Slashdot Mirror


Tennessee Official: Water Complaints Could be "Act of Terrorism"

An anonymous reader writes "A Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation deputy director is threatening citizens with being listed as terrorists for giving official complaints. Sherwin Smith, deputy director of TDEC’s Division of Water Resources said: 'But you need to make sure that when you make water quality complaints you have a basis, because federally, if there's no water quality issues, that can be considered under Homeland Security an act of terrorism.' 'In terms of the comments made by a member of the Water Resources Division at the meeting, we are just receiving the information and looking into this on our end,' spokeswoman Meg Lockhart said. 'The department would like to fully assess what was said in the meeting. I am told that the meeting was far longer than the audio clip provided by SOCM and that Mr. Smith actually clarified his remarks. But again, we are looking into it.'"

407 comments

  1. Scare tactics by memnock · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The government's number one tool in the fight against terrorism.

    1. Re:Scare tactics by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Funny

      The violators will be subjected to interrogration by the newly-established Federal Water Board. After federal water boarding, they'll be shipped to Gitmo.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re:Scare tactics by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The government's number one tool in the fight against terrorism.

      I hate to say it, but by definition, the only way for terrorism to work is for people to be terrified.

      If the People would grow a backbone again, and stop being terrified, no matter if it's salafi jihadists or government propagandists who are attempting the scaring, then there could be no terrorism. War's over, let's pack up and go home.

      A skiddish populous is the #1 tool in the effort that has been misnamed the "War on Terror".

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    3. Re:Scare tactics by slashmydots · · Score: 0

      All you have to do to stop terrorists is rush zerglings...or maybe that's Terrans

    4. Re:Scare tactics by Dunbal · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Better to live a single day as a lion than a thousand years as a lamb.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    5. Re:Scare tactics by rk · · Score: 4, Informative

      7-pool is better than a 6-pool, but if they wall off before your zerglings get there, you're toast. Roach timings are better, especially if the Terran goes early expand.

    6. Re:Scare tactics by milkmage · · Score: 4, Insightful

      there may be some foundation though.. remember the "dihydrogen monoxide" prank those Florida DJs pulled on April Fools.

      possible felony charges (of course this was radio, so that's understandable because of the panic they caused)

      the charges never materialized.

      http://www.theatlanticwire.com/entertainment/2013/04/florida-djs-april-fools-water-joke/63798/

    7. Re:Scare tactics by gmuslera · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The easiest way to always have terrorists is to create them.

    8. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When you put it that way... actually, living like a lamb doesn't sound like such a bad idea on the surface. Sounds like a nice, calm, peaceful existence. Whereas living like a lion sounds like every day would be a struggle to survive.

      I get what you were trying to say, but there's got to be a better way to say it.

    9. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

      That story is indeed terrifying for several reasons.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    10. Re:Scare tactics by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2

      True enough, but you're really scraping the bottom of the barrel if you putative scary monsters come from people complaining about government services. Who's next? People who don't pay parking tickets?

      Boo!

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    11. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Here's where my imagination runs wild - I mean what I'm about to post is pure fiction:

      Somewhere near this town, some very well connected industry and industrialist is polluting the water.

      Now, a rich and powerful person who makes a lot of campaign contributions can order his bitch to order the state bureaucrat to hide the problem to intimidate people to shut up. I think it's called racketeering.

      Because after all, it's not like corrupt government officials in Tennessee have ever tried to screw over their citizens before.

      But this is PURE fantasy and it couldn't possibly happen in real life.Businesses are always trying to clean up the environment even if it hurts their bottom line!

      That'll be what I say in my deposition.

    12. Re: Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ever seen a wormskin rug?

    13. Re:Scare tactics by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In other news Orson Welles is retroactively found guilty of terrorism by a secret government court.

      --
      http://www.rootstrikers.org/
    14. Re:Scare tactics by gl4ss · · Score: 4, Insightful

      personally I'm waiting for them to label schoolyard bullies as terrorists since obviously they're terrorizing people and the law must be the same for everyone - no exceptions(exept gov.)!

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    15. Re:Scare tactics by mc6809e · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The government's number one tool in the fight against terrorism.

      Is to terrorize innocent people with threats of imprisonment?

    16. Re:Scare tactics by Skapare · · Score: 2

      I thought the reason to not live as a lamb was that you had no hope to live a thousand years.

      --
      now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
    17. Re:Scare tactics by ewibble · · Score: 1

      Of course, if people don't pay their parking tickets, It could mean the end of society as we know it, people just parking anywhere.

      In fact people who simply depict illegal parking should, taken away, they are encouraging it.

    18. Re:Scare tactics by hedwards · · Score: 2

      Having been to China, I have to point out how silly you're being. Traffic and parking tickets there are rare, and it shows. People drive on the sidewalks, on both sides of the street, park pretty much wherever they feel like parking.

      So, it would be the end of society as we know it, as the society as we know it is reasonably safe to cross the street. In much of China, if you wish to cross the street, you look left, you look right, you look left, you look behind you, then proceed after doing it a couple times.

    19. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah, not Gitmo, just a shiny new jail in, oh, say, Monroe County, TN. Cinder-block and rebar-encased Faraday cage, heating by the Frost Queen, cameras and mics up every bodily orifice. Maybe fMRI scanners if the County Commission goes for it. I know, tell 'em it's to catch terrorists. Heck, just put in a grant request. Yeah, that's the ticket.

      You'll need such facilities once you convince people that lodging any kind of legitimate complaint will get them some kind of Federal felony. They'll be just as likely to blow up a dam as complain about crappy water then. Some of those hillbillies are nuts!

      ---
      Subscribe now to the Sarcastic Comment of the Day.

    20. Re:Scare tactics by justthinkit · · Score: 1, Insightful
      With 96% of TN fluoridated, you don't have to invent a situation where "some very well connected industry and industrialist is polluting the water."
      .

      Is it going to become illegal to protest the government/city/county poisoning the water?

      --
      I come here for the love
    21. Re:Scare tactics by HiThere · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Given what you say, it's the government that are the terrorists.

