEA and the WoD, the incarceration of American Japanese, and who knows what else before these.

All people seem to just be born as scared-to-death xenophobes, and most just don't learn any better as they age.

Re:Zeig Heil

[Mashiki]

If I remember correctly CALEA still requires a warrant.

Re:Zeig Heil

[Anonymous Coward]

"Requiring a warrant" is a joke. The FISA courts approve about 99.5 percent of requests: http://epic.org/privacy/wiretap/stats/fisa_stats.html

Re:Zeig Heil

[postbigbang]

We may never know. The secret US Federal Security Court can issue blanket extractions at will, and does. Of course, the telcos and other services will likely give up phone records at the drop of a hat.

So we won't know, and a warrant is probably unknown whimsy anyway. I, like others, would like to believe that the principles of the US Constitution and the rule of law are incarnate, but it is not, as is proven time and again.... and not one government official is convicted for the breaches.

Re:Zeig Heil

[element-o.p.]

Be that as it may, a warrant still provides some kind of tracking. I strongly suspect that implies that a cop isn't going to request a warrant on a lark even if 99.5% of them are approved, because someday, someone could look at his requests and find out how many of them panned out to be legitimate investigations and how many were snooping/harassment/other abuse.

Re:Zeig Heil

[betterunixthanunix]

While simultaneously requiring the creation of a vast wiretapping infrastructure that is easily abused. All it would take is some kind of a law that allowed the government to bypass the warrant procedure, or to obtain and execute warrants in secret.

Re:Zeig Heil

[exomondo]

What, btw, is an emporer?

An emperor with the o and e the wrong way round?

Re:Zeig Heil

[jamstar7]

From what I understand, the few FISA warrants that were kicked were because the agents requesting them fucked up on the paperwork. The court told them redo the paperwork. They did, and got their warrants.

Re:Zeig Heil

[TwilightXaos]

'Emporer' is the american spelling.

Re:Zeig Heil

[Anonymous Coward]

As a European, the modern day McCarthyism is 'anti-xenophobism'. So it can go both ways.

E.g. a school hosts a political debate that pupils attend, a tradition here. The representative from one party starts the debate by saying: "There is at pupil here who is a member of a racist organisation, his name is ____". Named 16-year-old has to change schools.

Re:Zeig Heil

[Culture20]

despots usually get assinated

That sounds unpleasant.

Re:Zeig Heil

[exomondo]

suggesting the guy is not american, still means pretty much the same thing either way.

Re:Zeig Heil

[Moryath]

We haven't believed in the right of gun ownership since George Washington sent in the troops to quell the Whiskey Rebellion.

Really, the only way you're ever going to have a revolution is if you have the military on your side. Otherwise, those in power will think nothing of sending in tanks and helicopters for strafing runs as a start.

Just wait. One of these days, the National Mall or some other location in the US will make Tiananmen Square look like nothing. Fuck if the Oakland PD haven't done a good job of doing shit like it already - or did you think that the asshole using a whole bottle of pepper spray on a group of people sitting nonviolently on the ground was unplanned?

Re:Zeig Heil

[Sponge Bath]

All people seem to just be born as scared-to-death xenophobes, and most just don't learn any better as they age.

Native Americans probably would be better off if they had been *more* xenophobic. Beware Europeans bearing blankets.

Re:Zeig Heil

[postbigbang]

Yeah, that makes them guilty. Must've been looking suspicious or something.

Re:Zeig Heil

[Anonymous Coward]

Beware Europeans bearing blankets.

Beware ANYONE bearing ANYTHING. Be nice, be friendly, but there is no such thing as a gift with no strings attached.

Re:Zeig Heil

[mug funky]

TSA agent with passport in hand, google in the other. it's not hard to social-network stalk somebody.

Re:Zeig Heil

[PopeRatzo]

DHS and the Patriot Act, destroying a once great nation one bit at a time.

Yeah, but they're really small little bits. So small that if you squint, you don't see them.

Today, I saw kids smoking weed about a block from a high school, watched a downloaded film, did tai chi in the park, read a pretty radical book while sitting on a big cement block in front of the Dirksen Federal Building (it was almost 50 outside here in Chicago today).

I read articles about hundreds of people protesting in one town and a bunch getting arrested and hundreds protesting in another town and nobody got arrested, so there still seems to be a fair amount of localization of the phenomena.

I drove back from a week in Memphis this past weekend, and I didn't really notice the gulags and FEMA prison camps. In fact, I saw a whole bunch of bumper stickers which were about as disrespectful to the president as it gets and the people driving didn't seem all that worried about getting arrested and tortured.

I think it's absolutely appropriate to talk about certain laws as being fucked up, wrongheaded and a big mistake. In fact, so many people did that about a particularly bad law a few weeks ago (SOPA) that there were congressmen who decided it was better not to vote for it.

Yes, there are forces trying to make things worse, and there are forces who are trying to make things better. The "worse" side is better funded, but the "better" side is more talented, more technologically skilled and has better-looking chicks.

It doesn't help when you talk about "destroying a great nation" because sane people say, "What the fuck is he talking about?" Better to talk about, "This is a shitty fucking law, and if we all go down and get in some congresspeople's faces, there's a good chance we can scare them into not voting for it." A bunch of idiots and paid shills known as the "tea party" did that in 2009 and '10 and made all the politicians shit themselves. Imagine what a bunch of motivated, reasonably intelligent people with good communications and technical skill could do. When the Patriot Act passed, everybody was too scared and/or lazy to do anything about it. 9/11 was still a fresh memory and nobody knew what the fuck to do. Most important, nobody went to get all up in their congress-critter's face and made him shit his pants. There's actually a pretty good tradition of making politicians shit their pants in this country and it's a tradition that people have forgotten, thinking that if they tweet enough, and put enough comments on the Internet, that's just as good as having 100 people show up at a congressman's event and getting all up in his face.

If you're an American citizen, or a resident of the US, stop whining and go make a politician shit himself. If you're from anywhere else, take a look at the sequoia in your own country's eye (UK and Europe, I'm looking at you) before you start pissing and moaning about the douglas fir in our eye and the "fall of the once-great America".

Hell, I'm still trying to figure out when the golden era of the "once great America" actually happened. When I was born, you couldn't drink out of the same water fountain as me if you were sufficiently dark-skinned and there has been some kind of ugly shit or another every decade since. Everybody's responsible for their own golden fucking age, OK? If you want some, you have got to make it happen.

Re:Zeig Heil

[jmcvetta]

27 Feb 1933 : Germany :: 11 Sep 2011 : USA

Re:Zeig Heil

[Aryden]

That's assuming the military goes along with it. Having been in the military myself, and having family still in, I can tell you know that there are no orders issued by any commanding officer that would cause them to open fire on U.S. citizens unless their own lives were in imminent danger.

Re:Zeig Heil

[PCM2]

What, btw, is an emporer?

In the hierarchy of the American oligarchs, the emporer is a most exalted merchant; traditionally, he is also allowed to bear the title of First Citizen of the Emporium.

Re:Zeig Heil

[Aryden]

umm w.a.s.p... were they not white anglo-saxon protestants? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2093796/British-tourists-arrested-America-terror-charges-Twitter-jokes.html

Re:Zeig Heil

[Seumas]

SEE SOMETHING; SAY SOMETHING

Re:Zeig Heil

[NotSanguine]

All people seem to just be born as scared-to-death xenophobes, and most just don't learn any better as they age.

I once thought of taking advantage of that and becoming emporer of the US. Then I remembered history and that despots usually get assinated or at least have to live in fear for their lives.

Then I tought, well I could be a multimillionaire radio talke show host and do spots on Fox News. Then I thought better of that too. I'd be rich but I'd be considered an ass clown by folks who matter and being considered a "hero" by the fans, well, it's like being thought of as a god by your dog.

Almost all of the things you mention would probably require a reasonable level of literacy, which you don't appear to have. So I guess it's a good thing you decided not to become "Emporer." Goodness knows, we wouldn't want you to get "assinated." (is that another word for becoming an ass clown?). Lucky you.

Re:Zeig Heil

[grcumb]

That's assuming the military goes along with it. Having been in the military myself, and having family still in, I can tell you know that there are no orders issued by any commanding officer that would cause them to open fire on U.S. citizens unless their own lives were in imminent danger.

I know you believe this, but the Ohio National Guard beg to differ.

Re:Zeig Heil

[NotSanguine]

'Emporer' is the american spelling.

Actually, it's not the American spelling. It's the illiterate jackass spelling.

Re:Zeig Heil

[magarity]

You are obviously forgetting McCarthy, who was doing his best to protect America from subversive elements.

McCarthy was obsessed about Soviet spies in the State Department and the Venona files pretty much showed he was right. Like most people you've probably confused Senator McCarthy, who was mainly just guilty of being a jerk, with the truly noxious House Un-American Activities Committee.

Re:Zeig Heil

[Anonymous Coward]

It's the illiterate jackass spelling.

Kinda like "Zieg [sic] Heil," hey?

Re:Zeig Heil

[cold fjord]

That sounds unpleasant.

For the 98.5%*, yes.

The 1.5%

Re:Zeig Heil

[circletimessquare]

Best comment on slashdot so far this year

Re:Zeig Heil

[cold fjord]

"Requiring a warrant" is a joke. The FISA courts approve about 99.5 percent of requests: http://epic.org/privacy/wiretap/stats/fisa_stats.html

Because Intelligence agencies and prosecutors self-select on what cases they take to court. No sense going through the trouble unless you are fairly certain you will get the warrant.

Re:Zeig Heil

[snowgirl]

Remember CALEA, the act that required phone companies to give the police easy wiretapping access?

Look, I'm all for resisting increased government power, but if they obtain a warrant, then they should have easy wiretap access.

Re:Zeig Heil

[Anonymous Coward]

McCarthy was actually right in a lot of cases, and a lot of people he got ridiculed for saying were Communists later admitted they were. Doesn't mean they were subversive or working with the Soviets, but McCarthy was right and they were lying.

Re:Zeig Heil

[rrohbeck]

Overzealous border guards are a typical sign of a totalitarian state.
The last time I heard something like this happening was when a bunch of West German students were sent back at the East German border after making jokes.
The only other place where this must happen regularly is at the South/North Korean border.
Oh and I have destroyed many Americans too. At the Oktoberfest. Does that count?

Re:Zeig Heil

[Anonymous Coward]

Those poor xenophobes, my heart weeps for people who'd love to trample on other people just because they are different. Their secret membership in various oranizations truly is an important right, clearly secrecy is the best way to achieve your reasonable and fair political goals.

Re:Zeig Heil

[gaspar ilom]

It IS that bad -- your comment seriously downplays what's been going on. Part of the problem is that not all Americans are affected to the same degree. (which is perhaps why you haven't noticed.) Look at the differential rates of incarceration, depending on what race you are. (holding constant particular crimes & crime rates, eg: white vs. black drug use rates are nearly identical for various drugs -- but the incarceration rate for blacks can be more than X10.) Or, just look at this guy, who just spent TWO YEARS in solitary confinement, after having had NO TRIAL.

Meanwhile, if you were the decision-maker at a bank that issued "liar's loans" en masse -- or led one of the credit agencies that fraudulently rated these bundled mortgages as "AAA" -- I guarantee that you got off scott-free! No one has gone to jail, or even been arrested for these crimes. (described & documented by many people, e.g.: William Black, here.) ...even though the ENTIRE ECONOMY NEARLY COLLAPSED -- putting the both the Constitution and American lives in peril.

That's just a few small examples of how law & order have broken down in this country.

Re:Zeig Heil

[Aryden]

The National Guard and the U.S. Army live under very different rules my friend. The NG is controlled by the Governor and CAN be used without invoking martial law. The U.S. Army is controlled by the President and cannot be used with out martial law being invoked. Redneck weekend warriors is most of what I've met as far as NG's go, with very few being former active duty personnel wishing to continue service while living a civilian life.

Re:Zeig Heil

[microbox]

All people seem to just be born as scared-to-death xenophobes, and most just don't learn any better as they age.

This is wrong.

Xenophobia is almost certainly a biologically based trait.

Re:Zeig Heil

[Anonymous Coward]

Considering how little priority the USA gives to education, isn't that pretty much one in the same?

Re:Zeig Heil

[grcumb]

The National Guard and the U.S. Army live under very different rules my friend.

No argument from me on that count. But I believe the reference was to 'the military', of which the National Guard is most definitely a part.

And while this didn't involve exchange of fire (but did involve tanks and cavalry, whose movements can be deadly in close quarters), the Army has indeed been used against innocent American civilians.

Re:Zeig Heil

[gaspar ilom]

You can't be serious. Failed federal policies, facilitated by corporate-financed corruption, nearly caused the entire American economy to collapse. ...A collapse big enough to put both the Constitution and countless American lives in jeopardy. Next time, we might not be so lucky.

Re:Zeig Heil

[PopeRatzo]

Look at the differential rates of incarceration, depending on what race you are.

That predates the Internet age by more than a century.

Or, just look at this guy, who just spent TWO YEARS in solitary confinement, after having had NO TRIAL.

Again, nothing that hasn't been happening for almost as long as the US has been around.

My point was that this notion that, "OMG! Everything is turning to shit overnight!" is wrong and a distraction. The panic in that notion actually does more to prevent people from improving things than it does to induce people to improve them. The US has not turned into some slave-state in the past decade, it was born as a slave state. Which by the way, does not make me pessimistic about the future. You can only work with what you've got.

That's just a few small examples of how law & order have broken down in this country.

See, that's the problem. You believe we have crossed some threshold and things have "broken down" and I see that things have been broken from the start. If you start looking around for something that happened recently to make everything break down, you're going to miss the fundamental mistakes that we've been making all along as a society (and maybe as individuals).

You're panicking. Don't panic. It doesn't help to panic. Think about what you can do to make things better. This is not some crisis situation that has just arisen, it's part of an age-old battle. Panic will most likely get you to do nothing.

The most effective way to stop things going in a direction you don't like is to get in the way. It's always been like this. People with power don't let go without a good reason, and it's up to people who want things to go differently to give them a good reason. There are people who have lost all fellow-feeling and who have decided to get what they can while the getting's good. Again, this is not new. We have to get in their way. Make them think that maybe it's less trouble to do the right thing. And even if you think you don't have any resources and you have no power, you can always do something to get in the way. But you can't be a pussy about it, running around in a circle and screaming "Oh shit oh shit oh shit nazis are coming" and clutching your pearls and saying "what ever shall we do?!?"

In the absence of a plan, at least get pissed off. It's not a solution, but it might be enough to get you off your ass. Because one thing we know for absolutely sure, if we all just stay on our asses, the chances of things going the way we want approaches zero.

Start by cultivating some fellow-feeling. Realize the people around you are scared too. If you're part of a community, even if it's just being a good neighbor, you're less vulnerable. If you worry about getting carted off to the gulag by the Belgian military, first make sure there are people around you who would notice if you disappeared. It's a start.

Re:Zeig Heil

[PopeRatzo]

.A collapse big enough to put both the Constitution and countless American lives in jeopardy.

Welcome to America. We've been here and done that before. Got the t-shirt. And judging European history, it's not really unique to us.

And then people did some stuff and things got better.

Every so often, people have to do some stuff to keep away the darkness. So far, all I hear from you is darkness-cursing. Go light a fucking candle for christ's sake.

Re:Zeig Heil

[Requiem18th]

Extirmenatus! For Emporer!

Re:Zeig Heil

[ciotog]

Oxemondo is right

Re:Zeig Heil

[korean.ian]

There is much controversy over the Venona Files, and if you were merely a member of the Communist Party of America, and not spying for the Soviets, with that level of hysteria, you would certainly lie your ass off too lest you get hauled off to the 50's equivalent of Guantanamo Bay.
McCarthy might have been right some of the time, but he was certainly not innocent of creating a poisoned atmosphere.

Re:Zeig Heil

[Aryden]

It was used, you are correct. If it happened today, don't you think Hoover would be crucified?

Re:Zeig Heil

[Loki_666]

I once thought of taking advantage of that and becoming emporer of the US.

Its been done before: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emperor_Norton

Re:Zeig Heil

[bemymonkey]

That's a bit of a dark path to start down.

I find myself rather more reminded of Harold and Kumar 2...

"Don't worry, it's just a bong!"
"He said he has a bomb!"
*Bong breaks*
"Aaaaah, poison gas!!!"

Re:Zeig Heil

[GauteL]

Look I'm not saying this as a "flag burning" hater of America, but what is this Once Great Nation you're talking about? Was there ever a single time in American history where a great atrocity wasn't occurring?

The country was created from genocide of native Americans, built upon the rock of slavery and may perhaps have started becoming "free" for a large part of the population in the 1960s. You had your own concentration camps for the Japanese and McCarthyism showed that even as a white middle class male, your freedoms were severely limited.

Don't get me wrong, many great things have been achieved in America, but this "once great nation" stuff requires an awful lot of white washing of history. This is no different from most countries that have played a big role in history, but you are probably the best in the western world at ignoring large parts of your history so you can call yourselves great.

Re:Zeig Heil

[myowntrueself]

All people seem to just be born as scared-to-death xenophobes, and most just don't learn any better as they age.

This is wrong.

Xenophobia is almost certainly a biologically based trait.

Interesting. This may explain why xenophobia is common throughout the English speaking world. I grew up in the UK and lived in some other parts of the Anglo-Saxon world. Today I cannot think of a single English-speaking, Anglo-Saxon country that I'd want to live in. Give me continental Europe ANY day.

Re:Zeig Heil

[da8add1e]

What i read that as is .. "we the Members of the AmerAryan Race are just fine thanks, it's just everyone else we want to treat like second class and bomb and put in concentration camps" (anyone remember Gitmo, it's still there you know!)

Re:Zeig Heil

[eggstasy]

Obviously I can't know if you're gay or simply poking fun at them, but for the benefit of the general population:

1) Not all gay men enjoy anal sex.
2) All my gay friends would resent being stereotyped as mere sodomites! :)
3) A gay man is a man who FALLS IN LOVE with men, not some pervert with a fetish for having anal sex with other men.

That sentence alone was the tipping point that made me truly accept gay men as being a normal part of the population.

Thanks for listening :)

Re:Zeig Heil

[gl4ss]

requiring a warrant = requiring a paper trail more than just donut receipts from stakeout night.

Re:Zeig Heil

[semiotec]

I beg to differ!

Perhaps to your untrained eyes, the poster appears to have poor grasp of the English language and suffers from frequent lack of accuracy in spelling, but I am entirely convinced that this Anonymous Coward in fact wields English with such Mastery as to dethrone the Bard at his finest!

Let's examine the two examples that you have brought up:

"Emporer" appears to be an incorrect spelling of the word "Emperor". However, I believe the word in fact derives from "emporium", i.e. the "emporer" would in fact mean the "shopkeeper"! It is obvious that he or she is alluding to the rise of USA through capitalism, and making the claim that the ones of stand highest in the land are corporate CEOs!

"Assinated" also appears to be a poor rendition of the word "assassinated". But the correct interpretation is that it comes from the word "asinine", i.e. to be "assinated" means to be made "extremely foolish or stupid", indeed the fate most feared by despots! And ironically, through your ignorance, you were correct in your guess and that the word "assinated" does in fact mean "to be made an ass clown".

I pray that you will careful study this particularly fine piece of writing again and try to divine the finer meanings!

Re:Zeig Heil

[BlackPignouf]

s/Zeig/Sieg/

Re:Zeig Heil

[Anonymous Coward]

All people seem to just be born as scared-to-death xenophobes, and most just don't learn any better as they age.

Native Americans probably would be better off if they had been *more* xenophobic. Beware Europeans bearing blankets.

We gave them whiskey and smallpox, they gave us tobacco and syphilis. Fair Trade.

Re:Zeig Heil

[tragedy]

How easy? When the police get a warrant to search an apartment, the landlord isn't obligated to search the apartment for them, and certainly not on an ongoing basis for months, even for monetary compensation. To the best of my understanding - and I'm not a lawyer - the landlord isn't even required to open the door for them or give them the key, although it's in their best interest since the police are within their rights to break in.

To wiretap, the police used to have to literally tap wires in a utility closet or out on a pole. It's more convenient for them, and for the phone companies (to avoid damage to their equipment) to just be able to get a direct feed from the phone company servers. Somehow, however, it's become a right of the police. This is pretty much the same as a search warrant requiring a landlord to do the searching for the police and it's bad for all of us. For one thing, for the sake of privacy and security, we should probably all be using encryption by now. With the current state of the law, I'm pretty sure that it's not even legal for telecoms to facilitate that for their customers without a back door that breaks the whole thing.

So, I'm not saying that telecoms should be obstructing the police when they have a warrant, but why should they be required to bend over backwards to facilitate things for the police?

Re:Zeig Heil

[tragedy]

That's not really the point though. The point is that the war on drugs isn't working. People can still get the drugs - even after they've been sent to prison - and still destroy their lives with them. Thanks to the war on drugs, it's actually about ten times easier for them to destroy their lives with drugs. There certainly are reasons to discourage people from taking drugs but the policies of the drug war are literally killing tens of thousands of people a year, wasting massive amounts of money, creating all kinds of extra crime, and not achieving their stated goals. So why continue this abysmal failure?

Re:Zeig Heil

[Ihmhi]

We haven't believed in the right of gun ownership since George Washington sent in the troops to quell the Whiskey Rebellion.

You live in a city, huh?

I do too, but speak for yourself on whether or not we believe in the right of gun ownership. I very much believe in the right, and thanks to recent Supreme Court rulings (which struck down banning ownership of guns as unconstitutional) even if you live in a hippie bastion like San Francisco you can legally own and purchase a firearm.

However, just because you can get one doesn't mean they make it easy or cheap. NJ, for instance, typically takes six months to clear all of your paperwork - they drag their feet on purpose. But if you go out into any rural area, firearms are way, way more common.

I digress, it's not even about rural or city, it's about the attitude of people. Look at Pennsylvania with their halfway decent firearm laws. You could be in the center of the biggest city in the state and see someone open-carrying.

Re:Zeig Heil

[Ihmhi]

Sir, you are a gentlemen and a scholar.

Re:Zeig Heil

[smurfsurf]

Actually, we do not know if the approval rate is due to the FISA courts just nodding off requests or if it is due to good self-selection of cases. You can argue both sides. What side you lean towards depends on how much you trust these courts to do their job. Without an independent, trusted review, we will never really know.

Re:Zeig Heil

[Ihmhi]

You had your own concentration camps for the Japanese

Hold it right there.

Yes, we had internment camps. I know "concentration camps" is a proper term, but this is unfortunately one of those words that only really has one meaning in the public conscious - a camp wherein industrialized murder and subsequent elimination of undesirables take place.

Our government (which we as Americans are responsible for) may have locked up the Japanese, stolen their property, and made the majority of them practically destitute after the war - but we didn't herd them into large gas chambers, kill them, and cremate the corpses. I'm not saying what we did is right, but I am saying it's very different and I ask that you please be careful with your wording.

Re:Zeig Heil

[XrayJunkie]

"Requiring a warrant" is a joke. The FISA courts approve about 99.5 percent of requests: http://epic.org/privacy/wiretap/stats/fisa_stats.html

Then maybe they create a webportal with an easy to use printable form.

Re:Zeig Heil

[Z00L00K]

Emporer is obviously someone that creates pores.

What other use could you have for that word?