      The government is the entity that decided that the people were afraid. The governments actions have caused me to be afraid...of the government.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    22. Re:Scare tactics by king+neckbeard · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, there are no other differences in China and other countries that could impact this difference, such as vastly differing viewpoints on human rights and value of individuality. Also, what kind of mental gymnastics does it take to associate a lack of parking tickets with it being dangerous to cross the street? Parked cars are rarely a danger to anyone, especially a pedestrian.

      However, in an experiment, a Dutch town removed basically all traffic signs and were considerably safer, because instead of relying upon signs and stoplights to tell them what to do, they had to instead actually pay attention to their surroundings. Believe it or not, we generally have strong instincts for self-preservation, and social mechanisms often work better than rules or legal mechanisms when no such system exists.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    23. Re:Scare tactics by UltraZelda64 · · Score: 1

      Scare tactics? Hey... ain't that just synonym for terrorism? Literally?

    24. Re:Scare tactics by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 1

      Some useful definitions:
      Lamb - meat from a juvenile sheep that was killed for its meat in its first year of life.
      Hoggett - meat from a juvenile sheep that was killed for its meat after the first year of its life.
      Mutton - meat from a sheep that lived long enough to be an adult before being killed for its meat.
      Best not to be a lamb...

      BTW, I have not come across anyone selling hoggett since I was a youngster. Even the butchers claim not to know what it is, despite it being widely sold a few decades ago. Apparently, they sell it as "lamb" nowadays.

      --
      Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    25. Re:Scare tactics by msauve · · Score: 5, Funny

      We can no longer sit back and allow Communist infiltration, Communist indoctrination, Communist subversion and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.

      You know when fluoridation first began?

      Nineteen hundred and forty-six. 1946. How does that coincide with your post-war Commie conspiracy, huh? It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hard-core Commie works.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    26. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Be careful, you'll catch the ire of the Christians. Jesus is a lamb and they want to live in eternity in heaven as lambs.

      Posting AC cause I'll catch thier ire too.

    27. Re:Scare tactics by fredgiblet · · Score: 2

      Are you in the States? If so anything not labeled lamb probably doesn't sell well and most people likely don't have any idea what "Hoggett" is. Hell most people here probably only vaguely know what Mutton is.

    28. Re:Scare tactics by fredgiblet · · Score: 4, Funny

      They're already suspending kids for gun-shaped pop-tarts, it seems like bullies should be higher on their lists than that.

    29. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How many times are you people gonna keep trotting out the Battle of Athens like it was some great Civil War battle? It was absolutely in no way some kind of proof you need to your guns to fight tyranny. It was vigilantism and a bunch of rednecks who wanted to shoot some people. Not a stellar example.

    30. Re:Scare tactics by justthinkit · · Score: 1

      What are you talking about? How does that relate to my post? Neither "commie" nor "communist" appear in my link. Next you will be denying there is a B3 bomber.

      --
      I come here for the love
    31. Re:Scare tactics by Gort65 · · Score: 0

      All nice and good, till the sun sets.

    32. Re:Scare tactics by msauve · · Score: 4, Informative

      LOL. You've apparently never seen Dr. Strangelove. Hint: you're Jack D. Ripper.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    33. Re: Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are hilariously ignorant.

    34. Re:Scare tactics by foobsr · · Score: 1
      No, they have to have a base to recruit from.

      CC.

      --
      TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
    35. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Live free or die hard?

    36. Re:Scare tactics by Calydor · · Score: 1

      To be honest I have never heard the word hoggett before, and just hearing the word knowing it refers to 'some kind of meat' I would think it was from a pig (specifically a hog) rather than a sheep.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    37. Re:Scare tactics by cold+fjord · · Score: 0, Troll

      The government's number one tool in the fight against terrorism.

      I hate to say it, but by definition, the only way for terrorism to work is for people to be terrified.

      If the People would grow a backbone again, and stop being terrified, no matter if it's salafi jihadists or government propagandists who are attempting the scaring, then there could be no terrorism. War's over, let's pack up and go home.

      A skiddish populous is the #1 tool in the effort that has been misnamed the "War on Terror".

      The "War on Terror" is symbolic language for the war against al Qaida, just as the "war against fascism" was symbolic language for the fight against Germany and Italy in WW2. Supposedly smart people should be able to understand symbolism, but there seems to be little evidence for it on Slashdot since I keep reading the same nonsense over and over again.

      You don't have to be terrified to take actions against terrorists. Just making the judgment that it is prudent to prevent mass slaughter of your fellow citizens is enough. Or maybe you could explain why it is a good idea to let your fellow citizens be killed by the thousands and do nothing?

      Al Qaida is just as happy killing brave people as they are frightened people. You seem to be in the camp that wants people to be brave against terrorists, and frightened of the government. Such frightened people are easier to kill. People frightened of their government are prone to interfere with government attempts to protect them. The result of that will be the population in effect becoming human shields for al Qaida. That won't end well, at least for Americans.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    38. Re:Scare tactics by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      In many places this is already the case. The offense of "making terrorist threats" is already being applied to children behaving like children.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    39. Re:Scare tactics by Steffan · · Score: 1

      The government's number one tool in the fight against terrorism.

      The government's number one tool in the fight against citizens
      FTFY

    40. Re:Scare tactics by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      American here. Only the educated people here have probably even heard the word "mutton", and most of them probably don't know what it is either; at best, they probably think it's some kind of dish served in England. And no one here has ever heard of "hoggett"; this thread is in fact the first time I've heard of it.

    41. Re:Scare tactics by Grishnakh · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not a chance that'll happen. In America, we like bullies, and we make fun of people who are their victims. Just look at what happens every time a bullying incidents develops to the point that some poor kid kills him/herself. Americans worship assholes. We might say a few nice-sounding words against bullies once in a while, but we'll never do anything to actually fix the problem, nor will we ever hold bullies accountable for their behavior.

      It's just like how we worship sociopathic business owners, and defend thier unethical and even dangerous behavior, and anyone who complains about them is blackballed in the industry. Whistleblowers (for instance, people who go to the government to stop a business owner whose practices will get someone killed through negligence) are seen as "rats", and will never get another job.

    42. Re:Scare tactics by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Sure you aren't thinking of George Orwell? Can't have anyone getting scared about the government with some dystopian fiction, after all. Sounds like terrorism to me!

    43. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      yipee kay yay, motherfucker!

    44. Re:Scare tactics by pla · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When you put it that way... actually, living like a lamb doesn't sound like such a bad idea on the surface. Sounds like a nice, calm, peaceful existence. Whereas living like a lion sounds like every day would be a struggle to survive.

      One of those things eats the other.

      Hint: The lion only fears other lions. The lamb fears that big scary yellow ball chasing it over the horizon every morning.

    45. Re:Scare tactics by pjt33 · · Score: 1

      You don't have to be terrified to take actions against terrorists. Just making the judgment that it is prudent to prevent mass slaughter of your fellow citizens is enough. Or maybe you could explain why it is a good idea to let your fellow citizens be killed by the thousands and do nothing?

      Are you talking about hypotheticals or is this supposed to have any relevance to recent history? Because if the latter, I would like to know who these thousands are. It's true that more than a thousand U.S. citizens have died in Afghanistan, but that's the result of a misguided and disproportionate "action against terrorists" rather than of doing nothing.

    46. Re:Scare tactics by Sara+Chan · · Score: 1

      “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety)....”
      —H.L. Mencken

    47. Re:Scare tactics by pjt33 · · Score: 1

      You've apparently never seen Wag the Dog. Hint: ask yourself what rhyme or reason there is to GP's last sentence.

    48. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's better to live one hour as a tiger than an entire lifetime as a worm.

      FTFY

    49. Re:Scare tactics by mhajicek · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Very much so. I have never in my life been afraid of a foreign terrorist, but often afraid of those who control this nation.

    50. Re:Scare tactics by anarcobra · · Score: 1

      Yes, but the lamb gets to live 1000 years.

    51. Re:Scare tactics by fredgiblet · · Score: 1

      I know mutton because I'm a fan of fantasy, without that I probably wouldn't have heard of it. I know hoggett because I went to the wiki page for mutton a few days ago when I was bored.

    52. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Threatening to label people as terrorists is an act of terror. Let's face it, our own government are terrorists.

    53. Re:Scare tactics by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Nah if its like the rest of the south they'll be locked up in a shithole of a county jail, with wires hanging down and shit falling apart, but it cost the taxpayers millions thanks to good old boy politics, aka massive corruption.

      Sadly the whole south is full of little fiefdoms that are corrupt as hell. I had a bud that flew drug interdiction for the USAF and they used to have jokes like "Why does the sheriff of (insert county) bust so many meth labs? because he doesn't want the competition!" rimshot. The feds know this but they know if they were to bust all of the corrupt cops you would end up having to use the National Guard because in a lot of these places you wouldn't have enough cops left to maintain the peace. My USAF friend said ANY fed could find out if a local police force was corrupt by just 30 minutes of looking at the land deeds, why? You'll find tons of pine forests owned by the cops or close relatives of the cops...because pine trees put out enough heat to foil their infrared scans.

      I have lived my entire life in the south and one thing you learn, if you get on "the right side" of the local politicians and cops? You have nothing to worry about ever. You try stepping on their toes, rocking the boat? they can turn your world into shit REAL quick, you'd be surprised how many laws are on the books in your average state they can use against you.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    54. Re:Scare tactics by chihowa · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A thousand years of abject terror.

      --
      If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
    55. Re:Scare tactics by cusco · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Nothing new here, Alcohol prohibition was enforced by police against the cop's competitors 'way back when my grandfather's uncle got his still smashed in the 1920s. The funniest thing to me is that most small town residents that I've known think that there's no official corruption in their community, that it's just a problem for the 'big cities'.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    56. Re:Scare tactics by cusco · · Score: 4, Informative

      The only thing dumber than an adult sheep is a lamb. The saying fits our population better than the original poster may have intended.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    57. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't watch shit films. That excludes 100% of everything churned out of Hollywood.

    58. Re:Scare tactics by martinX · · Score: 1

      Australian here (four times as many sheep as people) .
      The only hoggett I know is this guy.

      --
      When they came for the communists, I said "He's next door. Take him away. Goddam commies."
    59. Re:Scare tactics by cold+fjord · · Score: 1, Informative

      There have been other attacks of course, but this has been the deadliest, and most famous against the United States.

      2001 9/11 attacks - 2,973 dead. Two skyscraper towers destroyed, heavy damage to Pentagon.
      Estimated damage to US economy: ~ $100,000,000,000.

      Attacks against the US embassies in Africa is another example.

      1998 Bombing of US embassies in Tanzania and Kenya - 224 dead, est. 4,000 injured, both embassies heavily damaged

      It's true that more than a thousand U.S. citizens have died in Afghanistan, but that's the result of a misguided and disproportionate "action against terrorists" rather than of doing nothing.

      The campaign by the US, NATO, and other allies in Afghanistan is neither misguided nor disproportionate.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    60. Re:Scare tactics by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      The violators will be subjected to interrogration by the newly-established Federal Water Board. After federal water boarding, they'll be shipped to Gitmo.

      More like, "Crank official mocked and removed from board, 15 minutes of fame coming to end."

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    61. Re:Scare tactics by screwdriver · · Score: 1

      I'm terrified alright. Just not of terrorists.

    62. Re:Scare tactics by davydagger · · Score: 1

      http://www.stopbullying.gov/

      they are working on it.

      From what most of its supporters I run into online want, is charging teenagers as adults for "bullying" in schools, and makiing it a crime not to use real life identies online, and arresting people who make disparaging remarks online.

      most of the people are fairly rude and uncouth themselves, so its obvious the laws are only going to apply to people they don't like, and I expect enforcement to be targeted.

    63. Re:Scare tactics by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      "Are you now, or have you ever been, a communist/terrorist?"