Re:Zeig Heil

[freedom_india]

Actually, Joe McCarthy was accurate in many aspects. That is why reports ABOUT him from FBI are blocked and many of his papers are either too restricted or have disappeared. Try fetching information about him under FOIA. See how much you can get.

Re:Zeig Heil

[MitchDev]

Give America time, or more likely, wait for the stories to start surfacing...

Re:Zeig Heil

[Anonymous Coward]

Happened to Gaddaffi.

Re:Zeig Heil

[circletimessquare]

Not one for history huh?

Study up on the banking panics of the 1800s.

But I'm with msr p ratzo: man up or shut up. There's a certain style of bloviating loudmouth who wallows in gloom and doom, and that's all you do. Fucking useless. All you are really doing is tweaking an inflated sense of self-regard, and contributing nothing of use or value to anyone.

Re:Zeig Heil

[Thing 1]

Woodpeckers create pores in trees. :)

Re:Zeig Heil

[the entropy]

The difference being?

Re:Zeig Heil

[the entropy]

My mind fixed that word while I was reading, I didn't notice the typo. Thank you for making my day by pointing it out, "assinated" :D

Re:Zeig Heil

[PopeRatzo]

What i read that as is .. "we the Members of the AmerAryan Race are just fine thanks, it's just everyone else we want to treat like second class and bomb and put in concentration camps" (anyone remember Gitmo, it's still there you know!)

You've got me wrong. If I were the rest of the world, I'd vote the US off the island. I can understand the concern the rest of the world has about us.

But please don't pretend that this is all a sudden occurrence. We've been cause for concern since before July 4, 1776 and for good reason.

But we've also been the source of a fair amount of good. It comes with being, as we were for a while, the biggest swinging dick on the block.

Oh, and I am not anything like "aryan" you piece of shit. That nazi shit was not an American innovation. That was home-grown Central European "feature not a bug" stuff. Again, I only know it from reading history, but not all of the countries of Europe (or of the World) thought Third Reich was all that bad. And I've got a late father with a bronze star to prove that the US was at least a little helpful in regard to getting rid of those concentration camps.

Re:Zeig Heil

[JasterBobaMereel]

Try a French, German, etc ... speaking country instead ... where there is a similar level of Xenophobia in a small number of people ...

What we call Anglo-Saxon were actually made up of Angles, Saxons, Jutes, Frisii and Franks - i.e. most of northern and mid Europe

The people of the USA, are a mix of the same people with a proportion of Eastern Europeans, Africans, Spanish, Mexicans, and of course Natives ...and they are still quite Xenophobic ...

It's nothing to do with speaking English, or Being of Celtic/Nordic stock ... it has a lot to do with any division of them and us ... (e.g. Japan is very friendly to foreigners, who are a minority and not considered a threat, but have a long history of suppressing the Ainu, who to westerners look the same as most Japanese)

Re:Zeig Heil

[thej1nx]

I give up... what is the difference?

Re:Zeig Heil

[Anonymous Coward]

So according to (3) I could enjoy anal sex with a man but because I don't fall in love with them, I'm not gay?

Re:Zeig Heil

[vegiVamp]

> getting carted off to the gulag by the Belgian military

Oh, that's rich, that is. Last thing you lot saw of our military was the then-minister of defence getting drunk off his arse in a bar in NY, and then getting the (belgian) barmaid who blogged about it fired. Google translated article here: http://preview.tinyurl.com/7zl5o2v

The only thing the Belgian military is likely to do is have a pint with you while explaining how a 10 million inhabitant country has no less than six governments.

Apart from that, you're making valid points, of course :-)

Re:Zeig Heil

[DarkOx]

Right but originally it was argued that FISA courts would take to long and represent a significant impediment to investigation. This would seem to be false; as all to documentation indicates FISA courts almost always issue warrants when requested and do so quickly.

I am sure the intelligence agency do self select. Which means the system is working to an extent. The court being there is supposed to prevent baseless infringements on the rights of the people; to that extent its effective independent of its rejecting warrant applications or by virtue of the process simply being in place preventing intelligence agencies from bothering with that which they know the court would refuse.

Re:Zeig Heil

[Remus Shepherd]

He mis-spelled it. He meant 'em-poorer', as in somebody who makes a great nation poorer than before.

Re:Zeig Heil

[BenoitRen]

And then people did some stuff and things got better.

Things got better after the economical collapse because Europe got destroyed and then rebuilt. We pretty much started back from zero. I don't think this is an option now.

Re:Zeig Heil

[Insightfill]

Oh, his mastery goes on:

Then I tought...

Of course, "tought" is an archaic form of "taught", meaning not only is he a scholar, but also quite the historian of language. We could all learn something from his "teechings" I'm sure.

... well I could be a multimillionaire radio talke show host and do spots on Fox News.

"Talke" of course is a "faux Old English" variation of "talk". The AC is obviously taunting us with this tongue-in-cheek 'fake authentic' touch.

Re:Zeig Heil

[Ihmhi]

I don't think we're there yet and I honestly hope we never will be.

Gitmo makes me very uneasy in this regard. It's small, but that doesn't make it any less evil.

Re:Zeig Heil

[Guppy]

Kinda like "Zieg [sic] Heil," hey?

Move Zieg. For Great Justice.

Re:Zeig Heil

[kilfarsnar]

It's too bad you were modded down, because you are absolutely correct.

Re:Zeig Heil

[LordLimecat]

You had your own concentration camps for the Japanese and McCarthyism showed that even as a white middle class male, your freedoms were severely limited.

That, at least, is a bit of exaggeration. We certainly did intern Japanese, and it certainly isnt one of our finer moments, but dont think for a moment you can compare it with nazi concentration camps. Im pretty sure we werent starving and working Japanese to death and gassing the rest of them. I havent been able to find anything to indicate that it was anything like your classic European ghetto.

Re:Zeig Heil

[quintus_horatius]

All people seem to just be born as scared-to-death xenophobes, and most just don't learn any better as they age.

This is wrong. Xenophobia is almost certainly a biologically based trait.

This isn't a contradiction. It is possible to learn new behaviors and suppress old ones. Just because a behavior is biologically based doesn't mean that it is right, and doesn't mean that we cannot overcome it and behave better.

Re:Zeig Heil

[Runaway1956]

Ho-hum. Peter puffer, or fudge packer, it makes no difference to me. Queer is queer. Why quibble over details?

Re:Zeig Heil

[Runaway1956]

The Fox News gig doesn't require literacy. I think he still has a chance of succeeding in life!

Re:Zeig Heil

[networkBoy]

+999 internets to you good sir.

Re:Zeig Heil

[tehcyder]

All people seem to just be born as scared-to-death xenophobes, and most just don't learn any better as they age.

This is wrong.

Xenophobia is almost certainly a biologically based trait.

Interesting. This may explain why xenophobia is common throughout the English speaking world. I grew up in the UK and lived in some other parts of the Anglo-Saxon world. Today I cannot think of a single English-speaking, Anglo-Saxon country that I'd want to live in. Give me continental Europe ANY day.

Yeah those fun-loving Germans, Italians and Spanish certainly haven't got any recent history of xenophobia, racism and fascism.

Re:Zeig Heil

[stealth_finger]

despots usually get assinated

That sounds unpleasant.

Not as unpleasant as you might think, only about half as bad as being assassinated!

Re:Zeig Heil

[tehcyder]

So according to (3) I could enjoy anal sex with a man but because I don't fall in love with them, I'm not gay?

That's a slightly more sophisticated version of "if your balls don't touch, it's not gay".

Re:Zeig Heil

[MitchDev]

Hope you're right, but I just think the truth has been hidden well enough we don't know just how bad it is...

Re:Zeig Heil

[tehcyder]

That's assuming the military goes along with it. Having been in the military myself, and having family still in, I can tell you know that there are no orders issued by any commanding officer that would cause them to open fire on U.S. citizens unless their own lives were in imminent danger.

In the UK we managed to get round the problem of British soldiers in Northern Ireland shooting British citizens easily enough. A couple of shots on Bloody Sunday ended up with a lot of dead civilians.

If you're a soldier carrying a weapon in a hostile environment (even if it's "only" students chucking rocks and petrol bombs at you) it is not then much of a step to believing that a demonstrator has what looks like a gun or that you heard gunfire, and your life is in imminent danger.

I wouldn't be too optimistic. I doubt that your Marines are much different from our Paras when push comes to shove.

Re:Zeig Heil

[tehcyder]

The National Guard and the U.S. Army live under very different rules my friend. The NG is controlled by the Governor and CAN be used without invoking martial law. The U.S. Army is controlled by the President and cannot be used with out martial law being invoked.

So if there was a violent situation where the National Guard were in danger of being overpowered/outgunned by a mob, do you really believe that if martial law was declared, the US Army wouldn't support the National Guard rather than the mob?

Re:Zeig Heil

[microbox]

What you say is true. However, one should consider that different proclivities have different strengths in the individual. A more precise societal discourse on the basis of behaviour would address these issues. But no, instead we have social-constructionists (and others) running around shaming people because they think they are morally better.

Re:Zeig Heil

[BitZtream]

You seem to have this silly idea that those are required to fight the military rather effectively.

I would think that the last several years of war where the enemy has been using improvised weapons of far lower quality than owned by most American's with a rather high rate of effectiveness would be some indication of you that high end automatic weapons aren't what decides the battle or the war.

It only takes one bullet to kill, spraying the wall with 100 bullets is a terror tactic used to suppress, not kill, you'll find most of those weapons you think are so great need massive quantities of supplies, and who is going to produce those supplies when they start attacking the factory workers that make them?

Re:Zeig Heil

[microbox]

He said "All people...". This is untrue. There is a continuum of traits. By analogy, it would be ridiculous to say that all people are born with brown skin.

Re:Zeig Heil

[microbox]

No all. Skin colour is a biologically based trait, and we aren't all born with the same skin colour either. I was in substantial agreement with the GP, except that he was projecting his individual experience on to all of humanity, and that was wrong. Biological traits imply diversity. Not everybody needs to grow out of being a racist. Some people just plain don't get the racist thing at all.

Re:Zeig Heil

[Anonymous Coward]

The popular image of Native Americans as hippies who welcomed the European settlers with open arms is a myth. They were plenty xenophobic, we just had better weapons.

Re:Zeig Heil

[Aryden]

I think it would take one hell of a situation to cause the President to send in the Army. I'm not saying it would never happen, I'm saying it would be an extreme circumstance.

Re:Zeig Heil

[StikyPad]

Kinda[sic] like "Zieg [sic] Heil," hey [sic]?

Yes.

Re:Zeig Heil

[Digital Vomit]

Or it could be the "innocent typo" spelling...

(geez..+5 Insightful?!?)

Re:Zeig Heil

[NotSanguine]

Considering how little priority the USA gives to education, isn't that pretty much one in the same?

I refer you to the American Heritage Dictionary

Re:Zeig Heil

[arkane1234]

Don't slap, it's not nice.

Re:Zeig Heil

[shutdown -p now]

How do you know that the organization is actually racist? Just because its opponents said it is.

You've got to be some fascist Nazi commie or something. ~

Re:Zeig Heil

[arkane1234]

Unfortunately, the truly illiterate are too silent ;)

Re:Zeig Heil

[shutdown -p now]

So according to (3) I could enjoy anal sex with a man but because I don't fall in love with them, I'm not gay?

In Afghanistan, that's just so:

"A typical expression, echoed by a number of authors and interviewees, is that homosexuality is indeed prohibited within Islam, warranting great shame and condemnation. However, homosexuality is then narrowly and specifically defined as the love of another man. Loving a man would therefore be unacceptable and a major sin within this cultural interpretation of Islam, but using another man for sexual gratification would be regarded as a foible - undesirable but far preferable to sex with a ineligible woman, which in the context of Pashtun honor, would likely result in issues of revenge and honor killings."

Re:Zeig Heil

[GameboyRMH]

If Xerox made a rubber-stamping machine it wouldn't approve things with such regularity!

Re:Zeig Heil

[GameboyRMH]

You have to wonder why anyone "heard" them? I suspect they were not as milk-toast innocent as
they are made out to be, and were being followed for other reasons.

LOL please, more likely the US' search bots picked up their joke and flagged them as potential terrorists.

Re:Zeig Heil

[oldmac31310]

Huh. I worked for a Japanese company for ten years and I can tell you that many (not all) of the Japanese people I worked with on a daily basis were often outwardly 'friendly to foreigners' but quite often would let slip their true disdain for pretty much anyone (or anything) that was not Japanese, especially Americans, Korean, Chinese and dark skinned people in general. A very strong sense of their own superiority. Anecdotal perhaps, but true.

Re:Zeig Heil

[mattack2]

All people seem to just be born as scared-to-death xenophobes, and most just don't learn any better as they age.

This is wrong.

Xenophobia is almost certainly a biologically based trait.

Aren't you vehemently agreeing?

Re:Zeig Heil

[arkane1234]

It's a homo sapien trait to containerize. This is where "xenophobia" comes from, mostly. It's a defense mechanism mostly, stemming from thousands of years ago.
Not that it's right, it just is. It can, indeed, be nullified to a dull roar, but never eradicated.

Re:Zeig Heil

[arkane1234]

The next time you think that, drive on a freeway.
You'll see primitive characteristics at play, probably the last abilities to let such activities show.

I also suggest you study human psychology.

Re:Zeig Heil

[SpaghettiPattern]

That sentence alone was the tipping point that made me truly accept gay men as being a normal part of the population.

There was someone on /. simply stating that inclinations and looks never are an issue. That to me was the eye opener. Simply not acknowledging that properties like these in people matter is the only acceptable way to behave.

If you feel obliged to utter phrases like "Among my best friends I have ..." or "I have nothing against ..." then that is probably a sign that you still aren't there.

Note to prejudiced smartarses: With inclinations I of course imply legal inclinations. There isn't anything else one could imply by default.

Re:Zeig Heil

[NotSanguine]

One misspelled word = illiteracy! Hooray for the internet and it's totally reasonable expectations!

Actually it was several, along with a variety of grammar and syntax mistakes. Not to mention the delusions of grandeur.

Re:Zeig Heil

[NotSanguine]

Or it could be the "innocent typo" spelling...

(geez..+5 Insightful?!?)

Well, I couldn't have modded it up -- and wouldn't have if I could. I'm kind of surprised myself.

Re:Zeig Heil

[DCFusor]

Here's the problem - They have "the goods" on your congress critter, and nothing you can do will make them not vote for laws like this - blackmail, you bet. And every crappy law, if allowed to sit on the books, gets misused - I am unaware of any exception. Gheesh, what country do you live in? Even rubber-stamp FISA warrants have been abused, and that's not that easy to find out - but it got out. Warrantless wiretapping? Phone companies indemnified for collaborating in illegal acts, government says "you can't try us, we'd have to reveal national security secrets, so no case". Just because they aren't abusing the NDAA now, that we kow of - why did they insist on getting it if they didn't plan to use it - and with a law like that - any use is abuse.

Re:Zeig Heil

[PopeRatzo]

They have "the goods" on your congress critter, and nothing you can do will make them not vote for laws like this

You're right, and that's why we're going to have to get all up in the faces of the corporate leaders too.

This is a consumer-based economy and it's time that consumers realized how much power they have. I'm all for boycotts and general strikes.

The main thing is getting in their way, even with your body if need be. The Occupy protestors were not particularly focused or well-financed or even organized, and yet they got the entire national discussion to switch from a focus on the budget deficit and "austerity" to fairness and social responsibility. Even someone as out of touch as Mitt Romney now refers to "the 99%" even though before the Occupy Movement, the only time Romney thought of "99%" was when he was figuring out how much his money he would try to hide from the IRS.

If you make yourself enough of a nuisance to powerful people who don't have your best interest at heart, you can have an impact out of proportion to how little power you have.

Just because they aren't abusing the NDAA now, that we kow of - why did they insist on getting it if they didn't plan to use it - and with a law like that - any use is abuse.

Absolutely right. But I don't remember any groups of hundreds or thousands of people descending on Washington to protest the NDAA. If those same congress people tried to pass even a mild gun-control law, you can bet there would be hordes of people doing so, and it would have the intended effect.

People are just now figuring out how to use the new communication tools to protest, and it's only going to get better. The authorities will always be behind the curve and we have to take advantage of that.

Re:Zeig Heil

[PopeRatzo]

The only thing the Belgian military is likely to do is have a pint with you while explaining how a 10 million inhabitant country has no less than six governments.

I was joking about the Belgian military of course. But there are more than a few among the right-wing tea party guns-and-bible group who really believe, for some reason, that the New World Order is going to use the "Belgian military" to put their dastardly plans into effect, first by taking away the guns of "patriots".

Don't ask me how these tall tales get started. Probably some crazy talk radio had some whacky theory thirty years ago and now it's become gospel.

If I see members of the Belgian military coming down my street, I'd probably assume they were heading to one of Chicago's blues bars.

Re:Zeig Heil

[PopeRatzo]

Things got better after the economical collapse because Europe got destroyed and then rebuilt. We pretty much started back from zero. I don't think this is an option now.

Don't be so sure. It might not be an option that we would consider, but we know for sure that there is a committed group of powerful people who believe war is a great solution to economic problems.

Re:Zeig Heil

[PopeRatzo]

Your middle of the road interpretation of historical events is - not middle of the road at all.

I don't know what is "middle of the road" about a belief that history is a constant struggle of regular people against a political and economic elite. I subscribe the Howard Zinn's reading of history for the most part. It's only a constant struggle by people in the bottom 90% against the top 1% that has made the world even a little bit livable.

And if it's one thing I do NOT believe it is that the political class does anything good, correct or morally sound. But they are absolutely allergic to being tarred and feathered, and it's only by making them more afraid of us than they are of their corporate masters that can possibly keep them honest.

The whole point of my post is that the last thing that is useful is hysteria because it leads to inaction. There is still a tremendous amount of power in the hands of regular individuals. We have it within our power to make the ruling elite's lives absolutely miserable, and we have to keep those techniques close at hand. Of course, as a group we first have to identify the nexus of big, powerful, non-human entities (corporations) and organizations with military power (governments) as the absolute eternal enemy. When you put those two together, they will always want what's worst for us.

Fortunately, both the corporate elite and governments are vulnerable to big, committed groups of citizens.

Re:Zeig Heil

[siddesu]

Skin colour is different mostly because of environmental differences. What environmental differences do you propose to explain your suggested differences in the expression of genetic xenophobia? Dark skin is beneficial where the sun is strong, lighter skin -- in the latitudes that are closer to the poles, but it seems the cruelty with which people kill the other tribe is approximately the same everywhere.

Re:Zeig Heil

[microbox]

Skin colour is different mostly because of environmental differences. What environmental differences do you propose to explain your suggested differences in the expression of genetic xenophobia? Dark skin is beneficial where the sun is strong, lighter skin -- in the latitudes that are closer to the poles, but it seems the cruelty with which people kill the other tribe is approximately the same everywhere.

lol! Well, culture can affect skill colour too! For example, some people like to go to tanning salons.

In the nature-vs-nurture debate, it is important to realise that this is a false dichotomy. Something can be 80% genetic, and 85% biological. (The remainders being chance factors.)

There are plenty of environmental circumstances that affect xenophobia -- but, according to what Turkheimer 2000 calls the "gloomy prospect", we will never be able to point to reliable environmental predictors of behavioural traits. Social scientists have been trying for, like, 80 years. (Read the paper for more information, it really is very interesting.)

According to Harris (The Nurture Assumption), our early-teenage peer group is a strong shaping factor on our personalities. (It has been shown conclusively that parents have little-to-none systematic permanent effects on behaviour.) Harris wrote a book "Why Children Turn Out the Way they Do", perhaps your answer to xenophobia will be there.

I do know that trait-conformity is correlated with trait-racism. But the only known strong causal predictors for either of these traits is genetics -- with only medium effect sizes.

Re:Zeig Heil

[tragedy]

Well, some people are born in a persistent vegetative state... There's some uncomfortable semantic and philosophical questions over whether they still count as people, at least for the purposes of this discussion.

Re:Zeig Heil

[siddesu]

lol! Well, culture can affect skill colour too!

Fine, so? Nobody's arguing nature-vs-nurture here except you -- with yourself. I don't really care why xenophobia comes about, if it is 80% genetic, 80% social or 80% alien due to not wearing tinfoil.

The important point is that one can deal with xenophobia, whatever its origins, by reason, and that ought to be enough for its vilest forms, if not all of it, to go away.

The other important point is that, regretfully, it doesn't happen, because it is a useful brainwashing tool.

And that's all I care about.

Re:Zeig Heil

[Sedated2000]

In the case of the Kent State shootings, I remember reading about how they found that a handgun was in fact fired before the National Guard opened fire. Of course, the article I was reading was suggesting that someone was purposely firing it to get the National Guard to begin firing on them. Aha! I found the article!

Re:Zeig Heil

[doccus]

I hope what you say is true, but the problem is that: 1) things will progress so subtly that before you know it, it will *be* a police state everyone is under, and as the military are also citizens, will be constrained by the same tyrannical rules as everybody else, subsequently having little or no opportunity to 2) confront the new *internal* military (perhaps an outgrowth of DHS), whose *JOB* it will be to fire on their own citizens if ordered..including, i might add, citizens in the military, in the name of "security".. and didn't the Soviets justify their actions against their citizens, on these same grounds? What about the Stazi? The SS? Did any of the regular army have any power against these either? Any student of history, of which there are, apparently, few in the US congress, would recognize the disturbing parallels between those regimes' beginnings and the current situation.. I must have missed when history became an optional course, for our countries' leaders, at least, at our nobel halls of learning..

Re:Zeig Heil

[Aryden]

It's our job, as the informed persons, to broadcast the reality to those who don't know. If we do not, then we have failed in our civic duty and Robert Heinlein would be a sad panda.

Re:Zeig Heil

[Anguirel]

Even if those citizens were branded as terrorists?

Re:Zeig Heil

[Aryden]

If an American citizen is declared a terrorist, it's up to US law enforcement to handle. Two of my favorite quotes can explain it quite wellL

Twelve hours after the President gives the order we can be on the ground. One light infantry division of 10,700 men, elements of the Rapid Deployment Force, Special Forces, Delta, APCs, helicopters, tanks and of course the ubiquitous M-16 A2 assault rifle. A humble enough weapon until you see it in the hands of a man outside your local bowling alley or 7-11. It will be noisy, it will be scary and it will not be mistaken for a VFW parade.

The Army is a broad sword, not a scalpel. Trust me, senator - you do not want the Army in an American city.

General Devereaux (Bruce Willis), The Siege 1998

Re:Zeig Heil

[PopeRatzo]

Not bad for an AC post.

I'm not sure you can blame Western countries after WWII for wanting to create "projects" in the countries you mention.

And one big problem with your assertion: If you look at the period since WWII, there were more loans forgiven for those countries, and outright aid given, than their loans total today. I'm not saying that it's not insidious, all the "lending", but it's not as cut and dried as you make out. Further, more of the outright aid came from Western people, however misguided, actually wanting to help, than you allow.

It's very complicated, but there have been countries who chose not to play and they're doing no better, and in some cases worse, than the others.

Re:Zeig Heil

[doccus]

Ah yes, agreed.. unfortunately there appears to be an inverse relationship between the size of the soapbox and the importance of the message.. that is to say, *my* soapbox is pretty tiny, alas..