    64. Re:Scare tactics by mrbester · · Score: 2

      Ex shepherd here:
      Hoggett is a term that has fallen out of general use, certainly, but anyone who keeps sheep knows what it is, plus a whole bunch of other terms besides, like bel-wether (sometimes belweather or bell-weather). Nowadays any sheep meat that isn't classified as lamb due to its age is usually called mutton.

      Nearly all terms used for sheep (including the word sheep itself) come from Anglo-Saxon / Old English.

      Offhand, I can't think of any words from French or Romance languages.

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    65. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ANY fed could find out if a local police force was corrupt by just 30 minutes of looking at the land deeds, why? You'll find tons of pine forests owned by the cops or close relatives of the cops.

      Because pine forests are so rare in the south eastern U.S. Just because cops own rural forested land doesn't make them dirty cops.

    66. Re:Scare tactics by jordan_robot · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I can't let this go.

      Estimated US deaths due to alcohol: 80,000... per year. The estimated economic costs of excessive alcohol consumption (in 2006) were $223.5 billion

      Lets look at some other numbers from the CDC on deaths in 2010...
      Heart disease: 597,689
      Cancer: 574,743
      Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 138,080
      Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 129,476
      Alzheimer's disease: 83,494
      Diabetes: 69,071
      Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 50,476
      Influenza and Pneumonia: 50,097
      Intentional self-harm (suicide): 38,364

      Homicide: 16,259.
      Motor Vehicular-related: 32,885

      So don't go on about how the Afghanistan campaign is proportionate. You look like a putz.

    67. Re:Scare tactics by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      As far as is publicly known, the B-3 bomber only exists as a concept, a plan for a future bomber, not as a flyable aircraft.

      You can see a clip of what they are referring to here. It is from a famous film.

      Fluoridation of water is generally considered safe, and in widespread use. You may not want to hear this, but the position you seem to be taking is often associated with the fringe or cranks, even if there might be a valid concern due to specific circumstances. There are communities that do remove it from drinking water.

      You may find this useful:
      How to Remove Fluoride from Drinking Water
      Basic Information about Fluoride in Drinking Water

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    68. Re:Scare tactics by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      I can't let this go.

      You probably should have. It is completely irrelevant.

      Shall we give up law enforcement since people die of heart disease? Stop arresting bank robbers because people die of the flu? Stop arresting rapists because people die of stroke?

      Should the US have not gone to war with Japan after Pearl Harbor because more people died in automobile accidents?

      So don't go on about how the Afghanistan campaign is proportionate

      Nothing you wrote addresses that issue in any meaningful way.

      You look like a putz.

      It's a big club. Care to show me around?

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    69. Re:Scare tactics by XcepticZP · · Score: 1

      You don't have to be terrified to take actions against terrorists. Just making the judgment that it is prudent to prevent mass slaughter of your fellow citizens is enough. Or maybe you could explain why it is a good idea to let your fellow citizens be killed by the thousands and do nothing?

      And to prevent mass slaughter you have to cause mass slaughter via a supposedly preemptive war? Do you even understand the implications and consequences of the things you write about?

      You talk about preventing "your fellow citizens be killed by the thousands" by killing your fellow human beings by the millions. Yes, millions. Please look up the iraq war death toll, including the soldiers you sent over there.

      People frightened of their government are prone to interfere with government attempts to protect them.

      You then obviously do not understand the violent nature of government. The violence which is completely hidden from you simply by virtue of you always obeying all laws. Your willingness to submit to the laws of your government is the sole thing keeping the government from being violent towards you. Let me know what happens when you fail to pay property taxes, and then try to yank the car keys away from the IRS agent that repossesses your vehicle as payment for those taxes. Yeah, guns. Welcome to your tax farm, let me know how you like being a tax-cow.

    70. Re: Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A radio broadcast of Welles' "War of the Worlds" in the early 20th century caused a minor panic because people thought it was a real invasion.

    71. Re:Scare tactics by tibit · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Throwing the Iraq and Afghanistan money after heart disease research would be way more productive. My bet is that the whole field of medical research, worldwide, has not seen that kind of money ever. Even if you add everything up since medical research has ever began.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    72. Re:Scare tactics by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      With all the corrupt and inhumane shit that goes on in the world why do you people attack science based public health measures that have been in use for over half a century and clearly shown to work as advertised? What's the fucking point of protesting one of the few policies that governments get right on a daily basis?

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    73. Re:Scare tactics by tibit · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. Sure it was no great battle, I agree. It was a small-scale siege of a jail where the entrenched honcho's deputies were attempting to tamper with ballots. I don't see what has it got to do with vigilantism, it was very obvious what was going on and there was no other law enforcement available to deal with it.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    74. Re: Scare tactics by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Yes, I knew about that, I was just pointing out that another guy with a sorta-similar-sounding name might be demonized by these people as well.

    75. Re:Scare tactics by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      The problem with your theory is thus:" A person is smart, people are dumb, dangerous, panicky animals and you know it". Sometimes a line in a movie can capture truth in a bottle and that is what that sentence is, truth.

      My mother weighed maybe 130 pounds soaking wet, a little bitty slip of a woman but she could come onto an accident scene and in less than 2 minutes everyone there, including the police, were doing EXACTLY what she said without question...why? Because when you get humans into a herd you have sheep and you have wolves, without an alpha to project authority and take charge the herd WILL adopt a position of cowardice.

      Now I'm sure some shrink can explain it better than this old PC fixit guy can but I have seen it time after time, you have a tense situation and the herd will do absolutely nothing until an alpha steps forward to take control of the group. The alpha doesn't even have to be what one would typically think of when you say alpha, but I have seen it over and over. I have seen people refuse to stand up for themselves but when I refused to just kowtow and pointed out "We DO have rights and you have to respect them" I suddenly had the entire group backing me up, the same group that wouldn't have said anything if I wouldn't have stood up first.

      Sadly from what I've seen society is breeding more and more sheep, and fewer and fewer wolves. as long as that is the case, and nobody is willing to stand up and be the alpha? Then things will only get worse, because the default temperament of a human herd seems to always default to cowardice.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    76. Re:Scare tactics by geoskd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The "War on Terror" is symbolic language for the war against al Qaida, just as the "war against fascism" was symbolic language for the fight against Germany and Italy in WW2. Supposedly smart people should be able to understand symbolism, but there seems to be little evidence for it on Slashdot since I keep reading the same nonsense over and over again.