Re:Zeig Heil

[Aryden]

Your soapbox is just as big as mine and anyone else's. Sir you have the internet.

Death, Strife, Destruction! Film at 11:

[Hartree]

"starting with LA, which, really, isn't that bad an idea"

Certainly has worked for a lot of movies.

But somehow, it doesn't quite rate up with Godzilla's thing for stomping Tokyo.

Re:Death, Strife, Destruction! Film at 11:

[schlachter]

No really, no need to destroy America, we'll do it for you.
-DHS

In other news...

[Scott Swezey]

itwbennett, the author of this story, is now on the DHS no fly list.

Re:In other news...

[Anonymous Coward]

itwbennett, the author of this story, is now on the DHS no fly list.

They also ticked the: 'Aways subject to full cavity search.' option.

Re:In other news...

[Zero__Kelvin]

... as is Scott Swezey

Now I'm off to destroy the Internet ...

- Bill Gates

Re:In other news...

[Anonymous Coward]

itwbennett, the author of this story, is now on the DHS no fly list.

They also ticked the: 'Aways subject to full cavity search.' option.

Isn't that the default?

Re:In other news...

[guttentag]

itwbennett, the author of this story, is now on the DHS no fly list.

I think you misspelled "internet." The Internet is now on the DHS no fly list.

Re:In other news...

[cold fjord]

If you are on the "No fly list" you don't get the cavity search because... why? YOU DON"T GET TO FLY.

The more posts I read on this topic the clearer it is that the default is apparently stupidity.*

*Which as the post above shows is "+5 Insightful"

Re:In other news...

[Anonymous Coward]

Damn, there goes my free massage.

Re:In other news...

[L4t3r4lu5]

Why take the chance? Put the US on your own personal No-Fly list.

I guess the DHS . . . (sunglasses) . . .

[Tanman]

. . . destroyed their vacation

WAAAAaaaaoaooooooh!

Re:I guess the DHS . . . (sunglasses) . . .

[gottspeed]

Why on earth anybody would want to take a vacation in that fucked up neo-fascist country is beyond me. Its like someone violated the prime directive by giving a bunch of red-necked hill-billies access to the idea of statutory obligation. Capitalism: Its not a mode of commerce, its the idea of registering your biological property to a corporation.

This proves that

[sofar]

The terrorists have won.

Re:This proves that

[synapse7]

Wait.. which ones are the terrorists again?

Re:This proves that

[KiloByte]

Let's check the dictionary:
1. terrorist -- a radical who employs terror as a political weapon
1..3. (other meanings) 4. terror -- the use of extreme fear in order to coerce people (especially for political reasons)

So yes, your fine government matches the definition fully. Although probably telling them what this word means would make YOU labelled terrorist.

Re:This proves that

[yurtinus]

You are, duh! Oh shit, so am I...

Re:This proves that

[Anonymous Coward]

the government also won ...

Re:This proves that

[Zero__Kelvin]

He already said that.

Re:This proves that

[AngryDeuce]

Of course. Everything that made America great is dead or dying, from opportunity to our freedoms. The economy is in the crapper, we're 10 years away from outright Corporate Feudalism, and it's getting harder and harder to move around this country without some ex-con TSA agent asking for your papers while telling you to drop your pants for the body cavity search.

It was good while it lasted, I guess...

Re:This proves that

[tick-tock-atona]

The spin on the story in some areas of the media is also a nice illustration of the way cowardly people will back the police state by blaming the victim.

For example, see the Gizmodo article "US Detains and Deports Two Morons Over Dumb "Destroy America" Tweets":

I'm totally okay with refusing entry to the US based on idiotic Twitter parlance.

Re:This proves that

[amiga3D]

We've a long history of terrorists. If George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Patrick Henry were alive today they'd all be on the no-fly lists. Their views would certainly be considered anti-government. Heck, what about the original tea-partiers at Boston Harbor. Those guys would probably be consigned to gitmo.

Re:This proves that

[b4dc0d3r]

...But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these States; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present government of the United States of America is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.

Re:This proves that

[jamstar7]

"And so's his WIFE!!"

Re:This proves that

[mercurywoodrose]

What a great quote to put on a tshirt when entering an airport. I wonder if you could be arrested for wearing the declaration of independence?

Re:This proves that

[Anonymous Coward]

If I were going to place a wager on the outcome, I'd put money on a trifecta of
1) you get arrested
2) TSA doesn't recognize the excerpt
3) you get grilled about the location of the radicals that came up with the shirt..

Re:This proves that

[sjames]

Not the middle eastern stereotype guys, the terrorists in suits that hang out in D.C. THOSE terrorists won.

Re:This proves that

[NotSanguine]

No they haven't. You cannot tell me that terrorists give a rats ass about how stupid we act. They just want to see our bodies laying out in the street dead shot by children that never received an education. No the "terrorists" that you refer to have not won.

However, the government pig terrorists, that like to use scare tactics to make you give up every single right we've fought for thus far. Yes, those guys are winning by making people fear the first group of terrorists. It all boils down to people having an underlying fear of dying, even though its something you really can't escape.

That's a common problem thinking that there are only two sides to every story, when in reality it's more like n-sides to the story, where (n-5) sides of the story are not that important.

"Understanding is a three-edged sword."

Re:This proves that

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait.. which ones are the terrorists again?

Us.

Quick reminder. Long before the 9-11 thing we spent decades bombing the middle east, rolling tanks down their streets, setting them on fire from the air, making fun of them in everything from news paper cartoons to saturday night live, calling them sand niggers and rag heads, and generally treating them like sub humans. Then they much like the little kid at school that no one likes he gets bullied too much and then kicks the bullies ass out of having enough. But of course america being america we act like the victims and run around reminding everyone across the entire planet were the victims and milk it for all its worth.

So the end result of us being the terrorist bullies and getting smacked for it is now "Our country and brave brave soldiers are fighting against terrorism to keep our country free". Funny thing is, if were fighting to keep our country free then why is it our own country is what is costing us our freedom? Shouldnt america be attacking itself instead of brown people from a desert on the other side of the world?

Atleast we stopped a terrorist plot by kicking out a couple of 21 year old british tourists out! Those tweets could have destroyed our democracy!

Re:This proves that

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait.. which ones are the terrorists again?

File sharers.

Re:This proves that

[Anonymous Coward]

Nah, they'd just be drone killed because that isn't a hostile act.

Re:This proves that

[cold fjord]

We've a long history of terrorists. If George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Patrick Henry were alive today they'd all be on the no-fly lists.

Well, you've not only managed to engage in vile libel against some of the key founders of the United States, brave and honorable men, but you've also managed to get some very simple things completely wrong. They joined their states in a revolution against King George the III of Great Britain. They were trying to change the government reporting structure, not engage in mass murder of innocent civilians. They wouldn't have been on "no-fly lists", they would have been taken into custody if found and hanged for rebellion, for treason against the Crown. They weren't anti-government, they wanted a different government (the Continental Congress vs the Crown of Great Britain). You are very badly confused. You ennoble people trying to engage in mass slaughter of Americans, Britons, Europeans, Australians, and many others when you utter such nonsense.

It is indeed a pitiful foolishness to confuse the meaning and consequences of "Give me Liberty, or give me death!" versus "Allah Akbar!!".

The demands Bin Laden was fighting for included that the US convert to Islam, and scrap the Constitution and institute Islamic Sharia law.

Keep in mind, the struggle against real, not imaginary rhetorical terrorists, continues.

FBI’s Top Ten News Stories for the Week Ending January 27, 2012

Denver: Man Arrested for Providing Material Support to a Designated Foreign Terrorist Organization

Jamshid Muhtorov was arrested by members of the FBI’s Denver and Chicago Joint Terrorism Task Forces on a charge of providing and attempting to provide material support to the Islamic Jihad Union, a Pakistan-based designated foreign terrorist organization. Full Story

Baltimore: Man Pleads Guilty to Attempted Use of a Weapon of Mass Destruction in Plot to Attack Armed Forces Recruiting Center

U.S. citizen Antonio Martinez, aka Muhammad Hussain, pled guilty to attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction against federal property in connection with a scheme to attack an armed forces recruiting station in Catonsville, Maryland. Full Story

Washington Field: Man Pleads Guilty to Shootings at Pentagon, Other Military Buildings

Yonathan Melaku, of Alexandria, Virginia, pled guilty to damaging property and to firearms violations involving five separate shootings at military installations in northern Virginia between October and November 2010, and to attempting to damage veterans’ memorials at Arlington National Cemetery. Full Story

FBI’s Top Ten News Stories for the Week Ending January 13, 2012

1.Tampa: Florida Resident Charged with Plotting to Bomb Locations in Tampa

A 25-year-old resident of Pinellas Park, Florida was charged in connection with an alleged plot to attack locations in Tampa with a vehicle bomb, assault rifle, and other explosives. Full Story

2.Baltimore: Former Army Solider Charged with Attempting to Provide Material Support to al Shabaab

A man who secretly converted to Islam days before he separated from the Army was charged with attempting to provide material support to al Shabaab, a foreign terrorist organization, and was arrested upon his return to Maryland after traveling to Africa. Full Story

FBI’s Top Ten News Stories for the Week Ending December 9, 2011

Seattle: Man Pleads Guilty in Plot to At

Re:This proves that

[cold fjord]

The difference is that George Washington wanted to restore and build upon a classic liberal democracy which the King had infringed upon, and for which reconciliation didn't seem possible*. Bin Laden wanted to destroy a classic liberal democracy with constitutional guarantees of personal liberty and turn it into a severe Islamic state through coerced religious conversion and imposition of the harsh Taliban style of Islamic law as favored by Al Qaeda.

Another difference is that George Washington engaged British armies on the field of battle to achieve his aims. Bin Laden repeatedly sent his minions on missions to engage in mass slaughter of civilians in office buildings, hotels, and markets to achieve his aims.

Osama Bin Laden was a terrorist. George Washington was an American patriot, a rebel against the British Crown, and not a terrorist.

If it makes you feel better, Bin Laden would have ultimately wanted the British Crown to fall, something the Americans didn't want. The fate for Britain, as well as the rest of the world, would be the same as for the United States.

I would have thought all this was clear. Are you still baffled?

* I seem to recall the Parliament took some stern actions against more than one British monarch over the years as well.

Re:This proves that

[amiga3D]

You totally missed my point. I actually agree with you about the founding fathers. It's todays idiot fathers that are the problem. They are undoing what was done to provide a free democracy. They apparently intend to build a tyranny in order to keep us safe. They want to abolish freedom in order to protect. I know, it was kinda tongue in cheek and maybe over the top but still those kinds of attitudes the founding fathers had would not go well in todays nanny state.

Re:This proves that

[drinkypoo]

I would have thought all this was clear. Are you still baffled?

What I'm baffled by is how people can think that the stated goals of an organization change their tactics from terrorism to not terrorism. There is no such mechanism. The USA is a terrorist organization which is made up of terrorist organizations. The CIA and our military spread terror to other nations with bombings and assassinations; half of our first ten naval engagements were bombardment of latin american towns to force them to sell to United Fruit, later Chiquita, now known as Bonita. The FBI and DHS spread terror within our own nation by treating citizens like criminals and by murdering any group of people with whom the powers that be do not agree (see: Waco, where they parked a tank on top of the escape hatch whose location they knew ahead of time, and set the buildings on fire with tank-mounted flamethrowers; or Jonestown, where Jim Jones and all his followers were forced to drink the Kool-Aid by men with guns (a fact recorded on video) whose bodies were not among the dead.

America is a terrorist entity and always has been since its inception. I would have thought all this was clear. Are you still baffled?

Re:This proves that

[drinkypoo]

Gawker Sucks. Please stop posting links from Gawker. Go down to the bottom of the article, visit the original URL which will give you better information than they will, read THAT, post THAT. (Open statement, not directed at you.)

Re:This proves that

[drinkypoo]

Away troll! Go!! Afflict some other web site!!

As long as this is the "quality" of my astroturfing detractors, I can only win. Thanks for the encouragement.

Re:This proves that

[elsurexiste]

If you have to ask, maybe it's you. *wink, wink, nudge, nudge*

Re:This proves that

[Solandri]

I got into this debate with a friend. The problem is that different people have different definitions of terrorism. He felt any act which caused fear in people not directly affected by the act was terrorism. My definition is much narrower - an act whose goal is to cause political change not directly through the damage caused by the act, but primarily through the social (over)reaction to that act. Depending on which definition you use, the U.S. (or any other entity) is or isn't a terrorist organization.

The problem I have with his definition (which also seems to be pretty close to yours) is that it's so broad as to be (IMHO) nearly useless. With that definition, all killing and crime is terrorism. The bully beating a weak kid up to intimidate others into giving him their lunch money is terrorism. We already have words for those things: killing, crime, intimidation. Everyone already knows what those are and how they affect people. There's no need to layer another term ('terrorism') on top of them to describe the same thing. If we're going to make a new term, it needs to be nuanced enough to describe something different from already-existing words.

My definition is selected to reflect why organizations resort to such attacks instead of a straight-up fight. Typically, they lack the manpower or hardware to last in a straight-up military fight. So they resort to terrorist tactics since it maximizes their chances of causing political change while minimizing their exposure to retaliation. You have straight warfare, where two groups' armies go at each other head-to-head to try to beat the other into submission to force the desired political change upon the loser. You have guerrilla warfare where one group's army attacks the other's army, then blends into the environment and/or civilian population, to achieve the same. And you have terrorism where one group's army doesn't even bother trying to attack the other's army, and instead focuses on attacking the civilian population in order to try to get them to enact the desired political change.

Re:This proves that

[drinkypoo]

I got into this debate with a friend. The problem is that different people have different definitions of terrorism. He felt any act which caused fear in people not directly affected by the act was terrorism. My definition is much narrower - an act whose goal is to cause political change not directly through the damage caused by the act, but primarily through the social (over)reaction to that act. Depending on which definition you use, the U.S. (or any other entity) is or isn't a terrorist organization.

Yes, that's the rub, isn't it? Right now our government can declare us terrorists and detain us without due process, and "terrorist" is defined as anything the media can repeat on the government's say-so (via press release) that most of the people will believe.

Suffice to say, though, that lots of what we do directly could reasonably be termed terrorism under your definition as well, and we have trained and supplied many more who are terrorists by nearly any standard. I stand by my statement.

Re:This proves that

[iceaxe]

The strategic purposes for which people choose to employ terrorism are many, but chief among them are publicity and the effect produced in the target audience. Those who carry out suicidal terror missions are rarely the strategists who planned them. Both can be referred to as "terrorists".

It is believable to me that the government and societal over-reaction and erosion of rights experienced in the US after the attacks in 2001 was one of the goals toward which the attacks were aimed. Although I can't cite source (someone check me here) I believe that senior Al Qaeda planners stated such as the case, or intentions to that effect.

Given that, I would say that the attacks succeeded beyond the wildest expectations of the instigators.

As for the "leaders" of the Western democracies...

I refer back to the interview with Hermann Goering during the Nuremburg trials, as reported by Gustave Gilbert in his memoir "Nuremburg Diary", which occurred on 18 April, 1946:

We got around to the subject of war again and I said that, contrary to his attitude, I did not think that the common people are very thankful for leaders who bring them war and destruction.

"Why, of course, the people don't want war," Goering shrugged. "Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship."

"There is one difference," I pointed out. "In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars."

"Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

Next up:

[Bieeanda]

People who say 'Foo_City, I am in you!' will be charged with sexual harassment of a municipality.

The next time...

[multiben]

America has a chance to vote for someone like George Bush Jr, please remember how much it has completely screwed the country up!

Re:The next time...

[betterunixthanunix]

Yeah, it is not like the Clinton administration contributed anything to this situation:

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CALEA
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clipper_chip
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Zimmerman#Criminal_investigation_by_US_Customs
4. http://www.cybercrime.gov/cryptfaq.htm
5. http://cryptome.org/echelon-nh.htm
6. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_McCaffrey#Paying_for_embedded_anti-drug_messages_in_television_shows

Re:The next time...

[countertrolling]

That's why you should vote for Newt... to finish the job.

Re:The next time...

[Genda]

Because voting for Obama has so clearly prevented the continued erosion of freedom... yeah right.

So you get to choose between the guy that drag races towards a fascist state vs. the guy who just ambles towards one.

Re:The next time...

[Charliemopps]

That's right, despite the fact the republicans haven't had control over the government for nearly 10 years, their secret plots and alliances with evil corporations still allow them to kick 2 British guys for making a bad joke in an airport. It's not at all possible that the the 2 parties are identical in their goal: Power. And you, being able to say whatever the hell you want to doesn't help in that goal.

Re:The next time...

[dietdew7]

Remind me again who has been president for the last 3 years?

Re:The next time...

[nomadic]

So might as well go with the ambler.

Re:The next time...

[QuantumLeaper]

Clinton didn't start two Wars and he did leave office with more money in the bank than any other President. How may of those laws or activities were started by him?

Re:The next time...

[amiga3D]

I see your point. You don't think Clinton was as bad as W. While this may be true it's like saying Idi Amin wasn't as bad as Hitler. I'll give ya the advantage though, Bush sucked worse than Slick Willie. He was also better at avoiding the blame. I liked that joke, "Clinton could ride through a car was in a convertible and someone else would get wet". It don't get much slicker than that.

Re:The next time...

[betterunixthanunix]

Clinton didn't start two Wars

No, he only bombed countries without declaring war:

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_NATO_bombing_campaign_in_Bosnia_and_Herzegovina
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Iraq_%28December_1998%29

Using war crimes and crimes against humanity as a pretext for doing so, while simultaneously ignoring the far worse situation in central Africa:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwandan_genocide#UNAMIR_and_the_international_community

Lest we forget, Bill Clinton also supported various increases in "defense" spending:

http://articles.cnn.com/2000-01-24/politics/pentagon.budget_1_defense-spending-defense-budget-military-spending?_s=PM:ALLPOLITICS

As for the surplus, it was projected, and had not yet been realized.

How may of those laws or activities were started by him?

All of them were carried out with his approval, and his administration was directly involved with the hijacking of TV scripts, the attacks on cryptography, and the use of ECHELON for industrial surveillance. Anyone who thinks that Clinton was some kind of left-wing hero needs to have their head checked; he was on the right wing of politics, and was only differentiated from Bush II in how aggressively he pushed right wing policies.

Re:The next time...

[sco08y]

Joke wasn't said in an airport, these were tweets posted over a week before they travelled. No concern that every post on the internet is being cataloged and traced back to the individual ? None at all ?

I'd be more concerned if the government wasn't scanning publicly available information looking for obvious stuff like "Hi! I want to blow up America!".

Terrorists use public sites to coordinate; usually in code, but also not in code so as to recruit. I'm worried about the government snooping on my *private* affairs, not if they listen to things I post in an explicitly public forum.

Re:The next time...

[TheGratefulNet]

aka, going with the choice that sucks the least.

when has it been otherwise?

Re:The next time...

[bytethese]

Really? CALEA and Clipper chip are your citations? Clipper was already defunct by 1996 and CALEA only allows the access, with a proper warrant. Not the same as Patriot Act and similar.

Re:The next time...

[b4dc0d3r]

The guy who can't get anything done because Republicans are the party of NO.

Regardless, they are all bad. I don't know who is pulling the strings, but every move seems to be an outright power grab to maintain the status quo. Inventing reasons to drop military equipment in dusty nations, so they have to buy more, and shaving away the Constitution seem to be at the top of the list no matter who is in charge. And since the start of the FBI it has been a matter of controlling the people rather than governing them.

Re:The next time...

[kpoole55]

Apparently, Steppin Fetchit. See post above.

Re:The next time...

[godrik]

"That's right, despite the fact the republicans haven't had control over the government for nearly 10 years"

I do not follow American politics that much, but I was under the impression that Bush was republican and still in office in 2008. Did I miss something?

Re:The next time...

[amiga3D]

ack...not good proofreading. car was = carwash, sorry, long day.

Re:The next time...

[Aryden]

On 30 August, the Secretary General of NATO announced the start of airstrikes, supported by UNPROFOR rapid reaction force artillery attacks.[15] Although planned and approved by the North Atlantic Council in July 1995, the operation was triggered in direct response to the second wave of Markale massacres on 28 August 1995. During the campaign, a total of 3515 sorties were flown against 338 individual targets. The aircraft involved in the campaign operated from Aviano Air Base, Italy, and from the U.S. aircraft carriers USS Theodore Roosevelt and USS America. Sixty-eight percent (68%) of the ordnance used in this campaign were precision-guided munitions. The VRS integrated air defence network, comprising aircraft and surface-to-air missiles (SAMs), presented a high-threat environment to the allied air operations. The German Luftwaffe saw action for first time since 1945 during Operation Deliberate Force.[16] Six interdictor-strike (IDS) version Tornados, equipped with infrared recce devices and escorted by 8 ECR Tornados, pinpointed Serb targets for NATO's artillery units around Sarajevo.[17][18] The artillery group was part of a Rapid Reaction Force deployed on Mount Igman to support the task of NATO's aircraft by pounding Serb artillery positions.[19] The Force was commanded by British Lieutenant General Dick Applegate.[20] On 30 August 1995, a French Mirage 2000 was shot down by a Serbian shoulder-fired SAM near Pale.[21] On 1 September 1995, NATO and UN demanded the lifting of the Serb's Siege of Sarajevo, removal of heavy weapons from the heavy weapons exclusion zone around Sarajevo, and complete security of other UN safe areas. NATO stopped the air raids and gave an ultimatum to Bosnian Serb leaders. The deadline was set as 4 September. On 5 September 1995, NATO resumed air attacks on Bosnian Serb positions around Sarajevo and near the Bosnian Serb headquarters at Pale after the Bosnian Serbs failed to comply with UN demands to lift heavy weapons around Sarajevo. On the night of 10 September 1995, the Ticonderoga class cruiser USS Normandy launched a Tomahawk missile strike from the central Adriatic Sea against a key air defense radio relay tower at Lisina, near Banja Luka, while U.S. Air Force F-15E and U.S. Navy F/A-18 fighter-bombers hit the same targets with about a dozen precision-guided bombs, and F-16 jets attacked with Maverick missiles.[22][23] On 14 September 1995, NATO air strikes were suspended to allow the implementation of an agreement with Bosnian Serbs, to include the withdrawal of heavy weapons from the Sarajevo exclusion zone. The initial 72 hour suspension was eventually extended to 114 hours. Finally on 20 September 1995, General Bernard Janvier (Commander, UNPF) and Admiral Leighton W. Smith, Jr. (CINCSOUTH) agreed that resumption of air strikes of Operation Deliberate Force was not necessary as Bosnian Serbs had complied with the conditions set out by the UN and as a result the operation was terminated.[24] The air campaign was key to pressure on Miloevi’s Yugoslavia to take part in negotiations that resulted in the Dayton Peace Agreement reached in November 1995.[25] In December 1995, NATO dispatched 60,000 peacekeeping force into Bosnia as part of the IFOR to enforce the Dayton Peace Agreement to secure peace and prevent renewed hostilities between three warring factions. In December 1996, the NATO-led SFOR was established to replace the IFOR to enforce the Dayton Peace Agreement. This lasted up until December 2004 when the NATO-led SFOR is replaced by the EUFOR Althea.

You should read your own links. The Secretary General was a Belgian. France, Germany, U.S., Italy, India, Sweden, Canada and Great Britain.

You're probably referring to H.R. 4655 which was signed to help try to remove a ruthless dictator from power. The U.S. and Britain did the bombing over 4 days because Saddam refused to follow UN resolutions.

Clinton did increase the budget... he increased it to modernize the U.S. military with these new fangled computers that had becom

Re:The next time...

[Aryden]

difference of a slow acting, possibly curable poison vs a .45 to the face. One is just a bit slower than the other in eliminating our rights.

Re:The next time...

[Aryden]

Erm, Ron Paul would just rather outsource your freedoms and the defense thereof to private corporations. Do you welcome our new corporate overlords?

Re:The next time...

[jmcvetta]

Dude, it wasn't even a bad joke - that's just how the Brits talk. When a young Englishman says "I'm going to destroy X", he is colorfully indicating his intention to "party hard at X". It doesn't have the slightest connection to terrorism, it's just slang for getting wasted & having a good time. It took me about 30 seconds of being around drunk, excited British tourists to figure this out - it tends to be pretty obvious from context.

Re:The next time...

[multiben]

Firstly, 10 years? What kind of years are you talking about? Secondly, are you suggesting that the influence of Bush government policy is no longer relevant? Thirdly, RTFA - it wasn't in an airport. Fourthly, you don't have a problem with arresting and ejecting people for *saying* things? Even if you think they're not very funny? I don't want to pull out the Hitler card here, but dude, you are making it hard.

Re:The next time...

[Asic Eng]

The problem with refusing to choose the lesser of two evils, is that then you then get the worse of two evils.

Re:The next time...

[asylumx]

Well then by that logic, the dems had 2 years of control and the reps had about 6 (2 of those years, the senate was 50/50, but since the VP is the tiebreaker, R's had control).

Re:The next time...

[jittles]

While the president was republican, the house and senate were controlled by a democrat majority. It is very hard for a president to do much of anything without support from the legislation. Of course some try to get around this VIA executive orders.

Re:The next time...

[Straif]

To be more accurate, the Republicans lost control during the 2006 elections when the Dems took control of both Houses of congress. From 2006 to the end of Bush's term in 2008 the Dems maintained complete control of the legislative branch of the US government. The Dems only lost that control during the 2010 midterms when the House went to the Repubs; the Senate remained under Dem control leading to the current legislative stalemate where one house will pass a bill and the other will refuse to even vote on it.

In the US federal system the President has some executive authority but the Legislative branch makes most of the rules since they control the purse strings. Only when both houses and the Presidency belong to the same party does the President have almost limitless powers (assuming he can get along with the House and Senate leaders from his own party).

Re:The next time...

[Straif]

For the first 2 years of his term the Repubs couldn't even filibuster a bill without getting 100% of Republican and at least some Democrat reps support (or the independents who caucus with the Dems). And since the 2010 midterms the Republican house has passed dozens of bills which Harry Reid refuses to even open for debate in the Senate.

Re:The next time...

[shutdown -p now]

No, he only bombed countries without declaring war

You forgot one more link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_NATO_bombing_of_the_Federal_Republic_of_Yugoslavia

Re:The next time...

[rtb61]

The real question here is when it comes to monitoring. Are they monitoring all face book posts in this manner, or just incoming tourists face book posts. Is posting and receiving treated in the same manner.

So is 'I am going to destroy America, starting with LA', the same as I heard you were going to 'Destroy America, starting with LA'. Will all tourists get arrested and molested or is just certain nationalities.

These are some important questions as it sounds like a lot of fun could be had here. Basically in the current climate if you're silly enough to go on holidays to the US as a 'ohh, evil' foreigner you deserve pretty much anything you get stuck with. Arrested, groped, gear confiscated indefinitely, barred from ever returning (not that you'll ever likely want to).

Just to be clear to the Department of Homeland in-Security I have no intention of ever travelling to the US but make no mistake I have no qualms about pranking them.

Context is important

[vmxeo]

'They asked why we wanted to destroy America and we tried to explain it meant to get trashed and party.

Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2093796/British-tourists-arrested-America-terror-charges-Twitter-jokes.html

Context is very important. Especially when dealing with a different culture, even though they may share a common language

Of course, as these young Brits discovered, this works both ways.

Re:Context is important

[vmxeo]

So, you're saying, "It's OK because they're white and thus obviously not a threat?"

No, I'm saying absent any contextual information, 140 characters can be widely interpreted as different things by a global audience. An audience who subconsciously fill in the context based upon their own individual culture, background, beliefs, ideas, worldview, etc.

Happens both in Tweets and in Slashdot posts.

Re:Context is important

[DigitalSorceress]

Indeed - one of my best friends is a Brit - when her brother came over here, the first thing he said after giving her a big hug was "God, I could murder a fag right now".*.. he got some strange looks.

*- A colloquialism for "I really need a cigarette" seeing as he'd been on a plane for 7 hours... needless to say, she had to quickly explain to him that this means "kill a gay person" in America.

Re:Context is important

[Zero__Kelvin]

No, we are saying it's OK because they weren't carrying any plutonium, and were obviously not a threat for that and a million other reasons. Besides that, she is kind of hot, and if she wants to "destroy" me, I'll give her a shot.

Re:Context is important

[BasilBrush]

she had to quickly explain to him that this means "kill a gay person" in America.

He already knew.

Re:Context is important

[Nutria]

obviously not a threat

That's a judgment. Judgment leads to bias. Bias leads to lawsuits and getting fired. So, err on the side of caution.

Re:Context is important

[liquidsin]

indeed. but this doesn't explain why, after detaining them for twelve hours, they were denied entry to the country. are we to believe that they were unable to convey that context successfully to their interrogators, or that those same interrogators couldn't get on some internets to investigate the whole "destroy" idiom? i can't help but think of the rob corddry character from the second 'harold and kumar' movie when i try to picture the clowns that thought these brits were an honest-to-god threat to america.

Re:Context is important

[amiga3D]

Sadly it's obvious that what little common sense existed in governmental bureaucracy, and that was very minute, is now gone.

Re:Context is important

[Zero__Kelvin]

"That's a judgment. Judgment leads to bias."

I guess that explains why the DHS didn't use judgement then.

Re:Context is important

[Nutria]

Since when did you think that common sense is actually *common*?

Re:Context is important

[Jiro]

I'm sure they told the interrogators that "destroy" didn't mean "destroy". I'm also pretty sure that if they had been actual terrorists, they would have said pretty much the same thing.

Re:Context is important

[1u3hr]

indeed. but this doesn't explain why, after detaining them for twelve hours, they were denied entry to the country. are we to believe that they were unable to convey that context successfully to their interrogators, or that those same interrogators couldn't get on some internets to investigate the whole "destroy" idiom? i can't help but think of the rob corddry character from the second 'harold and kumar' movie when i try to picture the clowns that thought these brits were an honest-to-god threat to america.

It doesn't explain why, if the DHS thought they actually intended to "destroy LA" that they put them on a plane back to the UK without any charges.

Terrorists, bent on destruction, and THEY PUT THEM ON A JUMBO JET.

Nothing could demonstrate more clearly that the DHS knew full well it was a joke and was simply punishing the tourists.

Re:Context is important

[amiga3D]

Well it's been so long I can't remember.

Re:Context is important

[Anonymous Coward]

more likely, what they said actually meant was: I would kill for a gay person.

Re:Context is important

[sjames]

More like it's OK because in the slang of their social group they just said they're going to party.

Their skin tone doesn't enter into the decision.

Re:Context is important

[Beryllium Sphere(tm)]

We should remember this case and cite it as an example the next time someone says that surveillance doesn't affect the innocent or "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear".

Re:Context is important

[rrohbeck]

I think they just did what their software told them to do.

Re:Context is important

[pt73]

No, I'm saying absent any contextual information, 140 characters can be widely interpreted as different things by a global audience. An audience who subconsciously fill in the context based upon their own individual culture, background, beliefs, ideas, worldview, etc.

Happens both in Tweets and in Slashdot posts.

There are actually an interesting questions raised. Who ought to be factoring in the 140 characters with limited background or context? Does the responsibility lie with the author or the reader? It also demonstrates the risks of tweeting may not be fully understood by most Twitter users. If these two have been deported because of a few tweets, I feel a little sorry for them. However he took the risk when he chose to broadcast tweets to the world - including DHS. Sometimes you just can't control how someone might interpret your writings (however short). As one never to take my own advice, "sometimes it is better to remain silent".

Re:Context is important

[Deep Esophagus]

When I was in high school in 1980, I had a friend who went to college while I finished my last year of high school in a remote rural town in East Texas. We stayed in touch by writing letters, and as soon as I learned his mail was left at the front desk in the dorm and lots of people got to see the envelopes before he picked them up (he really should never have told me that) I made it my life's work to embarrass him. I would address the envelopes to FirstName "Embarrassing Nickname" Lastname, or follow his name with "c/o some embarrassing fictitious organization"; I would put even more bizarre things on the return address. We also were trying to learn Russian for kicks, and each of us had a dictionary we used to translate a few words or phrases. And to further confuse one another we would often the rearrange words random at.

I told you that story so I could tell you this one: Once I got it into my head to address a letter to him care of the C.R.A.P. I had been reading about Nixon and his Committee to RE-Elect the President (CREEP), so I thought the Committee to Re-Assassinate the President, spelling out the acronym CRAP, was a hilarious parody. Now, this was back in 1980 when domestic terrorism was the farthest thing on anybody's mind, and remember I was in a backwoods rural town. STILL, despite all that and the obviously childish scrawl on the envelope, the local postmaster notified the Secret Service. Only then did my friend's previous letter make sense -- he had said something about "I suppose you have heard from the SS no I don't mean the German kind but the American kind" and I had no idea what he was talking about. Out of the blue I got a call from a guy in the "big" city a few counties over (population 50K to our 10K) identifying himself as an agent with the Secret Service and he had to come out and interview me about a letter I had sent threatening President Carter's life. He came out and grilled me on the subject thoroughly; my mother had me show him other letters we had exchanged. To make it more exciting, I had drawn a big hammer-and-sickle emblem on the top of the page... I have no idea why... AND written the first paragraph in as much Russian as my little dictionary could provide... AND transposed a bunch of the words, making it look to your average antiterrorism unit like some secret code. I had to get out my dictionary to look up the words and translate it for him; it said something like "You idiot, I got a headache trying to understand all the gibberish in your last letter so this is my revenge on you". Oh, and there was also a joke filling half the last page, where I had drawn an imitation of a memo paper-clipped to the letter giving instructions from the FBI to keep an eye on these troublemakers and don't forget to throw this memo away before you re-seal the envelope.

And did I mention I'm a Canadian citizen, complete with green card? Let me tell you, "shitting bricks" doesn't even begin to describe how I felt. He took samples of my handwriting to put on file for comparison against anything else I might ever write; he took all ten fingerprints; he had my entire letter preserved in plastic folders around each page. His job was to put the fear of God and Jimmy Carter into me, and he succeeded beyond his wildest dreams. My mother told me afterwards that as he walked back to his car he literally had to stop, he was doubled over laughing so hard. Of course since they had already talked to my friend they knew it was just kids being funny, but he wanted to make sure it never went beyond that point.

Now: think about how thoroughly they pursued that incident in the peaceful 80s, and think about what would happen to kids today who did exactly the same thing. Never mind that my mother was born in the US or that I had been here since I was six years old... I'd be on the train back to Toronto faster than you could say "Fuddle duddle!"

Re:Context is important

[LordLucless]

In other news, a petty vandal has been refused entry, after stating his intent to "paint the town red". I wonder how long until the DHS outlaws metaphors.

Re:Context is important

[MadMaverick9]

so ...

if "destroy america" means "get trashed and party".

what does "dig up Marilyn Monroe" mean?

Re:Context is important

[Farmer Tim]

"Get really trashed and party".

Re:Context is important

[Inda]

Only the mainstream media have it wrong again.

To destroy someone is to fuck them.

destroy = fuck

"I would totally distroy that bitch" - I'd fuck her until she couldn't walk.

It has nothing to do with partying. It is never used for physical things, unless your really mean destroy

Re:Context is important

[ConfusedVorlon]

It seems pretty clear to me. The agents would have lost way too much face if they just said 'sorry, we now realise this was a misunderstanding'

Instead, they were able to say 'yes - we defending the country, and never go over the top when investigating genuine threats to the security of our nation' as they convinced themselves that the kids should never have threatened America and were lucky to be sent back to the UK with a permanent ban on US travel rather than being hooded and sent straight to gitmo.

Never underestimate the power of people to delude themselves when the alternative is to admit that they foolishly over-reacted.

Re:Context is important

[Terrasque]

"Using a metaphor in front of a man as unimaginative as Ridcully was like a red flag to a bu-- was like putting something very annoying in front of someone who was annoyed by it."

--Terry Pratchett, Lords and Ladies

Re:Context is important

[Terrasque]

This one explains it pretty well, I think.

Re:Context is important

[Jason Levine]

Kind of like when the TSA seizes those liquid containers from passengers because they might be explosives... and then they throw them into a trash bin. If I had a liquid that I thought might be explosive, I wouldn't be casually chucking it into the nearest trash can!

Re:Context is important

[tbannist]

After detaining them for 12 hours, they could let them enter the country, then they'd look stupid and pointless. By turning them back they can continue to pretend they're actually doing something useful.

Re:Context is important

[CowTipperGore]

It was a reference to a Family Guy episode.

Re:Context is important

[Fauxbo]

Let's Play this situation out.

Fauxbo: Jiro is a terrorist
Jiro: No I'm not
Fauxbo: Aha! exactly what a terrorist would say. Off to Gitmo.

I, for one, am happy they took it seriously

[Trepidity]

Given rampant celebrity corpse theft, you can't really be too cautious when investigating a tweet about a plot to steal Marilyn Monroe's remains. Kudos for defending our dead actors, DHS!

Re:I, for one, am happy they took it seriously

[Jason Levine]

So *THAT* is why we need such long copyright terms! To prevent foreign nationals from coming to our shores, digging up long-dead celebrities and re-enacting Weekend At Bernie's with them! Now that I understand it, I'm totally for extremely long copyrights! Let's extend them to a thousand years!!!

Morbo beware..

[Billlagr]

So Morbo, the green giant headed newsreading monster, should be careful with his 'I WILL DESTROY YOU'..it might get him deported.

Hrmm

[acehole]

Of course the terrorists haven't won.

Why doesn't the average American see that the freedoms they hold so dearly and supposedly separates them from the "terrorists!" have been eroded and continue to be? I thought the whole 'war on terrorism' thing was defending the American way of life and upholding freedoms. Doesn't seem to me that it was a 'mission accomplished'.

Re:Hrmm

[yurtinus]

"Arrogant xenophobia" is a way of life too, you insensitive clod.

Re:Hrmm

[PCM2]

Why doesn't the average American see that the freedoms they hold so dearly and supposedly separates them from the "terrorists!" have been eroded and continue to be?

Here's what I don't get: Why don't more American servicemen and women, past and present, speak out about how cowardly and weak this kind of action makes America look?

Let's just assume for the moment that the "War on Terror" is totally legitimate. If we assume that's true, and these people were really kicked out of the country because of two Tweets, then... seriously? These two spooked us? This is what we're worried about? That's like a big, musclebound guy strutting around all day, sticking out his chest, then leaping onto a tabletop and shrieking as soon as some passing kid pulls a squirt gun.

It's deep in the American psyche to think of this country as the most ass-kickin' badass on the planet. The DHS is making us look like a bunch of scared pussies.

Re:Hrmm

[MacGyver2210]

The terrorists, who are in this case the US Government, have clearly won. They have taken the freedoms which we have been granted and been too glued to American Idol and MTV to defend. The ironic part is that they have used the 'fear of losing our freedom' to take it from us.

The general population are more concerned with celebrity housewives than who is running the country. They have won. We are now a slave population, and those that speak out against it will be detained and perpetually monitored until the powers-that-be determine they have reached their quota of 'unlawful speech' and have them imprisoned, deported, or executed.

Welcome to the future. Welcome to 1984.

Re:Hrmm

[sgtrock]

Oh, we vets have been speaking out pretty much nonstop since 9/11. We have gotten drowned out, unfortunately, by the likes of Karl Rove, Rupert Murdoch, Rumsfeld, Obama, Bachmann, and all the others who claim to be on our side. :(

Re:Hrmm

[Aryden]

We vets do speak out. Those still in uniform have to be incredibly careful of what they say in critique of the government. It's against the law for them to do so.

Re:Hrmm

[kj_kabaje]

Perhaps you misunderstand what the mission was?  From an administration that knowingly lied to the American people about WMD, why would you expect differently on this matter?

Re:Hrmm

[shutdown -p now]

There have been plenty of vets speaking out, on all sides of the spectrum. Heck, there have been some that came to light as victims of police abuse during OWS protests. What more do you want?

Problem is, they are citizens like any other, meaning their voice is ignored just as much.

I'm not convinced we have the whole story

[PCM2]

According to the New York Times report on this subject:

Information gathered during this interview revealed that both individuals were inadmissible to the United States and were returned to their country of residence.

That's the government talking. But they don't say that it was the Twitter posts themselves that rendered the two "inadmissible." They say it was "information gathered during this interview." Presumably the people interviewed repeated many times that it was all a joke, they didn't mean it, etc., so it seems unlikely that the "information gathered" was anything that was said. It seems totally possible, though, that there was something else that flagged them to be blocked at the border during the interview (for example, they had prior drug convictions).

Re:I'm not convinced we have the whole story

[Anonymous Coward]

One of the stories mentioned that during the interview, it was ascertained that the guy was gay. That must be it.

No, the DHS really is that jackbooted, and "inadmissible" is merely their attempt at newspeak, to cover their own arses.

Re:I'm not convinced we have the whole story

[joe_frisch]

I hope that the news media follows up on this and we find out if it is as outrageous as it sounds.

Re:I'm not convinced we have the whole story

[yurtinus]

I'm just going out on a limb here, but making as assumption that the information would have meant jack shit in any other situation - except that these fellows got on some bureaucrat's bad side. Not much worse than giving a middle manager that wants to flex nuts the opportunity to do so.

Too bad, to. Wasn't there just some big political hoopla about making America the world's choice vacation destination? Hey, I hear China is beautiful this time of year - and you're really not any more likely to get arrested for things you post on the internet!

Re:I'm not convinced we have the whole story

[BasilBrush]

Bryan's charge sheet read: "During secondary examination Mr Bryan was placed under oath and his sworn statement was taken by CBP Officer Wahmann. Mr Bryan confirmed that he had posted on his Tweeter website account that he was coming to the United States to dig up the grave of Marilyn Monroe.

"Also on his tweeter account Mr Bryan posted that he was coming to destroy America."

No sign of any other reasons.

Re:I'm not convinced we have the whole story

[Anonymous Coward]

It seems totally possible, though, that there was something else that flagged them to be blocked at the border...

Right, and what bothers me about the incident is not that they were sent home, per se, but that we don't know why.

The essence of the Rule of Law is that you don't just have someone in a position of power making gutdecisions (e.g. the King shouting "Off with his head!"). Instead, you have a system of laws and the people in power have power (only) to apply these laws and procedures. And, you havetransparency to be sure that the people in power are not abusing the power based on personal opinions and feelings.

But in this case, we have only a deliberately vague and useless official statement - the kind of statement one would expect from a corrupt third world dictatorship. And it's not just this case either, I have, myself, had close friends denied entry to the USA totally inappropriately with no meaningful explanation of the reason.

Now I know there are plenty of people here on Slashdot who blindly trust the federal government on these kinds of issues. But there is a serious problem here. Things were bad under Bush and I had hoped they would get better under Obama. But they have actually gotten much worse. In the last election, I voted for Obama, dontated money and even got the "hope and change" t-shirt but, needless to say, I won't be supporting Obamaor any other democrat in the coming election.

Re:I'm not convinced we have the whole story

[daktari]

Also on his tweeter account Mr Bryan posted that he was coming to destroy America.

And if DHS is using these tweets as evidence, one should hope that the officers handling the case have enough intelligence to name the little beast correctly: it's Twitter not Tweeter, ya DHS dufus!

This is either a case of an officer lacking in intelligence, or his/her inability to pay attention to details when writing official documentation. I would think that, ideally, both intelligence and being observant would be essential qualities for all homeland security officers. Especially those in the field.

Re:I'm not convinced we have the whole story

[Aryden]

Wait, did they rename Twitter?

Re:I'm not convinced we have the whole story

[rastos1]

On the other hand Mr. Bryan officially achieved the title "The Man That Could Destroy America (if they just let him in)".

Re:I'm not convinced we have the whole story

[ConfusedVorlon]

yup - they laughed at him.

right there, they sealed their fate.

Re:I'm not convinced we have the whole story

[Jason Levine]

So his "top secret, yet tweeted" plan was:

Step 1: Dig Up Marylin Monroe to turn her into a zombie
Step 2: ????
Step 3: Destroy America

In other news, the Underwear Gnomes are now under investigation by DHS.

Re:I'm not convinced we have the whole story

[History's Coming To]

So how does this tie in with the whole "free speech" thing I keep hearing about? Presumably they weren't technically in the US, and not US citizens, so it doesn't apply? Or is it fine for them to say these things, and the real problem is what they were thinking?

Re:I'm not convinced we have the whole story

[yurtinus]

On the bright side, look at all the new attention they're getting! They'll go back to the Britains and be HEROES for standing up to DHS. Then they can hit the pubs and DESTROY LONDON!!!

Let's all hate americans and love one another.

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously as far as comments on the USA go those aren't even confrontational.

What must they do to people that comment negatively on american foreign policy?
Of course I've long felt that quoting family guy should be a crime, so I'm not sure how I feel about this.
If you quote the new seekers song from the coke advert do they search you for a tuning fork incase you aim to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony?

Everyone in the USA feel safer?

[SilverJets]

I know I would.

Re:Everyone in the USA feel safer?

[betterunixthanunix]

We cannot be too careful, I hear that those Brits are planning something for the War of 1812 bicentennial. This time, not only will they burn down the white house, but they will also steal our celebrities' remains!

Re:Everyone in the USA feel safer?

[formfeed]

We cannot be too careful, I hear that those Brits are planning something for the War of 1812 bicentennial. This time, not only will they burn down the white house, but they will also steal our celebrities' remains!

Fear not, the DHS is monitoring every online activity. And they keep you safe by going after posts that contain words like "bomb", "destroy", or "Islam". "Islam"? you ask. Yes, Yusuf Islam. Another one of these British terrorists. But DHS prevented him from entering the US as well. While it is still unclear what this evil-doer was going to do, they intercepted some of his communications and learned about "morning" and "broken".

Re:Everyone in the USA feel safer?

[sjames]

The DHS heard something about a British Invasion and thought those two might be it.

Alarming

[Darkness404]

The US is fast on track to be earth's most totalitarian society.

Re:Alarming

[bky1701]

It already is. Most people just don't realize that private corporations can also remove freedom. It seems this only registers on the radar of most Americans when those corporations start to influence the government in the open.

Thought-Police

[gweihir]

I think I get it now: The whole TSA is a training-ground for the upcoming thought-police. Makes perfect sense. Next step: Establish new-speak.

Re:Thought-Police

[masternerdguy]

Newspeak is based on the now largely discredited idea that we think in words from our language, meaning that if we don't have words in our language to express an idea we can't even think about that idea. You don't have anything to worry about.