      You don't have to be terrified to take actions against terrorists. Just making the judgment that it is prudent to prevent mass slaughter of your fellow citizens is enough. Or maybe you could explain why it is a good idea to let your fellow citizens be killed by the thousands and do nothing?

      Be very careful giving government the power to do anything for any justification. In the history of the world, orders of magnitude more atrocities have been commited by those in power when there have been no effective checks on that power. Terrorists may have managed to kill several thousand people in the world trade centers, but it took a fascist state to bring about the Holocaust.

      In short, government without restrictions is far more dangerous than all the terrorists in the world combined. This should be amply evidenced by their shameless use of the existence of terrorists to expand their own power, and reduce all of our freedoms.

      -=Geoskd

      --
      I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
    77. Re:Scare tactics by lightknight · · Score: 1

      Depends if the choice is that simple. Lions have positive and negative connotations, as do lambs.

      Ask the British. When a pair of lions were prowling outside their camps in Africa, dragging off people in the night, the lions became the number one most wanted species in the area. They may adorn many coats of arms as ferocious creatures...but you'll notice Europe is devoid of them. That's because Europeans wiped them out a long time ago.

      Lambs on the other hand are seen as peaceful species, but also one that tends to get eaten a lot. It's a rarity to hear of a lion steak, it's not at all a rarity to hear of someone having lamb chops for dinner.

      --
      I am John Hurt.
    78. Re:Scare tactics by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 2

      Considering the number of suicides from kids who were cyber-bullied for years, I don't think their position is as radical as it seems.

      As the father of a teenage girl who was bullied at one school, if it ever led that far, the school would have several less students in it the next month.

      Between the two options, which would you rather have?

      --
      If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
    79. Re:Scare tactics by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 0

      Very much so. I have never in my life been afraid of a foreign terrorist, but often afraid of those who control this nation.

      This from a /.er whose name is an acronym of "hijack em", so is obviously a terrorist himself. :-P

      --
      If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
    80. Re:Scare tactics by lightknight · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually...lions aren't fans of many other species. Hyenas for example. Large enough numbers of hyenas can take down a lioness.

      Just because you're at the top of the local food chain...or occupying one of the higher positions, doesn't mean you don't see a pair of fork and knives when you look down.

      --
      I am John Hurt.
    81. Re:Scare tactics by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      the reason not to live as a lamb - at least in the bay area - is to avoid being made into rogan josh.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    82. Re:Scare tactics by lightknight · · Score: 1

      Not quite. Lamb of God != a lamb, in the same sense that 'Little Boy' != a little boy. Anyone stupid enough to think that he's supposed to represent a free meal will probably die in a difficult, painful, yet strangely hilarious fashion.

      --
      I am John Hurt.
    83. Re:Scare tactics by hairyfeet · · Score: 4, Informative

      Hell it was frankly better in the old days, as at least then the cops were "honest" in their corruption. My mom worked at a truck stop when she was a teen and she said every week, you could set your watch by it, the local sheriff would come in to have a meal...and leave with an envelope that more or one of the other servers were told to stick under the plate before handing it to him. But she said you didn't get all this head cracking hassling teens bullshit because all the cops cared about was making sure you didn't tear up shit or act crazy and hurt somebody, a far cry from the 'roid monsters you get nowadays.

      And for the dumbass AC that said "Oh well, nothing illegal about cops owning pine forests"? If you have a pine forest that is practically NEVER harvested, isn't making squat compared to what that same rich land would make if you used it for something else, yet in county after county you see the cops ALL have the exact same setup? Well it don't take Kojack to solve the case of the peculiar pine forest,especially when you know that the longer and bigger you allow a pine forest to get the more it throws off DEA infrared. my USAF buddy said you could have both meth labs and underground pot farms in those and the DEA won't be able to spot it because the pines just put off too much heat.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    84. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Citation needed

    85. Re:Scare tactics by Zaelath · · Score: 1

      It's skittish.

    86. Re:Scare tactics by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Should the US have not gone to war with Japan after Pearl Harbor because more people died in automobile accidents?

      Poor analogy. Responding to an act of war with a declaration of war is far different from responding to a non-government-sanctioned act by a handful of individuals with an undeclared war.

      Shall we give up law enforcement since people die of heart disease? Stop arresting bank robbers because people die of the flu? Stop arresting rapists because people die of stroke?

      Again, poor analogy. Normal law enforcement doesn't suck down half our federal budget (not counting trust funds). If we were spending half our country's income on arresting bank robbers or rapists, then the answer would be a resounding "yes"... well, not to stop it entirely, but certainly to scale it back by several orders of magnitude.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    87. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This from someone who doesn't even know what an acronym is.

    88. Re:Scare tactics by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      I largely agree with you. Government is potentially very dangerous. Although nations with a long history of democratic government have been better off, the potential is still there.

      The national security apparatus of the US government still appears to be bound by the rule of law, even if one may disagree about the boundaries.

      What concerns me most at the moment isn't NSA, but IRS. That is admitted and demonstrated political oppression of ordinary political opposition by an arm of government, but few on Slashdot seem to mind. It might be easy to conclude that few people on Slashdot care about political oppression, as long as the "right people" are being oppressed. That makes the opposition to NSA defending Americans so much more interesting.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    89. Re:Scare tactics by justthinkit · · Score: 1

      The people being attacked are those being force fed fluoride. Remind me, what is wrong with those who want it using fluoride toothpaste?

      --
      I come here for the love
    90. Re:Scare tactics by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 1

      Dammit. I guess I had a brain freeze. Please replace "acronym" with "anagram".

      --
      If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
    91. Re:Scare tactics by GoogleShill · · Score: 1

      Are you saying that Dr. Strangelove was a shit movie?

    92. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lions have a conservation status of 'vulnerable'.

      Most sheep are not of an endangered species.

      If the goal is to win - as opposed to just looking majestic - then fighting is not always the smartest strategy.