Weeks before trip

[michaelmalak]

A critical detail absent from the summary is that these tweets took place weeks before their trip -- they weren't done at the airport. So whereas previously one could not make a joke at the airport, now one may not make a joke anywhere, anytime.

Re:Weeks before trip

[shutdown -p now]

An even more interesting thing is that they actually look up Twitter posts for random travelers entering U.S. I wonder if I'm gonna have troubles next time I cross the border, given that I've had a bunch of anti-TSA posts in my G+ stream.

Re:Weeks before trip

[Anonymous Coward]

That is indeed the big deal here. So you have to start self-censoring yourself if you ever have any intention of entering the USA. Stimulating sufficient paranoia in the citizenry that they will start censoring their behaviour in the belief 'they' might be watching is pretty close to the situation in a totalitarian police state.

Re:Weeks before trip

[jamstar7]

Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised to get hauled off to Gitmo the next time I try to fly home, based on my /. posting history. They'll probably set me up for double waterboarding, no starch.

Re:Weeks before trip

[joe_frisch]

It would be very surprising if the US really tracked every flip anti-american comment made anywhere in the world on any social media.

Something here just doesn't add up.

Someone needs to do the experiment - tweet some threatening, anti-american comment then see if the let you into the country. Nothing like a controlled experiment.

Re:Weeks before trip

[pnot]

A critical detail absent from the summary is that these tweets took place weeks before their trip -- they weren't done at the airport. So whereas previously one could not make a joke at the airport, now one may not make a joke anywhere, anytime.

Thank you; this point seems to be getting missed in this discussion. It's even worse than that, though: as has been repeatedly pointed out, this wasn't a joke; it was simply a figure of speech. So, in fact, not only can you not make a joke, you can't say anything which may be construed by the DHS to have a meaning related to terrorism.

In fact, few sensible Brits would knowingly make a Twitter joke about terrorism, after what happened to Paul Chambers.

Re:Weeks before trip

[joocemann]

That sounds pretty unlikely.

It sounds a lot more like they had software scavenging publicly available information, with alerts.

It would be nearly a complete waste of time to have people looking up twitter posts of random travelers, for most of the time nothing of interest would be found.

Methinks the government has gone the way of google/facebook/etc, and it didn't happen yesterday. Why would the government let all of this freely accessible intel slide on by? Pretty much after the Patriot Act laid waste to the Intelligence Oversight Act of 1974, the so-called 'protections' of US Persons became gray area, aka worthless.

In 74, the atrocities of intelligence collection past was culled and forced to heed our Constitution. In 2001, that effort, by-and-large, was undone.

Re:Weeks before trip

[joocemann]

...before the comment... Yes, I realize the Brit's of the OP are not US Persons....

holdup.. someone is at the door.

Re:Weeks before trip

[sowth]

Which is why you probably shouldn't use your real name when posting on the Internet. Then again, the government probably has a way to track you anyway. Don't some of the major ISPs have government hardware running on site?

Re:Weeks before trip

[Spamalope]

Don't some of the major ISPs have government hardware running on site?

I can neither confirm nor deny those allegations.

Re:Weeks before trip

[Oloryn]

A critical detail absent from the summary is that these tweets took place weeks before their trip -- they weren't done at the airport.

This itself I find interesting. This isn't just the TSA involved here, you have to have some of the U.S.'s intelligence apparatus involved, possibly including the NSA(for capture of communications). This essentially exposes the fact that U.S. intelligence has the capability of taking minor tweets (and no doubt other forms of internet communications), correlating them with the real-life identities of their authors, and matching them to people entering the U.S. These statements weren't made where TSA statements could hear them. That the TSA agents knew about them at all implies some sort of ECHELONish mechanism for collecting even minor tweets such as this and matching them to people entering the U.S.

To some degree, this isn't surprising. Give a government organization the task of keeping terrorists out, and this is the type of capability you would expect them to develop. But why 'spend' this kind of capability on such a minor, harmless target? This implies to me a couple of things:

1. Over reliance on technology vs use of actual human analysis or review. An actual human analyst might well have spotted the cultural references and noted that they were harmless. The implication seems to be that intelligence collected via technical means are presented directly to minor TSA agents who don't have the training or analysis skills to correctly understand them. This is likely done to speed up 'getting the information to where it needs to be used', but increases the risk of failure due to poor quality of information or interpretation..
2. Is it possible to go from a tweet to the real-life identity of the sender in this kind of time-frame (hooking up a tweet to the identity of a person entering the country within a week or two) without the cooperation of Twitter? Note that there's no questioning if they got it right - the couple in question acknowledge they actually sent the tweets.

Finally, does anyone else get the feel of something out of Person of Interest, except that the computer isn't actually capable of spotting malicious intent?

Re:Weeks before trip

[Anonymous Coward]

You're entirely off the mark. More likely what happened was that the Immigration officers grabbed their smart-phones at the border, and started flipping through their tweet history.

Your analysis reminds me of the xkcd encryption comic

Re:Weeks before trip

[gpuk]

>In fact, few sensible Brits would knowingly make a Twitter joke about terrorism, after what happened to Paul Chambers [wikipedia.org].
Few sensible brits would set foot in the US as it stands, myself included.

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[Zelucifer]

The jokes in question were not made in the airport. They were made much earlier, while still in Britain. DHS just ran around like a chicken with its head cut off. The inability to confirm whether "destroy" is British slang, or that the other tweet in question was a Family Guy quote is absurd.

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[zAPPzAPP]

They were not joking about it.
It is slang.
They were clearly stating something and were very serious about it (the intent to party hard).
Just the other guys don't understand the language.

This just makes Americans look timid and stupid

[kawabago]

Maybe that is what they have become.

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[betterunixthanunix]

Yes, we cannot be too careful when it comes to watching what we say -- the Stasi are always listening! Someone might report you, and then you'll be in for a world of hurt, because you said something they did not like.

Hrm? Oh, right, there is no Stasi anymore. Therefore, it is perfectly acceptable to demand that everyone watch their mouths because the government might be watching.

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[SilverJets]

Tweeting to your friends that you are going to party hard in LA (destroy being British slang) is nowhere near the same thing as yelling fire in a crowded theatre or today's equivalent of saying "bomb" while on an airplane or in an airport.

It seems the terrorist truly have one. America lost its sense of humour somewhere in the past 10 years.

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[SilverJets]

err....won not one.

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[chrismcb]

First off, making jokes like that are without taste

I'm curious, is it tasteful to say "lets paint the town red?" That is essentially what they tweeted. She tweeted something 3 weeks prior, and he twitted a week prior.

It's never too late .....

[qqe0312]

to make yourself completely ridiculous.

Re:from the best coast

[Zero__Kelvin]

"may i speak for the los angelenos when i say to submitter:
go fuck yourself."

No, you may not. Can't you read?

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[gweihir]

Forbidding jokes is one of the hallmarks of a repressive regime. Actually a pretty good indicator. Seems this time the US is ignoring history. In the past the price to pay for that was always extreme.

Les face it, there is no need for terrorists anymore, the US is right on the path to hell. A pity.

So I guess now I can say

[Howard Beale]

I'm gonna get stoned on a cruise ship...

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[yurtinus]

Really?

First: It was a tweet.
Second: It was a joke. When did we get such a stick up our ass that making a joke is cause for arrest and deportation?
Third: Airports are not dangerous. Flying is not dangerous. Taking our national security too seriously though - that to me as a freedom loving American - is downright terrifying. Once the tools are in place, they will be used. They will be abused, and it is *damned* hard to get rid of them.

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[Zero__Kelvin]

Dear Penis1,

... you are a moron.

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[Hentes]

If they don't take it seriously, and it turns out to be a valid threat, then the press would have a field day with DHS.

You can't be serious. No terrorist is stupid enough to announce what will they do before doing it. Joking about it might be stupid, but saying stupid things is still protected by free speech.

What Disgusting Moderation

[Anonymous Coward]

+5 for this vile, lewd, disgusting hate speech? Whatever you think of the USA's policies and practices, only the most sick and twisted can compare this to Nazi Germany.

This is why I've almost left slashdot completely. The nuttiest commenters have moderators have taken over the political discourse here.

As someone who has lost relatives to the Nazis, seeing this post as "insightful" almost bring me to tears.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[element-o.p.]

With all due respect, and with every sincere attempt to be sensitive to the loss of your relatives, I have to disagree that the GPP is vile, lewd, disgusting or hate speech. It's someone pointing out (accurately, IMHO) that we are on the fast-track to fascism and a police state. We may not yet be engaging in the type of infamy that WWII Germany was known for, but the comparison serves as a warning about what could happen if we don't reverse the trend. The worst horrors of the Third Reich did not begin as soon as Hitler took office. Likewise, we have not yet reached a comparable level of evil in our government, but I have to admit, I no longer recognize the country in which I am living.

Incidentally, for whatever it's worth, my father-in-law was a PoW in Nazi Germany. IMHO, I would be dishonoring the sacrifices he made if I didn't warn others that what happened in the past can happen again if we allow it.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[AngryDeuce]

Nazi Germany didn't start out like the evil machine it's portrayed as in movies. A lot of the German people had no idea the atrocities that were being carried out in their own country.

While we may not be anywhere near like Nazi Germany as it existed in 1943, how different are we compared to Germany of the 20's and early 30's? We're certainly tottering down the path to a full blown police state with this bullshit; that's undeniable to anyone that's really followed how things have gone in post 9/11 America. Hell, we even have our own ethnic group to demonize in place of the Jews, Middle-Easterners and Muslims. We may not be throwing them in camps and forced to work, but we have no problem shipping them off to Gitmo and holding them as long as we want without trial...

All this shit is supposed to keep us safer, but we just end up with our rights curtailed more and more. We may not be driving through police checkpoints every time we leave the house yet, but I doubt it's going to be long before people are getting thrown on the ground on the side of the road for not producing their "papers" fast enough.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[Anonymous Coward]

Whatever you think of the USA's policies and practices, only the most sick and twisted can compare this to Nazi Germany.

Perhaps you should take the time to learn history, pre-Nazi Germany & early Nazi Germany started more or less exactly as we are now with the "little things" being censored / rejected and moved on from there. This while only being mildly relivent to the conversation as a whole is a prime example of whats been happening http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came%E2%80%A6

This is why I've almost left slashdot completely. The nuttiest commenters have moderators have taken over the political discourse here.

If you cannot handle comparison to past then perhaps you should leave.

As someone who has lost relatives to the Nazis, seeing this post as "insightful" almost bring me to tears.

I suppose you would like a cookie?... Not to be a heartless prick (which admittedly I am pretty good at) comments like this have no place in a thread that should be an intellectual discussion about the current state of affairs in the United States. The state of affairs being as they are bear a striking resemblance to pre-WWII Germany weather you like it or not that's how it is. Bringing up your relatives who were lost adds nothing to the conversation beyond attempting to tug at the heartstrings of people who are less analytical and more "feeling" then what I assume is the majority of are.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[jc42]

It's called a "slippery slope". One "right" at a time and we may find ourselves in Nazi land again.

Except that this is America. It's not and never has been "Nazi land". The appropriate phrase would be "McCarthy Land", as in Joe McCarthy. Not quite as horrific as the Nazis, since he and his ilk didn't kill people by the millions. But still awful enough to serve as a warning to us all.

Those of us who were kids in the 1950s or earlier know that it's nothing new in the US of A. There has long been pressure to go back to that time, including returning women to the kitchen, retracting the Negro^WColored^WBlack^African-American vote, etc., etc., etc.

The appropriate slogan here is probably that old one about the price of liberty ...

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[grub]

My grandfather died in Auschwitz.
He got drunk and fell out of his guard tower.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[SendBot]

It's not and never has been "Nazi land".

That's right! After the war, America showed everyone how freedom can triumph when we went to the moon. Showed those Nazis!

I... (/me holds hand to ear piece) what's that? The Saturn V rocket was developed by... oh. Uh...

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[FrankSchwab]

I live in Arizona with our lovely Sheriff Joe Arpaio, and I assure you that (brown) people are "getting thrown on the ground on the side of the road for not producing "papers" fast enough". And with the anti-illegal alien sentiment that seems to pervade the country (for no obvious reason), I don't think the rest of you are far away from it.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[AngryDeuce]

We had our own camps, too. We didn't kill the Japanese like the Nazis killed the Jews, but they certainly were imprisoned, they certainly lost almost all of their material possessions, they certainly died in the camps due to lack of adequate medical care and suicide, and, in some cases, yeah, they were killed by sentries "trying to escape".

There's plenty of horrific things in our own history that are on par with the Nazi's. How many fucking Native Americans did we put in the ground over the 250 years our nation has existed? How many Chinese immigrants died building the railroads? And of course, the millions of African-American slaves...

I'm not saying that we should allow these things to cast a pall over our entire society, but it's important that we remember these atrocities lest we repeat them. Sugar-coating history, and especially our culpability in these foul acts, does a great disservice to those that fought and lived and died through those times.

While we may not have condensed our atrocities down to a 30 year period like Nazi Germany, we've definitely had more than our share spread out over the 250 years our nation has existed...

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[Anonymous Coward]

What about someone who lost relatives in Hiroshima? What about Native Americans who lost, well, their ENTIRE CULTURE and GENE POOL. Or black people in America. Etc. etc.

Fuck you for hoarding all the misery for "your" relatives. Ask anyone who lost family in the fire bombings of Tokyo, the napalm in Vietnam, ANYONE from East Timor, on and on and on.

Germany vs America? Fascist police state, check. Eradication of undesired peoples, check. Slavery, err, well we were a bit more heavy handed there. Nuking people, well, we have that over everybody else as well. Bullshit lies and propaganda everywhere, check. The list goes on. I think the USA is at LEAST tied there.

Did Germany eradicate an entire culture and its people? They tried, but didn't succeed. America DID.

So fuck off and get off your high horse asshole. There is plenty of evil for all, you don't get to whine about your relatives exclusively.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[mug funky]

so much Godwin...

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[mug funky]

say you're a scientist, minding your own business, and the rather right-wing government that you're not a big fan of makes you an offer you can't refuse?

Germany went down a slippery slope too. avoid at all costs people who tell you what you want to hear.

at that time, only the lucky, or those with more than the usual foresight left when they could. if your life is in Germany, you're not going to leave until it's too late and there's war. and then you're held to ransom, especially if you have family.

things aren't so black and white.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[AngryDeuce]

I said "we even have our own ethnic group to demonize in place of the Jews"; the Nazi's didn't immediately start throwing them in camps, either. At first it was just anti-immigrant propaganda, you know, kinda like how people are blaming all of America's ills on illegal immigrants lately?

As for your Muslim co-workers, they may not be worried about getting shipped off the Gitmo, but ask them if they have been mistreated by racists and bigots over the last 10 years. Ask them if people don't look at them suspiciously in the airport or any other mass transit. I have friends from all over the Middle-East and North Africa that came here to go to school and they deal with shit like that all the time out of ignorant assholes right here in the good ol' U.S. of A.

I think maybe you should go back to school and read up on your history. I think you'll find there are a lot more similarities between Nazi Germany and the path we're currently on in this country than you'd be comfortable to admit. We may not be burning books yet (although some bigots are happily burning Qurans) but we're not against banning them, and restricting the freedoms of the people of this country day by day.

I hope you're just a troll, I really do, because if not, you're one of the sad people that are unable to see past the propaganda and bullshit, and frankly, we have far too many of them in this country as it is...

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[interval1066]

Didn't the US shortly after WWII transfer Nazi researchers to the US and gave them a new identity because their knowledge & research could help the US gain a global advantage? How is that not a "Nazi land"?

Using Nazi scientists makes the US Nazis like using a makes one a mass murderer. Ok... or; perhaps we'd be better off if we swore off any technology that was used by anyone who did anything bad. Ever.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[SecurityGuy]

All depends on which part people are upset about. I'm pro immigration, so aliens (spare me the martian jokes, please) are quite welcome. I have tremendous respect for people who will give up their home, extended family and friends to make a new life in a new land. Now the illegal part, there I have a problem. If part of making your new life is disregarding the laws of the land, that's not good. Should we really welcome with open arms those who come here saying the hell with your laws, I'll do what I want?

The sentiment is just a consequence of the fact that we're not resolving the issue either way. We don't make it legal for them to be here, and we don't send them home. Pick one.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[AngryDeuce]

The difference being, of course, that the implied analogy was totally appropriate. History shows the parallels between the birth of the German police state and our own missteps in post-9/11 America. As for the demonization being rare, have you watched the GOP debates? You'd think that the only issue our country faces right now is illegal immigration, that's almost all they ever talk about. That and the cartels and terrorists in Iran/Pakistan. It's never anything we've done wrong as a nation (unless it's something Obama did), it's "everyone else" trying to "attack America" because they "hate freedom".

It's not a fucking game, either. It's the erosion of our free society for reasons of "security".

I suggest you get to bed, child. Us grown folks are having grown-up discussions over here and you're obviously both out of your depth and up way past your bedtime.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[Sir_Sri]

except that the entire history of the US isn't really much different than today. Steal land from the indians, buy ilbegotten land from the french(which they stole from the Spanish a few weeks earlier), steal land from the mexicans, fight a civil war over keeping th blacks enslaved, steal land from the spanish. Half a century of 'we don't want to be involved in whatever murder and mayhem the rest of you are up to, unless you force us into it' all while keeping blacks from being full citizens, then it was onto trying to oppress some southeast asians and then some arabs. And I'm glossing over a lot. Ok, so the methods have changed and the people being oppressed changes over time (remember when no on thought a catholic could become president?), but there's always someone looking to do bad things to someone else, and technology gives them new ways to do that, and new people to pick on.

The history of the world isn't really very friendly. The Nazi and the japanese were particularly dramatic step up in the 'evil' department, but considering all the while the US was keeping blacks as partial citizens, the british keeping indians and arabs as cheap labour, all of us were drugging up the chinese, and everyone was keeping women as half citizens frankly your country doesn't really look any different today than ever. Most of us were only one step away from mass gas chambers, but we were willing to go so far as mass sterilization and resettlement camps. The US britain and france (and as is pointed out below germans) tend to hide all this unpleasant business.

People can claim their country was some paragon of decency previously. But it's bullshit. The US has been in the business of institutionalized oppression as much as everyone else *except* the nazi's and the imperial japanese because they institutionalized mass murder. And SOPA ACTA, DHS and patriot are no more insidious than the kansas-nebraska act, the repeated gerrymandering that goes on in the US, pretty much everything we've done in canada to the native indians and the french, the british did to the irish etc. etc. The only surprising thing, and really, it hasn't been a long enough time scale to be all that surprising, is that both parties in the US are stumbling along with policies that a lot them realize are braindead. But reality has a habit of kicking you in the teeth when you ignore it, and that is happening to the US now on jobs and every time you get on an airplane, and 10 years from now no new member of congress will want the TSA as it is etc. That just the way politics works. There have always been people trying to regress hard won rights, and resisting legitimate demands on their contributing to the collective of society, and there always will be. And there will always be people on the right side of history.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[hey!]

Well, McCarthyism and Naziism have a lot in common. They both were heavy on fear-mongering and scapegoating.

But history never quite repeats itself. There's always a different wrinkle. In some ways contemporary America resembles the environment in which far right and fascist parties rose to power in post-Depression Europe. There's economic dislocation and uncertainty, albeit milder, the same longing for a simple explanation to our problems that assigns responsibility for solving them to anyone but us.

On the other hand, the experiences of WW2, McCarthyism and the Civil Rights Movement have left us less inclined to scapegoat our neighbors; maybe even the least inclined anyone has ever been in the history of civilization. I think it's remarkable that there hasn't been a major resurgence of anti-semitism after the banking crisis of 2008. That's almost unprecedented.

There's the anti-immigrant movement, but I don't think most people who are in the anti-immigrant camp actually think that Mexican braseros picking crops is the source of our economic or international problems. Sure there's bound to be a few, but the sense I get is that what drives the thing is a feeling the world has got out of control, and this issue is one that ought to have a straightforward solution. The immigration issue is like a canvas on which you can paint simple sounding solutions to exerting control (like building a wall -- excuse me, *fence -- along the border).

But then we'll always have race. Racism is alive in this country, yet it's hobbled, forced to take bizarre forms like birtherism because nearly *everybody* agrees racism is wrong. If you don't think that's remarkable, go back and look at papers, magazines and books of the 1930s. Racism was actually seen as respectable, * scientific* even. If that seems inconceivable to us, that represents real progress We still have racism, but it has to pretend to be something else. Politicians who want to exploit have to dance around it. Racism today is a puny, petty thing, still able to damage, but deprived of most of its terrifying weapons. Nobody in the mainstream dares to call for concentration camps, lynchings, or overt racial discrimination in public or economic life. Today it is the norm for even *racists* to reject racism.

It's like Dicken's said. It was the best of times, it was the worst of times. That has always been and always will be true.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[slimjim8094]

You can unite a lot of different peoples with hate. Hate the Jews (Hitler), hate the Commies (McCarthy), hate the Rich (currently Obama), hate the Muslims (911 and the Patriot Act), etc.

One of these things is not like the others...

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[wonderboss]

The people that want them here (employers) don't want them here legally.
If they are here legally, employers would have to treat them fairly. If they
have to treat them fairly, they may as well hire citizens.

The powers that be do not want this "solved". It is such a great issue
to leave open and unresolved. Think how both sides can rile up
their "base". Those evil democrats what to let "illegals" steal your
jobs! Those evil republicans want to make hard working immigrants
"illegal".

The solution is easy and clear. Either make it illegal to hire them and
prosecute those that do, or give them some sort of legal status.
Neither solution will be implemented.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[Anonymous Coward]

All depends on which part people are upset about. I'm pro immigration, so aliens (spare me the martian jokes, please) are quite welcome. I have tremendous respect for people who will give up their home, extended family and friends to make a new life in a new land. Now the illegal part, there I have a problem. If part of making your new life is disregarding the laws of the land, that's not good. Should we really welcome with open arms those who come here saying the hell with your laws, I'll do what I want?

The sentiment is just a consequence of the fact that we're not resolving the issue either way. We don't make it legal for them to be here, and we don't send them home. Pick one.

Well that's how the country was founded, so what's good for the goose?

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[SecurityGuy]

Clever, and true. Well played.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[cold fjord]

I... (/me holds hand to ear piece) what's that? The Saturn V rocket was developed by... oh. Uh...

Just think of it as a form of reparations.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[mikael_j]

Fascism is not "rooted in socialism". Fascism is at its core a nationalist authoritarian ideology. One of the core concepts of every fascist ideology is that the people must rally around the leaders and follow them without question. Now, there have certainly been regimes that have called themselves socialist but in practice behaved more like fascists (come, you know you were going to drag that one out there) but that does not mean fascism is rooted in socialism.

Fascism is also a very conservative ideology (socially).

How far to the right a fascist party has been has varied, the Nazis were pretty staunchly to the right as were Mussolini's Italian fascists (although they did have some fringe "national syndicalists". Other fascist parties have outright denied being on the classic left-right scale instead basically positioning themselves as an "alternative" to democracy. Also, keep in mind that many of these parties are at their core dependent on popular support from the masses and thus are likely to remain fairly vague on these issues (to get support from as large a portion of the population as possible).

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[slimjim8094]

You had a good point, but you lost your credibility by claiming that Obama hates the rich. I find it unlikely that he would particularly hate himself for his own wealth (he is a millionaire).

Despite what the Republicans have been saying, the Democrats, Obama, and the OWS folks (most of them, anyway) actually have a relatively nuanced argument. The basic principle is that the wealthy have received the benefit of society in excess of the middle class or the poor, so they should pay a higher percent in taxes. It's the same philosophy behind donating to your university - it helped you get where you are, so you want to give back. It's the same principle that explains why the poor pay fewer taxes than the middle class. The government, if you believe one ought to exist, should be a joint effort. (If you don't believe that a government has a role, I have nothing to say). What "class warfare" exists is in the wealthy attempting to wiggle out of their moral, ethical, and legal obligations to pay a proportion of their income as taxes to the entity that secured their ability to make that income.

A more specific issue is the capital gains tax. "Normal" people work; they get paid, and that income is taxed. But "the 1%" don't need to work (if they don't want to) since the earnings on their investments aren't the same, and they're taxed at a much lower rate. But they haven't produced anything, they're leveraging their wealth to produce more wealth. It's not bad in and of itself, but if you subscribe to the economic principle that people act according to incentives, you can see that we, as a society are incentivizing the wealthy to avoid doing anything productive with that money, since then they might be taxed at a higher percentage than if they'd just let it sit. People also have problems with the "soft power" that the wealth brings, like accountants that can figure out how to pay even less in taxes.

The problem people have isn't with success. They work hard, they make a good living, support their family, pay their bills and taxes and things - but then they see that there's this other class, where if they could possibly get into it, they wouldn't need to worry about pesky things like work and money, because it'd all take care of itself. The objection isn't to the wealthy, or even the disparity, but to the feeling that there's an institutional clique that's keeping them out. And they hear the wealthy still complaining about taxes and trying (successfully!) to get them lowered. And they get angry.

Remember all those old movies or TV shows, where the good man who's being harassed always tries to defend himself with "I pay my taxes"? When did that stop being a matter of pride?

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[amRadioHed]

I would say yes, for the most part there is no reason to dislike aliens. Being in the country undocumented is legally wrong, but that doesn't make it wrong by my own judgment. The worst thing many illegal aliens are responsible for is low priced produce.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[theshowmecanuck]

Well except for the people driven to ruin and suicide by McCarthy. Or the giant Klan rallies in the 1930s when it was fashionable in many places to belong to that organization. Or now-a-days with the secret police practices of secret arrests and other actions against the constitution. From any one of those points it is not very far from extremism. American has gravitated very close to the motherland/fatherland mentality of countries like 30s Germany and Soviet Russia. Not everywhere in the U.S.A. but in a lot of places. Just look at what happened when the Dixie Chicks exercised their right to free speech and slagged Bush for invading Iraq. They got all sorts of death threats and had contracts cancelled and CDs burned etc. People going apeshit without any thought. And the more inured the people get to secret police and 'homeland' security (fuck that even sounds like a phrase from Nazi Germany.... vee muzt protekt za homeland!) the further down that slope you slide. Arizona has come really close to the whole 'papers please' gestapo bullshit. If this keeps going it will eventually happen and once there, it will be everywhere. The leaders there should really protect the constitution. Part of the reason for the revolution was to get away from being ruled by a king and arbitrary decrees and laws. It wasn't all about taxes like the right wing freaks want you to think (but then again it is the right wing freaks... well them and Obama... who advocate for arbitrary laws and decrees and secret courts and police). So now what do we have. Bush and Obama claiming executive privilege (kind of like the king saying we don't have to tell the people we rule anything). And the government passing laws saying the army can arrest anyone anywhere, even in America. You guys had enough laws to catch the 9/11 terrorists, it was inter agency head up the ass-ness that is why they never caught them. None wanted to share info. If they had put out bulletins to pick these guys up instead of each one looking on their own they would have stopped them. Fuck there are records one of the guys was stopped on a traffic infraction days before. If the cops had known that the FBI, or CIA or whoever wanted to question them, he could have arrested the guy on spot, or at least brought him in for questioning. None of this bullshit is necessary. Existing laws (i.e. laws that existed in 2000) were good enough. It is how the laws were used that needed to be improved. But now momentum towards terminal stupidity is almost unstoppable now. Next they'll be arresting kids on terrorism charges when they overhear them playing soldiers.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[Anonymous Coward]

What about Native Americans who lost, well, their ENTIRE CULTURE and GENE POOL.

You apparently aren't an American, otherwise you would know that there are millions of native Americans living in the US with their own distinct culture.

And yes, black people still live in America. They are free, equal members of American society. They were intially freed from the southern slave states in the 1860s. Other slave states soon followed as the Constitution was amended to free them. Laws forcing segregation were struck down in court over time.

As far as Hiroshima goes, there were fewer people lost there than in the fire bombings of other cities. Bombs kill people. Nuclear bombs kill people. Same same.

In fairness though, there is a difference between what happened to people in concentration camps targeted for death. Entire peoples were targeted for extermination by the Nazi's, genocide. There is a special horror to that, and they came all too close to achieving it.

So fuck off and get off your high horse asshole. There is plenty of evil for all, you don't get to whine about your relatives exclusively.

Aren't you sweet? Forget his relatives? I guess you feel the pain of all murdered people, virtually all of which you'll never know? Do you feel the pain of the people the Japanese killed in the Rape of Nanking? What about the American service men who were dissected alive by the Japanese? Or, as it appears, do you mainly reserve special pity for the people killed by Americans, or people in America?

You really should think about starting a web site to flesh out and present your ideas. Might I suggest this as a model that reflects your style?

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[appociappo]

If part of making your new life is disregarding the laws of the land, that's not good. Should we really welcome with open arms those who come here saying the hell with your laws, I'll do what I want?

This reminds me of something we (as europeans) did long time ago...to colonize North America.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[webnut77]

Didn't say Obama hates himself; and this one is not really hate. But it's pitting one group against another. And that's definitely going on.

I'm no financial guru but I do see where interest and dividends are taxed twice. Much the way when taxes are added to a pack of cigarettes and then you pay sales tax on the total price when you purchase them. Not really fair. It's a sin tax. Why does this go on? Well the non-smokers think it's ok since it doesn't affect them. Same way with the 'tanning tax'. Pit one group against another.

If I understand correctly, that extra revenue from 'taxing the Rich' won't even make a tiny dent in our deficit. If that is true then it really illustrates what an empty "class warfare" argument this is. It's just a smoke screen to hide the failings of congress and the president to cut expenses and balance the budget. BTW, I think it would be better to cut out the loopholes and simplify the tax code.

Anyway, it's all about control and manipulation. Do you agree?

Oh, and thanks for a well though out, no name calling post.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[rhook]

As did the UK and the Soviet Union. It's called "the spoils of war".

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[findoutmoretoday]

We had our own camps, too

I even thought that concentration camps were invented by Americans "... were forced into concentration camps called reconcentrados which were surrounded by free-fire zones ..."

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[91degrees]

They're a drain on our services (schools and healthcare) without shouldering any of the tax burden

Typically minimum wage earners receive more in government benefits than they pay in taxes. And illegal immigrants are less likely to have family

Some are members of gangs committing crime

So are some citizens.

Your other points are fair enough.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[Anonymous Coward]

No, they were invented by the British in the Boer War.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[repapetilto]

I would say the "tea party", Republican, (also some OWS) argument is similarly a bit more nuanced than portrayed. It isn't that the wealthy shouldn't give something back to society. It is that governments are commonly corrupt, make inefficient economic decisions, and are chronic debtors. So giving to the government is perceived as a poor way to give back.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[Ihmhi]

As for your Muslim co-workers, they may not be worried about getting shipped off the Gitmo, but ask them if they have been mistreated by racists and bigots over the last 10 years.

2:191 And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. And fight not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if they attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers.

2:192 But if they desist, then lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

When you willingly believe in shit like this, you automatically lose all credibility with me. You say that you are immediately accepting of hateful beliefs, and you either do it without thinking or, even worse, do it consciously.

I don't advocate assaulting or discriminating against people because they are Muslim, but I absolutely understand why it's done.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[makomk]

Except that this is America. It's not and never has been "Nazi land".

Quite right. It's the other way around - it was America and the incredibly popular American eugenics movement that inspired the Nazis in the first place. Admittedly the US eugenics programs stuck with things like forcibly sterilizing rape victims without their knowledge or consent rather than going for death camps, but the death camps were kind of the last resort of the Nazi regime anyway.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[dave420]

So the same goes for Christians, whose favourite book calls for genocide for pretty much any reason... Hint: Most Muslims, like most Christians, don't believe their favourite book is actually 100% true.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[Bayoudegradeable]

I tell my world history students this every year... Think about what would happen if terrorists due in fact get hold of a nuke and wipe out a US city... or three.... How long would it take for us to build the camps? Sadly, I think more people would be donating time and money to get the camps built then they would to help the victims of the attacks. One of the scariest scenes I ever saw in the 24 tv series was the de facto camp built to house "suspected terrorists." We'd do the same... in a heartbeat. Sad and scary.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[Phrogman]

It seems very common on /. to find people who associate both "Fascism" and "Communism" with the political left - leaving I suppose the political right as the only "good" form of government in their eyes. I cannot understand this level of ignorance and I assume its either willful, or the result of constant repetition by other political conservatives who want to distance themselves from any fascist associations.

Once more though:
* Extreme Left Political position: Communism
* Moderate Left Political position: Socialism
* Middle of the road - the term to use varies considerably (Up here in Canada we use "Liberal" but down in the USA "Liberal" usually is associated with "Socialist" which in turn means "Communist" to most people apparently). I suppose you can use "Democrat" in the US, but since the Democrats (from a Canadian perspective at any rate) seem to be rather rightwing generally, perhaps that is incorrect.
* Moderate Right Political position: Republicanism
* Extreme Right Political position: Fascism

Personally I think the Democrats in the US are by and large Moderate Right, and the Republicans are somewhere between Moderate Right and further Right but not quite Fascists.

 

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[MechaStreisand]

The immigration issue is like a canvas on which you can paint simple sounding solutions to exerting control (like building a wall -- excuse me, *fence -- along the border).

That's not an immigration issue. That's an illegal immigration issue. One would think that the difference would be pretty obvious.

Racism is alive in this country, yet it's hobbled, forced to take bizarre forms like birtherism

It's nice to see that the more recent practice of attempting to silence dissent with accusations of racism is alive and well.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[MechaStreisand]

To follow up: I feel that it's worth pointing out that I'm not a birther by any means. But that sly little comment you made sneakily implies that the only reason anyone might doubt Obama's citizenship, or even just use it as a tool against him, is that they are racist. That is complete and utter garbage.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[jasomill]

When you willingly believe in shit like this, you automatically lose all credibility with me. You say that you are immediately accepting of hateful beliefs, and you either do it without thinking or, even worse, do it consciously.

Unthinking adherence to any ethos, I agree, is dumb. But your passages don't sound "hateful" of anything but persecution. Mohammed was a warlord, born and raised amidst violent tribal warfare, and, taken in this context, these sound like a plea for a sort of moderation: once you have put down your oppressors, stop. In particular, don't seek revenge.

The trouble is with people who want to use the Quran, or, for that matter, the Bible, as an endorsement of rebuilding society on a model of violent, tribal warfare, only now we have nuclear bombs instead of swords. Which is both dumb, and certainly not the point of what Mohammed was saying.

Expecting the Quran to advocate nonviolent nonparticipation as a means of reform reminds me of the Catholic priest in Religilous who points out how stupid it is to look for science in the Bible, because the Bible was written hundreds of years before the dawn of science.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[Idimmu Xul]

One of the scariest scenes I ever saw in the 24 tv series was the de facto camp built to house "suspected terrorists." We'd do the same... in a heartbeat. Sad and scary.

Er, you have dude .. Guantanamo and your President dude is quite happy to hold people there with out trial.

I can't really see the US changing direction though politics, policies and good will though unfortunately.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[tbannist]

If I understand correctly, that extra revenue from 'taxing the Rich' won't even make a tiny dent in our deficit.

You don't understand correctly. The extra revenue would cut the deficit to less than half of what it is. If you look at the graphs on that page, you should be able to see that the Bush tax cuts are more than half of the structural deficit and will increase over time.

If that is true then it really illustrates what an empty "class warfare" argument this is.

It's not true, and it really illustrates how empty the "class warfare" argument is.

It's just a smoke screen to hide the failings of congress and the president to cut expenses and balance the budget.

Yes and no. Cancelling the tax cuts would help balance the budget, however, the Republican controlled congress refused to accept a budget that included a mixture of cuts and reversing the Bush tax cut on people earning over $250,000. So there is an impasse here because the Republicans refuse to seriously consider any budget that includes new tax revenue. The Democrats, on the other hand, are willing to negotiate and actually had worked out a deal that included both with the Republican leadership, however, the "Tea Party" Republicans revolted against the deal and sunk it.

BTW, I think it would be better to cut out the loopholes and simplify the tax code.

The Repbulicans can't do that either, again because of Grover Norquist. He considers "closing loopholes" to be "raising taxes". Republicans aren't allowed to do that unless they lower taxes by more than the closed loophole would raise in revenues.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[DarkOx]

There's the anti-immigrant movement, but I don't think most people who are in the anti-immigrant camp actually think that Mexican braseros picking crops is the source of our economic or international problems. Sure there's bound to be a few, but the sense I get is that what drives the thing is a feeling the world has got out of control

I think it should also be pointed out that the anti-immigrant camp largely isn't anti-immigrant at all. Its anti-illegal immigrant. That is very important distinction to make as well. Clearly there are very real security problems and perhaps not economic problems but social justice problems when we have people streaming in across the boarder with not documentation.

I for one think we should do alot more to secure our boarders against illegal crossing. I also think we should make our laws much more open about who is allowed to move here, and make it much easier and faster to become a full citizen. Then we can really say we don't want the sort of people here who won't follow our rules.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[tbannist]

Indeed, racism is only one of the reasons they would use it as tool against him, the other reasons include rapacious greed and political opportunism. I agree with MechaStreisand, there are many different types of creeps in the Birther movement.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[jbeaupre]

No, they existed long before that. I'm sure Andersonville wasn't the first, but it set a standard for evil: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andersonville_National_Historic_Site

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[LanMan04]

Should we really welcome with open arms those who come here saying the hell with your laws, I'll do what I want?

I'm an atheist, but I have to quote the Bible here:

"And why behold you the mote that is in your brother's eye, but consider not the beam that is in your own eye?"

Why are illegal immigrants coming here? Because there are JOBS for them. Lots and lots of jobs. That means that there are many, many, many American businesses that are **breaking the law** by hiring illegal immigrants.

Maybe we should worry about those guys FIRST...you know, the ones exploiting the desperation of illegal immigrants for their own gain?

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[Ihmhi]

So the same goes for Christians, whose favourite book calls for genocide for pretty much any reason...

Yes, this is true. Both books are similar in this regard, although the timing is switched. (The bible starts out all angry and violent and mellows out, while the Quran is the reverse.)

My disrespect for Christians is generally equal to Muslims, however...

Hint: Most Muslims, like most Christians, don't believe their favourite book is actually 100% true.

Oh, you mean that little "apostasy" thing that will get you beheaded in some hardcore Muslim countries?

The (uncomfortable) truth is that while both Islam and Christianity are similar in many regards, there is also a major cultural difference. America is a very, very heavily Christian nation and yet you don't see us beheading atheists or homosexuals (although there are certainly some people who want to, I'm sure.) Yet take a look at a country where the majority is Muslim, and things are noticeably... different.

The other important bit is people say "I believe in this, but only parts of it". That says to me that they are a hypocrite in that they selectively believe in what is considered to be the "Word of God". It's an all-or-nothing thing - if you can't honestly affirm that the entire thing is divine, then you call a portion of the book in question. If a portion of the book is called into question as to its divinity, who's to say the rest isn't divinely inspired? (Of course, any thinking man or woman who actually takes the time to read their culture's holy book of choice will readily find that they are none too comfortable with it. After all, the best way to get someone to abandon a religion is to have them read that religion's holy book.)

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[LordLimecat]

When someone says "zeig heil, der DHS", its not the witty political commentary you seem to think it is. Its someone who would, if you engaged them, declare that we are right now as bad as nazi germany and that we have our own gestapo that will detain you for badmouthing the president.

Seriously, this is what people actually think, and it really does drag the whole conversation into a gutter. Calling the US the equivalent of Nazi Germany isnt a warning, its either ignorant or a troll.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[LordLimecat]

We may not be throwing them in camps and forced to work, but we have no problem shipping them off to Gitmo and holding them as long as we want without trial...

We're not "shipping them off to Gitmo", these arent folks who were grabbed off of the streets of Everytown, KS. Unless my memory is faulty, basically every one of them were captured overseas as "enemy combatants" in what is basically a war zone.

So points taken about slippery slopes and all the rest, but things are not what youre making them out to be.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[LordLimecat]

If I recall, a good part of the founding of our country was because it was believed that the laws werent actually being followed by the British government, our rights were being violated, and that that was a just provocation for us to sever ties.

These might be good for brushing up on the details:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Tea_Party
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intolerable_Acts
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_taxation_without_representation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consent_of_the_governed

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[LordLimecat]

At first it was just anti-immigrant propaganda, you know, kinda like how people are blaming all of America's ills on illegal immigrants lately?

Pretty sure we're not blaming anything on any kind of Muslim immigration problem, and I havent heard anyone (at least in the DC metro area) blaming lack of skilled jobs on hispanic immigrants.

That said, that doesnt mean that Im pro-amnesty either. It IS possible to believe that illegal immigration is A problem without thinking it is THE problem.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[baegucb]

The difference is soldiers vs. civilians.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[tehcyder]

I don't advocate assaulting or discriminating against people because they are Muslim, but I absolutely understand why it's done.

Translation: I do in fact advocate assaulting or discriminating against people because they are Muslim.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[element-o.p.]

This should be it.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[lonecrow]

Your making the wrong assumptions.

Fascism is a form of single party totalitarianism. This is not synonymous with Dictatorship which is embodied in the rule of a single individual.

The simplistic left and right comparisons are pretty weak tools to describe the spectrum of political creatures that can exist.

There are plenty of terrible ideologies to the "right" such as dictatorships, oligarchies, and anarchy.

If you assumed that I was trying to place all bad political organizations on the left of the spectrum your making leaps without evidence.

To put it another way, dictatorships and oligarchies are the tyranny by the few whereas Fascism is tyranny by the many.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[Garth Smith]

Your passage seems to imply defending one's homeland. That isn't even that evil. Plenty of times in the Bible, the nation of Israel is ordered to destroy other nations for not being Hebrew. Peronally, growing up I was reminded that truly devout Christians would stone to death children who did not respect their parents. Can we just admit that most large religions have had nasty shit done under the claim of "Righteousness"? (The Crusade's anyone?)

If someone has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey his father and mother, who does not heed them when they discipline him, then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his town at the gate of that place. They shall say to the elders of his town, “This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a glutton and a drunkard.” Then all the men of the town shall stone him to death. So you shall purge the evil from your midst; and all Israel will hear, and be afraid. (Deut. 21:18-21)

I understand you are playing devil's advocate and thinking through this issue through other points of view (something to be commended). Please realize the following statement makes it seem like you stand idle or are uncaring about hateful speech. Bigotry should be denounced.

I don't advocate assaulting or discriminating against people because they are Muslim, but I absolutely understand why it's done.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[quacking duck]

But then we'll always have race. Racism is alive in this country, yet it's hobbled, forced to take bizarre forms like birtherism because nearly *everybody* agrees racism is wrong. If you don't think that's remarkable, go back and look at papers, magazines and books of the 1930s. Racism was actually seen as respectable, * scientific* even. If that seems inconceivable to us, that represents real progress We still have racism, but it has to pretend to be something else. Politicians who want to exploit have to dance around it. Racism today is a puny, petty thing, still able to damage, but deprived of most of its terrifying weapons.

There were allegations of racism a couple months ago when a banana was thrown onto the ice as a Black hockey player, Wayne Simmonds, was trying for an overtime shootout goal in an exhibition NHL game in Canada. Many comments in online news stories agreed that throwing anything onto the ice was poor conduct on the part of an overzealous fan of the opposite team, but wondered what made throwing a banana (instead of say an apple or orange) a racist statement?

The reply was that bananas are tossed at monkeys and apes, so throwing a banana implies they're lower than human, and how did anyone over 20 not know this? It happens all the time in soccer, apparently. Well, I'm over 30 and had no idea (don't watch soccer), and clearly many others didn't either. The fan who threw the banana came forward on his own after the story broke, said he also had no idea of its racist undertones and claimed he was horrified at the implication and deeply ashamed, and apologized to Simmonds.

He claims he bought the banana at a concession stand. Since they close by the start of the final period, it's unlikely he bought it just in case the game went into overtime and then shootout, and just in case the Simmonds' was the deciding shootout goal.

I'd say we've come a long way when the younger generation isn't aware of the racist epithets and symbols of the previous one. It's too bad some Black rappers keep using the "n" word in their lyrics as if "owning" it empowers them, it doesn't, it just passes the word down another generation.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[quacking duck]

It seems very common on /. to find people who associate both "Fascism" and "Communism" with the political left - leaving I suppose the political right as the only "good" form of government in their eyes. I cannot understand this level of ignorance and I assume its either willful, or the result of constant repetition by other political conservatives who want to distance themselves from any fascist associations.

Nailed it on the head. Much of it is willful ignorance and revisionist history, trying to distance their preferred political leanings from the evils the prime example of fascism, the Nazis ("National Socialism"), by claiming that just because it has the word "socialist" in its acronym it somehow espouses its ideologies. By such simplistic thinking, North Korea is actually democratic ("Democratic People's Republic of Korea").

And yet, not long after the Nazi gained power they turned on the communists and socialists in Germany, and many others that helped get them into power.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[jc42]

... it was America and the incredibly popular American eugenics movement that inspired the Nazis in the first place.

Well, that's part of the story. But a number of historians have claimed that the main antecedents that the Nazis used to excuse their genocide were earlier. They repeatedly mentioned the world's reaction to 1) the Turkish genocide against the Armenians in the 1910-1920 years, and 2) the American extermination campaign against the Plains Indians during the last half of the 19th century. They pointed out that these genocides were documented, but the rest of the world mostly just ignored them, and didn't hold them against the Turks or Americans. So, the Nazis argued, the rest of the world would also ignore the extermination of the European Jews.

To a great degree, they were correct in this prediction. The outrage against the Jewish extermination developed mostly after WWII was over, when the photos and stories started to leak out and were widely published. Before 1945, the rest of the world (even the Allies) mostly ignored what was going on in the concentration/extermination camps. There were even cases of fleeing Jewish refugees who were refused entry to other countries, on the grounds that they were (in current terminology) "illegal aliens" who were sent back home.

Actually, it's hard to find a country of any size that doesn't have history like this. So it's basically wrong to attribute it to any group of people, especially any national or political group. It's better to recognize that, when conditions permit, people who commit such atrocities will emerge in any society, and they will carry out atrocities until those in power stop them. If the people in power quietly support them, they will kill a lot of people. The Nazis may be "poster children" for this, but it's easy to find bad examples just about anywhere in the world.