    93. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      skiddish, as in leaving skidmarks due to fear?

    94. Re:Scare tactics by cold+fjord · · Score: 0

      Poor analogy. Responding to an act of war with a declaration of war is far different from responding to a non-government-sanctioned act by a handful of individuals with an undeclared war.

      You've got that pretty much entirely wrong.

      Al Qaida was both guest in Afghanistan, and integrated into its military forces and government. Al Qaida's jihadis were organized up to brigade level and fighting along side the Taliban. Al Qaida was churning out thousands of trained terrorists per year in their training camps, with many of the dispersing to raise havoc around the world. And Bin Laden did in fact issue a recognizable declaration of war as understood in his culture, and similarly understood in the West.

      1996 Bin Laden's Fatwa - Text of the fatwa, or declaration of war, by Osama bin Laden first published in Al Quds Al Arabi

      After repeated attacks killing thousands and wounding thousands more, the US responded with its own declaration.

      The Authorization for Use of Military Force passed by Congress after 9-11-2001 is legally equivalent to a declaration of war. That is well settled law.

      Again, poor analogy. Normal law enforcement doesn't suck down half our federal budget (not counting trust funds). If we were spending half our country's income on arresting bank robbers or rapists, then the answer would be a resounding "yes"... well, not to stop it entirely, but certainly to scale it back by several orders of magnitude.

      The poster I responded was essentially arguing that the US should not be engaged in military action to defend itself as long as disease killed more people. It was a nonsense argument whether you apply it to national defense or law enforcement, which is what I was demonstrating.

      Social welfare spending is about twice what the defense budget is. Defense spending will be taking a disproportionate hit from sequestration. National defense is a Constitutional responsibility of the Federal government.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    95. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      try crossing a field of sheep when that First sheep decides it's not going to run away but chase you. They can be viscious little b'stards at times.

    96. Re:Scare tactics by gmuslera · · Score: 1

      Well, as a country enjoy a lot bullying. Do as I say, not as I do?

    97. Re:Scare tactics by martinX · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well, it is hard to have "sheep" and "Romance" in the same sentence. Unless you're from New Zealand.

      --
      When they came for the communists, I said "He's next door. Take him away. Goddam commies."
    98. Re:Scare tactics by cusco · · Score: 1

      The "War on Terror" is symbolic language for the war against al Qaida

      [citation needed] Horesepucky. The "War on Terror" is symbolic language for "Unending bottomless Pentagon money pit". The generals retire directly to lucrative board seats on military contractors, and just keep sucking the money down. Today they can do anything, kill anyone, and blame it all on the terriers. I wonder how many of the supposed "terrorist attacks" that the Pentagon uses to justify its budget are actually mercenaries in the employ of the mega-corps.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    99. Re:Scare tactics by anarcobra · · Score: 2

      Not really.
      If there is a lion out there for 1000 years and it doesn't kill the lamb there's no real reason to be afraid.

    100. Re:Scare tactics by dryeo · · Score: 2

      If by "this nation" you mean the USA, then lots of people in other countries are scared of your government and have been for quite a while.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    101. Re:Scare tactics by turbidostato · · Score: 2

      "Nowadays any sheep meat that isn't classified as lamb due to its age is usually called mutton. [...] Offhand, I can't think of any words from French or Romance languages."

      Then, you will be surprised that mutton in French is... mouton.

      And it comes from the ancient French moton. In Italian, montoni.

    102. Re:Scare tactics by hedwards · · Score: 0

      Well, for one things, having cars parked on the side walk implies that they're being driven there, unless of course you think they're depositing the cars there via crane. And there's nothing quite like looking up as you cross the street to see a car driving in the crosswalk.

      Just because you're too stupid to comprehend what I wrote, does not mean that I'm not ultimately right. I've seen how people drive in parts of the US where they aren't enforcing the law, it's hardly a stretch to imagine that happening in most other parts of the world.

    103. Re:Scare tactics by mrbester · · Score: 1

      Well, colour me sheepish. I was under the impression that it originally came from somewhere north of Bavaria *via* Old Breton...

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    104. Re:Scare tactics by mjwx · · Score: 0

      However, in an experiment, a Dutch town removed basically all traffic signs and were considerably safer, because instead of relying upon signs and stoplights to tell them what to do, they had to instead actually pay attention to their surroundings. Believe it or not, we generally have strong instincts for self-preservation, and social mechanisms often work better than rules or legal mechanisms when no such system exists.

      Correlation != Causation.

      The Dutch and that part of Europe are much better drivers in general than most nations, especially the United states. There are strict requirements for getting a license and driving is considered a privilege, not a right. It's also quite easy to lose your license. Any speeding infringement over 30 KPH is an automatic 1 month suspension. This could easily be explained by the fact the Dutch are simply better drivers.

      Now lets perform this experiment in nations without stringent driver standards or effective law enforcement. Lets try the Philippines... You dont even need to bother removing the signs as Filipino drivers ignore them anyway. Traffic there is chaos and deadly.

      Lack of traffic control devices wont solve gridlock, in fact it will create more. Especially in nations where people already choose to ignore common sense whilst driving. Coincidentally, because of the lower speeds that gridlock results in there will be fewer pedestrian deaths.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    105. Re:Scare tactics by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Al Qaida was both guest in Afghanistan, and integrated into its military forces and government. Al Qaida's jihadis were organized up to brigade level and fighting along side the Taliban.

      The U.S. military reportedly has a skinhead problem. Does that mean that the actions of skinheads should be considered to be on behalf of the United States government? Where do you draw the line? I'm not saying I disagree with you; I'm just playing devil's advocate here.

      Social welfare spending is about twice what the defense budget is.

      Except the vast majority of that spending—social security, medicare, and unemployment benefits—comes from money that the workers have paid in explicitly so that they could get it back when they retire or become unemployed. I don't consider any of that spending to be part of the federal budget as such. It's just an insurance company that happens to be run by the federal government.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    106. Re:Scare tactics by styrotech · · Score: 1

      "Nowadays any sheep meat that isn't classified as lamb due to its age is usually called mutton. [...] Offhand, I can't think of any words from French or Romance languages."