For a more recent example, look into the events in Rwanda in 1994, and pay special attention to the reactions in the rest of the world. Nobody stepped in to stop the killing, even when the news media reported it widely.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[Patersmith]

I'm not a muslim or an expert in the koran by any means, but isn't that text regarding Mohammed talking to his followers about how they should treat the incumbents when they re-enter Mecca? I believe that Place of Worship business is talking about the Kaaba. Mohammad was forced out of Mecca for a while and founded Medina, then returned after a bit to reclaim Mecca. Seems like pretty standard wartime politics to me for any people of any era.

Anyway, if you can take some text out of context and try to justify your condemnation of an entire people, I think you were already biased to begin with and looking for something with which to justify it. I wonder if you hold similar views about Jews and Christians over Deuteronomy 20 or Americans over Iraq.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[GameboyRMH]

That sounds nice but keep in mind that the average Mexican trying to immigrate faces what is, for them, insanely high costs and a waiting list that is only one decade long if they're lucky, so the legal option isn't really an option for most.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[shutdown -p now]

Even so, that does not make for hate speech.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[webnut77]

Your graph shows the tax cuts are $300 billion (2%) of a $1.4 trillion deficit. And your graph covers all people not just the rich. Try reading this.
From TFA:
Making the tax cuts permanent for all taxpayers, regardless of income, would increase the national debt $3.3 trillion over the next 10 years.
Limiting the extension to individuals making less than $200,000 and married couples earning less than $250,000 would increase the debt about $2.2 trillion in the next decade.

Two thirds of the tax break goes to the non-rich. How anyone could call it 'tax breaks for the wealthy' is beyond me. If you only gave the tax break to the non-rich there would be an additional $1.1 trillion revenue dollars over the next decade. This $110 billion per year pales compared to our deficit just like I suggested in my post.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[shutdown -p now]

There is a fairly big difference. The Christian book that calls for genocide is Old Testament, and most Christians believe (as their dogma dictates) that it is superceded by the New Testament in most if not all matters.

There's no such distinction in Qu'ran - it is the immutable Word of God in its entirety, and fully applicable today. The only Islamic doctrine that could deal away with the nasty stuff is the doctrine of abrogation (naskh), where, in case of any conflict between the two verses, the one that corresponds to a later time period abrogates the one that came earlier. Problem is, all the "sword" verses are chronologically later than the "peace" verses, so those who subscribe to that doctrine believe in the former abrogating the latter, not vice versa, and those who don't are presented with a bunch of conflicting verses that have to be applied differently on a case by case basis (so, if a justification for violence is needed, it's always conveniently there).

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[tbannist]

If you only gave the tax break to the non-rich there would be an additional $1.1 trillion revenue dollars over the next decade. This $110 billion per year pales compared to our deficit just like I suggested in my post.

Oh well, then if it's only $110 billion per year, it's obviously not worth doing.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[SpaghettiPattern]

Both Communism and Fascism are outside any reasonable scale. Communism isn't just ultra left but a barking mad idea that all people are identical without any form of individualism and must be led by an exemplary leader. Fascism makes a set of persons more special than others. Not confirming people are considered subversive. And of course an exemplary leader is required. In some ways Communism and Fascism are quite alike.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[pandaman9000]

I was going to rip you for going on about "paying their fair share", to summarize, for the wealthy.

Then you tied in what I believe to be the single most important, glaring, flaw in our entire system: money from money, and less tax on this "work free" money.

Capital gains should be 30%. Period. I see no reason to allow vapor money to be worth less in tax revenue per dollar than work money.

Tax overseas money at HIGHER rates. Remove shelters. Flatten the code. 12% for EVERYONE of income, 30% for capital gains, with exceptions of homes used as primary living for over 2 years. Hell, maybe even exclude real estate, and use a separate rate.

The overly complex system we have right now only works for the wealthy. Moving from a retarded system to a possibly retarded system can only be more of the same or better.

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[SendBot]

Just think of it as a form of reparations.

Only if I get to refer to my middle school as a forced labor camp rife with abuse. Thanks a lot, compulsory attendance laws in the land of the "free"!

Re:What Disgusting Moderation

[Phrogman]

Of course we should not use a single axis. However the point I was making is that many people - almost all of whom see politics as a spectrum - seem to thoroughly be confused about what falls where.
Trying to add further axises into my comment would only have made it more confusing and difficult to explain. I know politics is more complex than that.

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[DigitalSorceress]

In British English, "I'm going to destroy LA" can be taken to mean "I'm going to party my ass off and see/do everything possible"...

If I said "I'm dying for a cigarette" would you immediately put me on suicide watch or would you recognize the cultural meaning of "I really need a cigarette"? In British parlance, they'd say "I could murder a fag" (fag means cigarette there, and the usage of "destroy" or "murder" can mean "ravenously consume"

It's cultural context here...

They weren't doing the equivalent of saying "I'm going to bring a bomb on this plane, ha ha ha" they were saying they were ready to go party and have a great time "painting the town red".

Ah, the DHS.

[Commontwist]

Created from fear, taught by fear, knows only fear.

Seriously, if the DHS don't have the wits to figure out the quote was from a popular cartoon from their own country and that 'destroy' is well known slang for 'party down the house' (which also sounds semi-evil. dun dun dun) from the country the Twitter user is coming from then the DHS have more problems than terrorists to worry about. Or rather, the USA does given they've been giving this new dept a bit too much of a leash.

Seriously, DHS and TSA were bad, bad ideas and mostly created to give voters the illusion that Bush was Doing Something. Well, he did something all right but not for the better from what I've been hearing.

Re:Ah, the DHS.

[AHuxley]

There are only so many smart, security cleared, patriotic, family cleared, drug test passing, police cleared, non "dual citizens" who can be accepted for work within the US gov.
The DIA, CIA, NSA.... FBI... health, Energy, Space ... all want staff from the same very limited pool of talent.
Their parents and grandparents exchanged colourful tracer fire with real Soviets (from Russia, not some locals) in South America, Asia, Africa ... they studied hard and stayed clean and found their way into the system.
But thats not what the DHS wants. You have to be of a certain mind set to be soak up radiation everyday or tell your staff with a smile thats its fine.
A problem seems to be that NSA and FBI like telco power is getting very cheap and very fast. What was the world wide skill set of the NSA with huge dictionary network efforts has now become so diluted.
http://www.allgov.com/Top_Stories/ViewNews/FBI_Stepping_Up_Monitoring_of_Social_Media_120128
Lots of people can now do vast dictionary drift nets when people of interest offer their details.
The difference is you would have never known that the NSA or other "smart" US agency would have contacted the GCHQ, MI6, MI5, Ireland, Scotland Yard ect and passed or not passed them.
Nobody would have known, no press, no forums, no comments - now many people are a bit more aware that Web 2.0 is a US trap and they will be more careful making US dictionary network efforts much less helpful.
What will tourism in the US be reduced to? Education swaps and people who want to feel the rush of entering a police state?

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[dietdew7]

"Paint the town red" is that code for something nefarious comrade?

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[Anonymous Coward]

... the other tweet in question was a Family Guy quote ...

Ah, copyright infringement. No wonder they were kicked out.

A strong sign of incompetence

[danielcolchete]

Look, when the best they can do is this it means that they are not doing anything else good. Really, someone inside though: "Finally something for me to work on!".

I dont like Venezuela because there is a guy there that if you piss him off then you are in trouble, you know, like a dictator. I guess the US is not going a path that is so different. Someone doesn't like your twitter joke and you are in trouble? Oh man... It is really bad.

But I think that the DOJ is even worse than the DHS. They don't seem to work by any law, and they think of no other consequence in name of stopping piracy. So, the DOJ is really the record labels, a small group of people in power of the whole population. Another sign of dictatorship. I really wish the US will get more democratic soon...

Slow and steady wins the race.

[mosb1000]

I don't think I'd say that. It's been in the works for almost 100 years now. The fast track has been tried in other countries, and it hasn't turned out to be sustainable in the long run. I think they're hoping that if they do it more slowly it will work better.

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[Anonymous Coward]

She tweeted something 3 weeks prior, and he twitted a week prior.

How did the zealous customs agent know what they had tweeted? Are there people with nothing more constructive to do than scan passenger lists and scour the intertubes for their twitter moniker and peruse what they have tweeted in the past?
I wonder how many terrorists that technique has caught!
Oh, right, these two...

Re:And vote Democrat to accelerate the process?

[Anonymous Coward]

> This Twitter thing happened under his watch

Are you talking about Twitter, a non-govt company, unilaterally instituting a policy to limit twits (yes, twits) by region? How is obama to blame for that?

> He defended the TSA detaining Rand Paul.

Is this a bad thing? It gives me hope that even congressmen have to live by the rules and laws that the laymen have to. If the White House came out against Rand's "detainment" (he was just turned away, not detained), you'd complain that Obama just believes that he and the rest of the lawmakers believe they are above the law

I voted for O and I feel that I've been sorely let down. But criticising him for THESE THINGS? As the kids say... REALLY? REALLY?

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[hawguy]

If I said "I'm dying for a cigarette" would you immediately put me on suicide watch or would you recognize the cultural meaning of "I really need a cigarette"? In British parlance, they'd say "I could murder a fag" (fag means cigarette there, and the usage of "destroy" or "murder" can mean "ravenously consume"

Maybe they should say "I could suck a fag" which clarifies the intent?

If everyone...

[Brad1138]

If everyone with Twitter, Facebook etc post they want to "destroy America" at the same time, would DHS explode?

Re:If everyone...

[AHuxley]

You may want to enter the US, fly in the US or get a security clearance in the US one day.
The US also has friends around the world who might fly you for free to spend same time with a list of questions from the US.

Apocryphal Australian customs/immigration story

[swb]

Someone swore to me that their brother saw this happen in Sydney in the customs/immigration line.

The story was: "I was with a group of people from my flight from Hong Kong to Sydney at the immigration/customs station. The guy in front of me was a British businessman. He was annoyed because of the late flight and the long customs line and was obviously in a hurry.

He showed his passport to the customs officer, who looked it over, paging through all the visa stamps. He sensed the businessman was in a hurry and asked the businessman a lot of questions, superficial and obvious -- do you travel a lot, where have you been, why are you in Sydney, and finally, if he had a criminal record.

The businessman was totally fed up. The late flight, the busy schedule, the long line at customs, and now finally this petty bureaucrat -- he'd had it.

So he answered, "I didn't think that was a prerequisite anymore."

The customs person looked straight at him, and stamped REFUSED ENTRY on his passport and told him he'd have to go back to Hong Kong."

----

There's lots of reasons to not believe it's true -- I'd imagine that the customs process for Commonwealth citizens isn't that onerous, especially for British citizens visiting Australia, especially if they were traveling from another Commonwealth country, and I can't imagine that you could just arbitrarily deny someone entry (well, at least in civilized countries like Australia).

But it's a fun story.

Re:Apocryphal Australian customs/immigration story

[swampa]

I would believe it. Having a criminal record can get you denied entry into Australia regardless of what country you are coming from (a quick google shows Snoop Dogg (US), a member from the band SNFU (Canadian) and David Irving (English) as people denied access to Australia for having a crimal record).

The Customs official probably had his fill of convict jokes for the day and decided to take wield his power (especially as the businessman didn't say "No, but" first before making the rest of the comment).

Re:Apocryphal Australian customs/immigration story

[PCM2]

There's lots of reasons to not believe it's true -- I'd imagine that the customs process for Commonwealth citizens isn't that onerous, especially for British citizens visiting Australia

An airport security agent asked me pretty much the same questions at JFK Airport in New York. I was on a flight from Mexico and I was only in JFK to transfer planes to San Francisco. The difference being, I was entering the United States with a valid United States passport. I couldn't believe he was asking me what I planned to do once I arrived home, either -- the temptation to say "oh I don't know, smoke some weed, I guess, maybe get on welfare" was overwhelming -- and yet I knew this guy could feasibly detain me for as long as he felt like, make me miss my flight, cost me hundreds of dollars when I had to book a new flight, and so on and so forth -- so I just had to stand there, answer his questions like I was at a job interview, and act like the whole thing wasn't completely outrageous.

Re:Apocryphal Australian customs/immigration story

[AHuxley]

Australia will usually send to you to a small room where they talk to you, scan your case, clothing, do tests and go over and over your background and paper work.
If you fail, your deported or face court.
The interesting part is if you pass - you feel ok as it was fair, honest, by the book and still want to enjoy Australia and spend your cash.
To deny someone entry they would be on the look out for an Australian/ other passport that only links with the 100 points of perfect of photo and medical ID that a person has on them - i.e. no "real" database background in Australia once the questions start.

Re:Apocryphal Australian customs/immigration story

[ironjaw33]

There's lots of reasons to not believe it's true -- I'd imagine that the customs process for Commonwealth citizens isn't that onerous, especially for British citizens visiting Australia

An airport security agent asked me pretty much the same questions at JFK Airport in New York. I was on a flight from Mexico and I was only in JFK to transfer planes to San Francisco. The difference being, I was entering the United States with a valid United States passport. I couldn't believe he was asking me what I planned to do once I arrived home, either -- the temptation to say "oh I don't know, smoke some weed, I guess, maybe get on welfare" was overwhelming -- and yet I knew this guy could feasibly detain me for as long as he felt like, make me miss my flight, cost me hundreds of dollars when I had to book a new flight, and so on and so forth -- so I just had to stand there, answer his questions like I was at a job interview, and act like the whole thing wasn't completely outrageous.

I always wonder what triggers the questioning. Last year I went on a trip to China and on entry back into the US I got nothing from the customs agent other than a stamp on my passport. Same for when I returned from Sweden. About a year before that, on entry, I was asked only about the purpose of my trip before being allowed through. Then, about five years ago, I drove into Canada for a day trip to Vancouver and on the way back into the US was hounded by a customs agent with questions about where I lived, how I got to Washington state since I lived on the east coast -- did I drive there?, and a demand to search the rear seats and the trunk. They did the whole mirrors under the car routine and everything before letting me through. I remember the Canadian border agents didn't care at all that I was going there for the day. Maybe I was dressed more casually when I was in the car, I don't know.

Re:Apocryphal Australian customs/immigration story

[Capsaicin]

I would believe it.

I wouldn't. Australia is a civilised country: we have judicial review (of administrative decisions). Still it makes an for an amusing story.

The Customs official probably had his fill of convict jokes for the day and decided to take wield his power ...

Could you please point me to the provision of the relevant Act which gives a customs official the power to reject entry on the basis that "[said official] had his fill of convict jokes for the day." One suspects that entry would be lawfully be refused based on some defect of the applicant, rather than of the official. I can't imagine the AAT or the MRT looking too favourably on this kind of exercise of power.

... especially as the businessman didn't say "No, but" first ...

Or even with "Yes, but ..." Which is why in the real world the official would have replied something along the lines of "was that a 'yes' or a 'no' sir?"

Re:Apocryphal Australian customs/immigration story

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm an Australian who went on holiday for a few weeks in south east Asia for a few weeks early last year. When I got to customs in Sydney airport on the way home it was pretty crowded and obviously busier than usual. A customs bloke asked me a couple of questions, then pointed to a line and said "just join that shit-fight over there". Within a minute I heard more casual swearing between employees. It was the first casual swearing I'd heard in weeks and really made me feel at home.

I think Australian culture is a little more immune to the terrorist paranoia and rubbish than the US, but you guys are definitely doing your best to impose it on us (along with your awful innovation and freedom-stifling "trade agreements" dreamed up and bought by lobbyists and supported by your openly-corrupt politicians).

Re:Apocryphal Australian customs/immigration story

[LoztInSpace]

I had the same thing in 1999. I too have a US passport thoug I never lived there so my visit was to catch up with friends before travelling on to South America. On my entry form I just said "friends" on the "where are you staying" bit. One of the customs or immigration guys (I think customs for extra WTF) started asking a bunch of questions about where I was staying. I started to explain I had no idea what my friend's address was before realising I didn't even have to even tell him. Luckily common sense prevailed and I told him that I was a citizen and unless he could prove my passport was a forgery, where I go or stay was none of his fucking business. I was told I'd be singled out for a cavity search next time I entered the US.

Funny thing was, the day before I left for South America we phoned around and visited about 5 shops trying to get some guns so we could have a laugh and shoot stuff (cans/trees) as is "my right" as an American. Two US citizens sporting federal ID absolutely could not get anyone to sell us weapons (guns or catapaults or anything) despite protests that "we absolutely have to have projectile weapons before tomorrow when I fly out".
I cannot imagine not being in jail had those shopping trips happened a year later.

Re:Apocryphal Australian customs/immigration story

[biodata]

> Having a criminal record can get you denied entry into Australia

Kinda the opposite of the old days then

Can I request my information?

[hawguy]

If TSA is compiling data about me from public posts, can I file a FOIA request to see what information they've compiled so I can verify that it's accurate and really is from me?

I'm assuming that they aren't restricting themselves to scanning foreign based tweets only since any terrorist intent on destroying America by digging up the remains of a long-deceased Hollywood starlet could avoid detection by tweeting from a USA account.

Re:Can I request my information?

[Spamalope]

If TSA is compiling data about me from public posts, can I file a FOIA request to see what information they've compiled so I can verify that it's accurate and really is from me?

You can file the request, but as they've decided to ignore FOIA obligations when inconvenient and lie when they do respond I'm not sure what that will prove.

Re:Can I request my information?

[gtirloni]

I wonder if these tweets were linked to a Twitter account with their complete real names and how the TSA is searching the Internet and keeping profiles of everyone, so they can check it later if people try to fly.

What kind of cooperation is going on here? Does it mean that, if my Twitter account doesn't have my name, that I'm "safe" from harassment?

In other news...

[bmo]

Leonard Cohen was arrested at the Peace Bridge border stop in because of his song "First We Take Manhattan"

--
BMO

Foolish cops

[physburn]

Surely they know how much transatlantic ping pong go on. Not to mention, how much brits joke and fake. Besides mentioning destroying america on twitter, doesn't mean that was there will, lots of thing would or could destroy america discuss.

Re:And vote Democrat to accelerate the process?

[MacGyver2210]

I, too, hate Obama for allowing Twitter to exist.

I suppose that's what you mean, since he has no control over or anything to do with the daily operation of Twitter...

You, sir, are an excellent troll.

So vote Democrat only if you want things even worse than voting for Republicans - because in the end the only people really into fascism are liberals.

I bet you can't name one thing that these dastardly Democrats do that is worse than an equivalent measure by the Republicans (ok, maybe with healthcare).

Also, by definition a liberal cannot be 'into fascism'. Liberal implies a breaking free from constraints, while Fascist implies the opposite with absolute and strict monitoring and control. They are diametrically opposed and cannot be likened to each other in even the slightest way.

Someone needs to destroy Homeland Security

[russotto]

And by "destroy" I mean de-fund the department, fire everyone in any position of authority, and permanently bar them from working in any government position again. The low-level workers can be treated on a case by case basis.

Re:Someone needs to destroy Homeland Security

[JustNiz]

...so are you going to vote Ron Paul? He's the only politician thats said he'd do exactly this.

Re:Someone needs to destroy Homeland Security

[Politburo]

No, he didn't say "exactly" that. He has said that he would re-privatize airport screening.

Re:Someone needs to destroy Homeland Security

[JTsyo]

I was expecting to see Ron Paul's name much before this in a topic like this. Are his followers giving up already?

Re:Someone needs to destroy Homeland Security

[JustNiz]

This smells of complete fabricated bullshit.
Cite your reference.

Re:And vote Democrat to accelerate the process?

[Microlith]

in the end the only people really into fascism are liberals.

As opposed to authoritarian conservatives, who (given their current insane base) would do exactly the same thing, only with a hint of JESUS?

Oh wait, this explains you quite well.

Re:And vote Democrat to accelerate the process?

[Microlith]

I'm sorry, that should be "conservatives" because no modern "conservative" actually is.

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[formfeed]

It seems the terrorist truly have one. America lost its sense of humour somewhere in the past 10 years.

Stupid feminist. Having one doesn't make you a terrorist.

- And no. I haven't lost my cent of humour

Re:And vote Democrat to accelerate the process?

[Anonymous Coward]

>> This Twitter thing happened under his watch
>Are you talking about Twitter, a non-govt company, unilaterally instituting a policy to limit twits (yes, twits) by region? How is obama to blame for that?

No idiot, he was talking about the very same article you just commented on - where a twitter message was identified as terrorism by DHS (a department that is more-or-less run by the POTUS)

Re:Still Bush?

[lister king of smeg]

Mod parent up. By the way congrass declareses war and the dems encluding hilery and Kerry voted to go to war why is all of the blame on Bush? Secondly the patriot act was extended by barrack obama. Hmmm but Bush must have made him do it I guess.

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[bill_mcgonigle]

The inability to confirm whether "destroy" is British slang

It's not even foreign slang - I heard this on campus 20 years ago here. Then again, USA 1992 may we considered a dangerous foreign country by the DHS.

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[schlachter]

so if I tweet some crazy shit to someone else's twitter account just as they board a plane to the US...they're going to end up ass raped by some Mexicans drug dealers and sent packing on a plane back home. (and by "packing" I don't mean carrying a gun in the US sense, but "packing" as in putting your shit in a bag)

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[kpoole55]

Never been to Britain, never heard this expression before but with the slight knowledge that "fag" is British slang for a cigarette the expression "murder a fag" seems very clear. The obvious way to murder a cigarette would be to burn it. In other words, smoke it.

Frame of mind

[no-body]

Creates reality for the dreamer.
A joke is a threat.
Doodling on a napkin is interpreted as a plan to attack. Threats are dreamed up and millions suffer.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2798679275960015727

In this case - aren't they loosing their ticket purchase price, reservations and vacation days?
I just hope that there is some legal process to sue.

assinated

[NoSleepDemon]

They most certainly do, a fine historial example of this can be found with the fate of one Mr Hitler in the factual documentary Dogma.

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[jamstar7]

First off, making jokes like that are without taste and quite dangerous in airports especially ones to the US.

Yeah, save these for the comedy clubs. Prolly still better than anything on TV these days...

Yup, the terrorrorrorrorrists have won.

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[airfoobar]

Hey, they're doing the same to Richard O'Dwyer but in reverse!

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[Frosty Piss]

Just the other guys don't understand the language.

Nonsense. DHS got the joke, they just didn't appreciate it.

There is a significant segment of the population that simply does not appreciate jokes about terrorism or jokes that put the United States of America as the butt of the joke.

Right or wrong, that's what was going on here: Brits making fun about God, Glory, Apple Pie... Send 'em home to good old England where people have much more freedom than here in the United Fascist States of America.

Oh, that's right, the Brits live under constant surveillance that would never be tolerated here...

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[jamstar7]

... the other tweet in question was a Family Guy quote ...

Ah, copyright infringement. No wonder they were kicked out.

Only because they haddn't already been properly extradited to the US, you know. Wouldn't do to have to try and arrest them before all the paperwork was in.

Destroy Baltimore first

[gatkinso]

Seriously. Please.

DHS is so embarrassing

[dwpro]

I really can't think of an agency of the US government that brings me more shame on a regular basis. Given the option, I'd have a referendum and disband the whole goddamned monstrosity.

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[DaleCooper82]

... the other tweet in question was a Family Guy quote ...

Ah, copyright infringement. No wonder they were kicked out.

You made me laugh loudly here, thx!

Re:And vote Democrat to accelerate the process?

[sjames]

Nah, it's the same deal either way. The only real choice is red or blue handbasket.

Mights as well 'throw my vote away' on a 3rd party, it's not like a vote for the Rs or the Ds matters.