      Then, you will be surprised that mutton in French is... mouton.

      My high school french teacher said that the Anglo Saxon 'sheep' derived from the old germanic word for sheep and that 'mutton' derived from the french word for sheep.

      So after the Norman Conquest, mutton evolved into a word for the meat (as that was how the French speaking nobility saw it) and sheep stayed as word for the woolly animal in a field (as that was how the Anglo Saxon peasants saw it).

      Whether or not it happened that way is another thing altogether though...

    107. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Just like how the terrorists don't kill you, but you're terrified of them anyway.

      Even though there's no real reason to be afraid.

    108. Re:Scare tactics by tbuskey · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Lamb, Chicken, Cows and Pigs are not endangered species. Lions are.

      There's a worth in becoming domesticated. Ever see a wild Cow?

    109. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Kardashians scare the hell out of me... where should we go with that...

    110. Re: Scare tactics by davidgay · · Score: 1

      Well, you might notice something similar with pork vs pig, and beef vs cow... (there's also pullet vs chickhen, but not in widespread use)

    111. Re: Scare tactics by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 2

      Some other names of meat of farm animals come from French:
        - beef, from boeuf
        - mutton, from mouton
        - pork, from porc

      --
      Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    112. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Inasmuch as the "War on Terror" is aimed at combating people hurting our feelings, (making us feel scared,) how easy it is to be labeled a terrorist is largely independent of what you do. It is instead actually a function of how big a bunch of cowards the people around you are. If they're far enough to the left of FULL-BLOWN-PUSSY, you can give them a mean look, and be labeled a "Terrorist"...

      Sporting a butch haircut? Have a tattoo? (Esp. of a single teardrop...) How about if you have a T-shirt or other article of apparel with a frightening message on it, such as "I have a gun, and I vote!" or something to that general effect? Then YOU'RE A TERRORIST.

      It might be time to start thinking seriously about bailing out of this bitch before it crashes, because when YOU can be put in jail because your neighbor has NO FUCKING BALLS, when you can become a criminal for the fact that the people around you are dick-less pieces of shit... it's just about over, the fat lady is warming up for her big number.

      And yes, I know the fucks at the NSA/CIA/FBI/KGB/GIU/MI5, etc. are reading this. If this pisses you off so much, or makes you piss your pants, you know where I am, I'm sure. Probably watched me type this, sick fuckers. If you think me typing this makes me a criminal, well, what are you fucking defending at this point? If America is so weak and cowardly that you have to police people's opinions to ensure they don't utter one you can't live with, why worry what happens to the weaklings who infest it? Anyway, curing a disease by murdering your patient does NOT count as curing a disease, and you've failed any way you slice it.

      Hopefully, something magical will happen, and America will remember it is America, not Shit-your-pants-opotamia or BigPussystan.

      Cowardice is a disease. This is the latest symptom, perhaps the heralding of the terminal phase of the illness. Sorry to see it go, it was a neat country while it lasted. Wonder what whoever's left in this country will do about securing the stockpiles of weapons it has squirreled away. Anything? Or will they be allowed to fall into whomever's hands can reach them first? A sobering thought.

    113. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a whole spectrum between Lion and Lamb. It isn't just the extremes that you have to choose to be. However, I suppose you could say America seems to be sliding inexorably toward the lamb-end of the scale. We really need to quit losing wars, it's clearly bad for us. Anybody remember the last war we actually won? It was against Japan. That's how long it's been since we won a damned war. Soon there will be no one left alive who actually remembers what it was like. Does that shed any light on how and why things are going the way they are?

    114. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Orwell, Welles, fuck 'em, ship 'em all to Gitmo.

    115. Re:Scare tactics by germansausage · · Score: 1

      Basically yes, this is how it was explained to me. The animal was herded by Anglo-Saxons, so it kept the Anglo Saxon name - Cow, Swine, Chicken etc. The meat prepared in the kitchen got the Norman French name, because the cooks had to tell their overlords what was for dinner (if they weren't French cooks in the first place) so - Poultry (Poulet), Beef (Boeuf) and Pork (Porc).

    116. Re: Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Growing trend in Australia for 'Jumbuck' to replace hoggett as the term for sheep too old to be lamb but too young to be mutton.

    117. Re:Scare tactics by flyingfsck · · Score: 1
      Depends on where you are in the world - Mutton means Goat, more often than not.

      In Britain:
      Lamb = young sheep
      Mutton = old sheep
      Kid = young goat
      Goat = old goat

      USA:
      Lamb = sheep
      Mutton = goat
      Kid = human child
      Goat = old fart

      and you can only eat the first two, while all of them may be chewy...

      --
      Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    118. Re:Scare tactics by jordan_robot · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The poster I responded was essentially arguing that the US should not be engaged in military action to defend itself as long as disease killed more people. It was a nonsense argument whether you apply it to national defense or law enforcement, which is what I was demonstrating.

      Whoa, whoa. Don't you put words in my mouth; I never said anything of the sort. Full stop.

      All I did was re-print some fatality statistics that showed the numbers argument is worthless when justifying the war on terror. I didn't think my brevity would be taken to mean so much more.

      Honestly, you can blast the shit out of [actual] terrorists and I'll cheer, go get em & godspeed. But to state that the reaction to 9/11 and other terrorist attacks is proportionate to the amount of lives and money lost is just not true. If it were, at least some of the other more significant causes of fatalities and monetary loss would have more of a reaction than 9/11. Its not about the numbers, it is about the reaction to being violated. Its about revenge, and making the disproportionate response known... the cost of such future attacks outweigh any benefit.

      And the putz thing was a bit too much. My apologies, I'm sure you're not a penis.

    119. Re:Scare tactics by DerekLyons · · Score: 1, Insightful

      . I had a bud that flew drug interdiction for the USAF and they used to have jokes like "Why does the sheriff of (insert county) bust so many meth labs? because he doesn't want the competition!" rimshot.

      Which proves pretty much - nothing. He doesn't know, he has no way of knowing, and you're a fool for believing him and a jackass for invoking his military service as some kind of proof of his veracity.
       