Re:Still Bush?

[sjames]

It's the game. The Rs will back date Obama to blame the Ds for the crap Bush did and the Ds will forward date Bush to blame the Rs for everything Obama did.

I will say that Obama is at least moving us towards hell a little slower, but I can't say I'm happy with how things are going.

Whos keeping score?

[Anonymous Coward]

Terrorists: 1
Land of the free and home of the brave: 0

Cardinal Richelieu would have been proud.

[Anonymous Coward]

Seems like the DHS have improved on the lower bound of Richelieu's requirement.

"If you give me six lines written
by the most honest man, I will find
something in them to hang him."

                                                                - Cardinal Richelieu

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[sjames]

It's not really a joke so much as a manner of speech. We all say things daily that could be taken in really bad or funny ways.

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[Aryden]

we still owe you for 1812... your time is coming foul swine!

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[Aryden]

Oh, that's right, the Brits live under constant surveillance that would never be tolerated here...

Never tolerated here? I'm looking out my window at cameras recording the movement of vehicles. I have the patriot act in one of the tabs open while reading this article. I drove passed an AT&T facility everyday to my father's house, a facility that was utilized for the tapping and storage of private phone conversations. You have got to be joking...

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[Aryden]

Only if it means covering a city in the blood of newborn babies. It's all for the children afterall.

Re:And vote Democrat to accelerate the process?

[psiclops]

I, too, hate Obama for allowing Twitter to exist.

I suppose that's what you mean, since he has no control over or anything to do with the daily operation of Twitter...

I don't know where you got the idea that Twitter ran the DHS and had the power to boot people out of the country? but if they did, i'd sure hope that the president had some level of control over what they did.

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[Dahamma]

Just ask the Dutch couple arrested and strip searched in New York last week, then deported after no red paint or brushes were found.

Re:And vote Democrat to accelerate the process?

[webnut77]

It gives me hope that even congressmen have to live by the rules and laws that the laymen have to. If the White House came out against Rand's "detainment" (he was just turned away, not detained), you'd complain that Obama just believes that he and the rest of the lawmakers believe they are above the law

Might want to check your facts. You need to watch the whole video to realize:
1) Rand Paul WAS detained for 1 1/2 hours
2) He didn't tell them he was a Senator. After awhile they did figure it out.

This is a message.

[forkfail]

And that message is, "We are watching everything now. Everything."

Re:This is a message.

[Serif]

And the answer from me is "Thanks, but no thanks". I'll spend my tourist dollars somewhere else that doesn't pull stunts like this.

language misinterpretation

[dinodriver]

If this is how oddly Americans interpret British English, and then can't let it go, imagine how poorly they must be misunderstanding the words of people from other countries. I wonder how many people have ended up on no fly lists or arrested or held based on gross misunderstandings?

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[mark-t]

What makes you think it was some sort of joke? They used colloquial slang. They used it while they were still in Britain. In context, it means to "party hard". They weren't being cheeky with anybody, they were just using their normal language. It's the DHS that figured that the homonym must mean something actually destructive, just because the term doesn't have any other meaning in the USA.

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[mark-t]

Perhaps you had failed to notice that the remark was tweeted while they were still in Britain... and several days before they even arrived at the airport.

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[Spamalope]

Maybe they should say "I could suck a fag" which clarifies the intent?

That could be ambiguous if they were heading for San Francisco...

they pretty much showed he was an opportunist

[decora]

the film J Edgar got it right. the Venona files would make incredibly poor evidence in a courtroom. many of them are partial and/or missing huge bits. if you just go and read them, and read the FBI papers on the surveillance done of some of the suspected agents, a large amount of it is a waste of our police time. "sep 1943. ms x went to get groceries. she went to visit mr y. she came home. dec 1943. ms x went to a book store. jan 1944. ms x had a baby. surveillance stopped."

of course, one of the major problems was that Wild Bill Donovan, the head of the OSS (prototype of the CIA) believed that the soviets were great allies, and wanted to invite the NKVD to come collaborate with the FBI. of course the congress would never go after the CIA - that would be unpatriotic or something. but they would go after some third string hollywood writer who had attended a meeting 10 years ago during the great depression, when people were dying in the street from malnutrition in Los Angeles county.

there were actual Soviet agents in the government and many were caught. they weren't caught because of mccarthy, they were caught because of ordinary police men doing their job, which is to gather evidence and present it to a court, not play hero in front of the media.

the other problem is the people like William Shirer, a journalist and historian of the Nazis, and Carl Foreman, the man who wrote High Noon, were kicked out of the US for basically no reason. they had nothing to do with actual soviet infiltration.

Re:they pretty much showed he was an opportunist

[Thing 1]

and read the FBI papers on the surveillance done

I just got a chill as I realized that I re-read that last word three times, the first two thinking I was auto-correcting for a typo: "drone". I'm being conditioned...

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[Anonymous Coward]

Nonsense. DHS got the joke, they just didn't appreciate it.

It's slang. Colloquial language. It's not a "joke" any more than "getting shit-faced" is a joke about bowel movements.

First they came for the communists

[Any Web Loco]

First they came for the communists, and PopeRatzo didn't speak out because he wasn't a communist...

Warning: DHS (and TSA) has no sense of humor

[xenobyte]

I'm pretty sure it's a central qualification point when they're hiring staff. That and a total lack of people skills. If you've got even a shred of either of those you're out! - and probably added to a watchlist for being subversive.

Seriously, why in the world are they monitoring tweets for terrorist threats? - Okay, I know they're actually thinking that terrorists and criminals are happy to self-incriminate; after all for decades there have been a question on the immigration form asking "Are you traveling to the US to commit a crime?" which now have been join by "Are you traveling to the US to commit terror?". Yes, they actually ask that. They obviously expect both criminals to and terrorists to be stupid enough to self-incriminate because if you answer yes to either you're bound to get deported pretty fast - because they have no sense of humor, remember?

Re:US does it to UK, UK does it to US (Chris Brown

[Patch86]

1) Man gets criminal conviction for severely beating a woman, gets travel restrictions when applying for visas.
2) Holidaying teenagers get detained and deported for tweeting that they were going to party hard.

If you can't see a difference, you're beyond help.

Re:And vote Democrat to accelerate the process?

[Ardeaem]

Oh piss off with your true scotsman fallacy. Words are defined by their usage, and political labels especially so.

Yes, but they aren't defined by your usage. "Liberal", except to US conservatives, means a political position that is marked by a desire to remove constraints on peoples' behavior. In the Western world, the people who use the word "liberal" to mean that far outnumber the people who take it to mean "people who disagree with the right wing in the US."

Muslims are not a fucking ethnic group

[YA_Python_dev]

Look, I love equality for everyone and I think prejudice is stupid. But can we please stop pretending that Muslims are a "race" or an ethnic group? They are the followers of a religion, Islam.

Some religious extremists love spreading this lie because it allows them to stop any criticism (legitimate or not) of their actions by labeling it as "discrimination" or even "racism".

Please don't fall for it: there's a very important difference between attributes like ethnicity, skin color, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, place of birth and other characteristics like religion or political ideas.

Everything in the first group is something that people get assigned at birth and cannot change, so discrimination based on them must be strongly opposed. But the stuff in the second group is something that people can change at any time if they want to, so criticizing people for their religion or political ideas should always be fair game.

Re:Muslims are not a fucking ethnic group

[91degrees]

Thing is, the prejudice is against middle easterners.

Do you think that a Bosniak Muslim (White, eastern European) would suffer as much prejudice as an Arabic atheist? The religion thing is used as an excuse.

Re:Muslims are not a fucking ethnic group

[dave420]

Yes, but when people lump together a bunch of disparate folks whose only common attribute is said religion, then ascribe to those people some characteristic that isn't true (say, Muslims = terrorists), then that is discrimination, and it is bad.

Re:Muslims are not a fucking ethnic group

[Jason Levine]

To a degree, yes. Let's say there was a Presidential candidate whose personal religious view was that it was his mission in life to convert everyone to his religion no matter what the method. This person's religious views would be completely up for criticism. However, let's say this candidate belonged to a religious movement and some other pastor, in some other church, in some other state, but in the same movement, stated that it was his mission in life to convert everyone to his religion no matter what the method. Should the candidate be criticized for this pastor's views? Should the candidate be forced to quit his religion or else? Or would it be ok for him to simply state that, while they "officially" belong to the same religious group, they don't share the same religious views?

Re:Muslims are not a fucking ethnic group

[anyanka]

Everything in the first group is something that people get assigned at birth and cannot change, so discrimination based on them must be strongly opposed. But the stuff in the second group is something that people can change at any time if they want to, so criticizing people for their religion or political ideas should always be fair game.

We were talking about demonization, and not mere criticism, weren't we? Anyway, even for criticism, there's a subtle difference between criticizing people for their religion/politics, and criticizing their religion/politics. If you're in favor of the former, consider yourself criticized.

DHS Sends ...

[KramberryKoncerto]

T____rists Home. Sounds fair to me.

DESTROY!

[Builder]

Just for some context, in the UK, 'destroying' something is often used as slang to refer to going out and getting massively drunk and partying.

Doesn't make him very bright though.

Re:DESTROY!

[jholyhead]

If intelligence isn't a prerequisite for the office of President, it shouldn't be a prerequisite for the role of tourist.

Re:DESTROY!

[jyda]

Now that DHS knows that, I bet tweeting words like "partying" and "getting drunk" is going to trigger a red flag as a synonyms to destroy.

I blame the boomers and their cold war fetishism.

[ToddInSF]

With the TSA and the DHS, every day can be like the cold war era in the US.

That's the way many people here like it.

Emporer

[dtmos]

What, btw, is an emporer?

I was going to write this scathing comment about Internet illiteracy, when another comment in this thread had me look up the Wikipedia entry for Emperor Norton I. There I read:

The 1870 U.S. census lists Joshua Norton as 50 years old and residing at 624 Commercial Street; his occupation was "Emporer" [sic].

So it seems there is precedent for this error, if not the occupation. No word on "assinated," "toght," or "talke," though.

An informed population is an armed population

[msobkow]

The main reason that Nazi Germany got out of hand is the same dirty tricks used to shovel cannabis prohibition through the US Congress all those decades ago: suppression of the media.

Even the AMA didn't know the "marijuana" slang being referred to by Congress in the newspapers of the day was in fact referring to the cannabis that was in 70+% of medicines of the day. The newspapers (mostly owned by one man on a mission) conveniently neglected to mention that fact.

Similarly, the atrocities the Nazis started performing simply weren't reported.

We CAN avoid a repeat thanks to the internet providing UNFILTERED news to the public, but only if the public pulls their head out of their collective arses and realize that those who would dominate the world will always try again. We MUST remain ever vigilant for the abuse of power, and denying that it can happen again will lead us right back down that terrible path to social destruction again.

The real cause

[Skapare]

... there's no actual terrorist threat going on right now. Gotta keep looking busy somehow.

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[CrackedButter]

America should grow up and constant surveillance begins and ends in city centres, benign stuff.

Germans should use their copyright on the phrase

[TaoPhoenix]

Wait -

So what happens if a German kid "plans to destroy America" using a British Copyrighted phrase that insults Facebook, who wins with what result??

Could the resulting lawyer generated hot air power the Facebook datacenter in Oregon?

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[mgblst]

You are right, the next time a terrorist jokes about blowing up a plane, is ignored, and does actually blow up a plane, the press will have a lot of fun in the field.

And you should never, ever, joke around. You are just going to make the DHS people feel like morons when you jokes are anything more intelligent than appears on Big Bang Theory.

See Bruce Schneier's blog for reasoned analysis

[Ymerej]

A more reasoned analysis -- http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/01/british_tourist.html

Shame on you /. editors!

[MisterJohnny]

Sorry to rain down on all of your police state conspiracies, buuut: Taken from Bruce Schneier's blog: New reports are saying that customs was tipped off about the two people, and their detention was not a result of data mining: "Based on information provided by the LAX Port Authority Infoline -- a suspicious activity tipline -- CBP conducted a secondary interview of two subjects presenting for entry into the United States," says the spokesperson, who notes that the CBP "denies entry to thousands of individuals" each year. "Information gathered during this interview revealed that both individuals were inadmissible to the United States and were returned to their country of residence."

Re:Moot

[kj_kabaje]

I think you missed a few steps... as pointed out by other posts.

A nice idea, but

[ThatsNotPudding]

Imagine what a bunch of motivated, reasonably intelligent people with good communications and technical skill could do.

Unlike their right-wing counterparts, so willing to check their individualism at the party door and march in lock step, we leftys, believing in the rights and privacies of the person over the state, end up self-fracturing along niche ideological lines and end up as effective as a herd of cats. Example: 'Screw the Democratic machine, I'm supporting Ralph Nader'.

How did dhs do this?

[EmperorOfCanada]

My question is how did DHS match a twitter account with a single individual and a boarding card?
The only things close to personally identifying on my twitter account would be my rough location and my email. But even with my email you would need to get twitter and then hotmail to cough up some details. Plus you would then have my name which matches the name of many other people.
Unless this guy has posted his UK equivalent of a SSN or passport # on his twitter account I don't understand how they were so able to link the person to the twitter account. This would require complete cooperation from a number of US Internet companies and ideally his UK ISP.
Even if this guy used his name on the account it still would match a zillion names.
Think of the steps: Scan all of twitter for Anti-american blather. Go to Twitter and get user details. Go to hotmail, gmail, etc for more details. And possibly go to ISP for billing information. This would ideally require that Twitter and Facebook, hotmail, gmail regularly hand over complete data sets or have given DHS a backdoor.

This is a huge opportunity for any company that is willing to operate somewhere they can ignore US pressure and US court fatwas; as you could create the ultimate privacy policy. "We don't give your info to the US as the other guys do."

Re:How did dhs do this?

[Jason Levine]

Some people use their real names and locations on Twitter. This makes it easier (though not exact) to figure out who they really are. I'm with you, though. I don't give out my real name or exact location on Twitter. (My Slashdot account is from a time when I did use my real name. If I could retroactively change it, I would. Yes, I could create a new account with my pseudonym, but I'm lazy. ;-) )

Re:How did dhs do this?

[EmperorOfCanada]

Some people use their real names and locations on Twitter. This makes it easier (though not exact) to figure out who they really are. I'm with you, though. I don't give out my real name or exact location on Twitter. (My Slashdot account is from a time when I did use my real name. If I could retroactively change it, I would. Yes, I could create a new account with my pseudonym, but I'm lazy. ;-) )

Still there must be a zillion Jason Levines out there. At the border they would get a huge number of false positives if they matched just "Jason Levine" to you. Even better for foreign names where there are many possible English translations. But it would be a whole lot easier if they were getting IP addresses from Twitter and account info from ISPs to match up IP addresses. Then they could even say "Ah ha we got you Indigo123."

Re:How did dhs do this?

[Jason Levine]

True, but if I used "Jason Levine" on Twitter, I'd wind up giving out other contextual information (approximate area I live in, for instance) that would narrow the search. With just "Jason Levine", though, you're right that I'm lost in a crowd of Jason Levine's. In fact, I just did a Google search on my name and the first entry actually relating to me is on the second page towards the end - A link to my Slashdot comments page.

Not visiting the US.

[Per Wigren]

I've always wanted to visit the US, to visit the huge cities or/and renting a car and going on a road trip. Not anymore though, it just doesn't feel worth it. I'll keep spending my vacations travelling around Europe and Asia. Maybe some day I'll travel Canada or the caribbean though. Heck, in 10-15 years it will probably be safer for foreigners to travel rural Africa than the US.

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[DarkOx]

Right and we have all seen the damage done from the soccer riots. When the Brit's claim they are going to "destroy" something they might mean party, but odds something is really going to be destroyed.

Clearly these were in fact dangerous criminals, and I am thankful we have a vigilant homeland security force keeping our nation safe. We can hardly tolerate the sort of property damage an mayhem these "terrorist tourists" would have brought down upon us.

Hey DHS agent, will this post get me off your list?

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[Stormthirst]

It's funny. When the Irish where bombing London, I don't remember the Americans taking that particularly seriously. In fact, as far as I know, a lot of Irish Americans were financially supporting the IRA. Certainly doesn't help when one of your own Congressmen actively supports the IRA, you have to wonder which side he's on. Especially when Peter King is the chairman for the United States House Committee on Homeland Security.

Does he support terrorism or not? Oh that's right - he supports it when it's not in the USA.

So if you see a really hot girl at the airport...

[tekrat]

And remark, "Wow, I'd destroy that." -- you're to be arrested for terrorism????

As someone with British ancestry...

[gestalt_n_pepper]

I can tell you that many of us have a genetic mutation that forces us to make jokes every 2nd or 3rd sentence. Totally involuntary, I assure you. Famous sufferers of the disease include all the Pythons and virtually every member of the House of Lords. The Queen herself is alleged to carry the gene, but manages to keep silent and simply carry on with her everyday life a sort of extended joke.

Furniture shock

[Splodgey]

Ok, here's a life lesson. Never read Slashdot immidiately after waking up. I read the headline, it didn't click what 'DHS' was so I put it into google uk. Bleary-eyed I clicked the top link http://www.dfs.co.uk/ My first thought was that they've really overstepped their authority........

this kind of crap

[chronoglass]

this is the kind of crap that makes me furious at our post 9/11 government setup.
Did you really have to outright deport them? you couldn't interview them and say.. hey, these are just a bunch of kids being annoying, not a threat to national security. but no.. let's knee jerk and be douche bags.

DHS -> gotta go, you're a waste of money
TSA -> gotta go, private security should be handling this job and the airlines should get terrorist insurance
DEA -> gotta stay, but stay in this country, you're not a reverse CIA
CIA -> you can not make money, accept that your operations NEED a paper trail

so on.. and so on.. and so on..

Sounds like a boring working on tourist visa story

[tangledweb]

Here is my bet.

This will turn into an utterly mundane case of the DHS deciding this he was an aspiring singer trying to come to Hollywood to work on a tourist visa (or visa waiver).

Here is a newspaper article that seems to be about the same guy's singing career: http://www.youghalonline.com/2008/05/05/...

Myspace
http://www.myspace.com/leighbryanmusiconline

Youtube: [NSFW]
http://www.youtube.com/user/OfficialLeighB/videos

Somebody with the same name as the female in the pair did some acting in the UK previously. But I have no other data so don't know if they are the same person:
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3960874/

We're becoming more like the Israeli's...

[E_Ron.Eous]

as every day passes...

They should have sent them to Gitmo

[amunds0n]

and just waterboarded them till they confessed....

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[jomama717]

Now you've done it - you'll never fly again with that post etched into your online history. I started this as a joke, but shit - the tweets in question were posted weeks before they actually flew, and clearly context didn't matter, so maybe you are actually screwed!

Re:Germans should use their copyright on the phras

[Digital Vomit]

Wait -

So what happens if a German kid "plans to destroy America" using a British Copyrighted phrase that insults Facebook, who wins with what result??

I'm pretty sure you go on to the lightning round -- or "blitzwenden" -- in that case.

Wow. Isn't this being blown out of proportion?

[Lashat]

They were detained for half the day and then sent home. Hardly, a witch hunt and burnt stake.

It is more comical than anything else. "We are going to destory America" vs. "We are going to paint the town red". Opps. Mistake in the code that flags tweets for human intervention. The human agent(s) do not want to "miss" a potential "real threat" and investigate the couple. Shame on the DHS brass for not being savvy enough to resolve that the pair was not a genuine threat and then letting them into the country.

Monitoring of communication that has been going on for YEARS in ALL developed countries. This just informs the public of the fact.

Back in 1953 this very communication would have me on the radar of Senator McCarthy because I typed "paint the town red".

Re:Wow. Isn't this being blown out of proportion?

[MitchDev]

Well, if you consider the whole state of affairs acceptable then go back to being an obedient little sheep...

Re:Still Bush?

[iceaxe]

I will continue to give "credit" to Bush for the damage he did for as long as that damage continues to exist.

As a corollary, I will give "credit" to Obama for the damage he has done or will do.

I will give "extra credit" to the morons that reelect proven scoundrels, whatever criminal political gang they happen to come from.

The blame lies at the feet of the voters.

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[iceaxe]

And still some people think "the government" has invincible secret agents out there protecting them from super-villains.

Wake up people, "the government" is a pack of human beings just as incompetent as you are. And so are "the enemies".

Re:And vote Democrat to accelerate the process?

[pandaman9000]

By definition??? Liberal and Conservative are brands. The name plate can say "rose garden" but if it smells like shit, and is gooey like shit, I am pretty sure that is just re-labelled shit. Liberal as in left wing is not "breaking free". If you think national health care will never mean ONE choice, and a "company" that is run based on your worth as a cog in the new Socialist machine, you are just dreaming. Everything comes down to power and money. Big government, or big business. Choose your poison. Either will kill you.

A "liberal" government will be fascist in its implementation here. So will a "conservative" one. Only by going back to our roots, where the rights and freedoms, and power were more focus on the individual, and trickled down to the community, state, and lastly federal governments, can we avoid the end of this road we are on. The second amendment isn't about pistols, and hunting rifles, for example. It is whatever weapons that will strike FEAR in the hearts of any government that wants to erode or deprive your constitutionally-endowed rights and freedoms.

For all those who want to remove the guns: You can't fight tanks and semi- auto snipers with night vision, and laser guided missiles with sit down protests, dirty looks and really aggressive frowning.

Keeping the freedom to say "Fcuk OMABA in his ass with a LAW rocket" may mean having to kill or die at some point.

The shit you see on the news is a diversion. The hand that moves the wires guides a fine puppet show of Liberals versus Conservatives. The other shows are terrorism and "they should make a law for that", to help guide you down the path of ratting out anyone that isn't flagrantly patriotic and supportive of all legal issues, and to help you feel comfortable knowing that the NANNY is making laws to protect you from yourself, and from any free thought.

You wouldn't want to lose your job and your kids by being a "single issue terrorist" and speaking out against the establishment, would you?

TL;DR:
Definition doesn't apply here. There is no real difference one either reaches the logical conclusion. The whole thing is a puppet show, diverting your attention as your freedom and ability to amass wealth slowly dissolve.

 

Re:And vote Democrat to accelerate the process?

[pandaman9000]

No edit....

"For all those who want to remove the guns: You can't fight tanks and semi- auto snipers, night vision, and laser guided missiles with sit down protests, dirty looks and really aggressive frowning."

Definition doesn't apply here. There is no real difference either one reaches this same logical conclusion. The whole thing is a puppet show, diverting your attention as your freedom and ability to amass wealth slowly dissolve.

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[pandaman9000]

The IRA weren't necessarily terrorists. There is a bigger story.

smug grammar nazi's...

[GillyGuthrie]

piss me off.

"assassinated".

the period goes inside the quotes. nice try

Re:smug grammar nazi's...

[semiotec]

Only if you were brought up with the silly American English system. Smug Americans piss me off.

Not to mention, the plural form of Nazi is just Nazis.

Tweeter?

[fangmcgee]

Tweeter? Really, Homeland Security?

Re:Joking about this is the height of stupidity.

[Stormthirst]

You don't live in England do you. I was living in London during the 70s and 80s. Trust me. They were terrorists. They have now seen the light and nominally given up arms.

The IRA are a terrorist organisation, plain and simple. Their aim was to bring about political change in Ireland through the use of violence and terror. That makes them terrorists.