      You'll find tons of pine forests owned by the cops or close relatives of the cops...because pine trees put out enough heat to foil their infrared scans.

      The mind boggle at the level of ignorance required to believe this.

    120. Re:Scare tactics by Cwix · · Score: 3, Funny

      FYI I would counter most Americans know what mutton is, why you ask? Seinfeld did an episode based on mutton.

      --
      You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
    121. Re: Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shhhh. Don't confuse them with facts. The "Americans are stupid"meme has been a roaring success in Europe since before the revolution.

    122. Re:Scare tactics by davester666 · · Score: 1

      You mean the number one tool in the fight against citizens.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    123. Re: Scare tactics by stenvar · · Score: 1

      Fluoridation is probably not harmful to most people. But it is not used in Europe and probably not very effective either. Where it survives a cost benefit analysis is doubtful. I doubt it would pass today, unless there was a big industry lobby pushing it.

    124. Re:Scare tactics by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1
      And both of those things apply to hedwards' argument as well. Perhaps the Chinese are worse drivers as well. Also, your comment doesn't necessarily even make sense, because they became EVEN better drivers without signs. It's actually tougher to make the best drivers even better.

      There is actually a similar concept employed in the US. When there's a new road, they will often test how fast people on driving on it and figure out what is more or less the average, rounded to a nice clean number. They do this because people are usually quite good at figuring out what is safe on their own, and basically do the really complicated math that they would have to hire someone to do themselves. However, a lot of traffic accidents in the US are the result of the law being different from what is most efficient. Red lights will have the wrong timings, and speed limits will be set inappropriately because it's an easy way to get easy money, and it disproportionately targets people who are just passing through, who are less likely to fight a ticket and don't vote in local elections. Lives are put in danger because of a horribly inefficient taxing mechanism.

      Now lets perform this experiment in nations without stringent driver standards or effective law enforcement. Lets try the Philippines... You dont even need to bother removing the signs as Filipino drivers ignore them anyway. Traffic there is chaos and deadly.

      Except the Phillipines still has a legal mechanism. A poorly enforced legal mechanism still means there is a legal mechanism. There are still rules, even if it is easy to get away with not following them. The purpose of the Dutch experiment was to remove the semblance of a system of rules.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    125. Re:Scare tactics by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      Yeah but does it _fear_ the hyenas?

    126. Re:Scare tactics by Person147 · · Score: 0

      Lamb, Chicken, Cows and Pigs are not endangered species. Lions are.

      There's a worth in becoming domesticated. Ever see a wild Cow?

      As a group, yes - but not as an individual. I don't think those domesticated animals survive very long before ending up as your lunch.

      I'd be the endangered lion any day!

    127. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lamb, Chicken, Cows and Pigs are not endangered species. Lions are.

      There's a worth in becoming domesticated. Ever see a wild Cow?

      African water buffalo. Fuck-off big, wild bovine. Attitude fitted as standard; doesn't like humans much. Flat-out hates lions, and can take them on. If it doesn't like your face, don't bother running, it'll catch you. Possibly the most dangerous beast in Africa, definitely in the top 3.

    128. Re:Scare tactics by dkf · · Score: 1

      Ever see a wild Cow?

      Yes.

      --
      "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
    129. Re: Scare tactics by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      But it is not used in Europe

      We have fluoridated toothpaste instead. One or the other is good. Travel advice warns you not to use British purchased toothpaste for prolonged periods in the US due to risk of excessive fluoride consumption. It seems that the dose you get is about the same from either.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    130. Re: Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Frankly, that sounds like complete bullshit.

    131. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      After the Cold War, people wanted enemies that couldn't be killed, defeated, arrested, or jailed. That's why we have a War on Drugs and a War on Terror.

    132. Re:Scare tactics by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      All the time.
      In fact - I've seen three different species of them on a regular basis.

      Then again - I live in Africa where there are three living wild bovine species that are all doing just fine and in no current danger of extinction.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    133. Re:Scare tactics by pjt33 · · Score: 1

      My apologies: I misremembered the death toll of the Twin Towers by factor of 10.

      However, I stand by the assertion that invading Afghanistan (not to mention Iraq, whose ruling party was as much an enemy of bin Laden as the U.S. was) was misguided and disproportionate. As you observe, people aren't keen on doing nothing when their fellow citizens are killed by the thousands, and the U.S. and its allies have easily killed twice as many civilians as the 11th Sept. terrorists killed.

    134. Re:Scare tactics by P-niiice · · Score: 1

      I'd say yes, because when hyenas are around, lions don't eat.

    135. Re:Scare tactics by P-niiice · · Score: 2

      Some Conservatives have turned the Stop Bullying movement into some kind of "pro-gay" movement in their minds. Unbelievable, but true. They like bullies because they "rightfully" point out and mock effeminate boys (who might be gay).

    136. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you have a pine forest that is practically NEVER harvested, isn't making squat compared to what that same rich land would make if you used it for something else, yet in county after county you see the cops ALL have the exact same setup?

      So rural southern cops like to have forested land for huntin', fishin', and relaxin'. People with stressful jobs like to live in peaceful environments. Your assertion that they ALL use forested land for drugs is bad and you should feel bad.

    137. Re: Scare tactics by justthinkit · · Score: 1

      They fluoridate the salt instead in Austria, Bolivia, Columbia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, France, Germany, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama, Switzerland, and Venezuela.

      --
      I come here for the love
    138. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ever see a wild Cow?

      The last Aurochs died in 1627. The question of their extinction rests with the determination that their european cattle decendants are separate species. This is questionable. Further info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heck_cattle

      Then there's the Ankole cattle of Africa. Are they fully domesticated? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ankole-Watusi_%28cattle%29

    139. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A skiddish populous is the #1 tool in the effort that has been misnamed the "War on Terror".

      Did you mean "skittish"?

    140. Re:Scare tactics by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      A Dutch town. Cities would not fair as well.

    141. Re:Scare tactics by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      Male lions sleep almost all day and let their groups of females go out and hunt for them. So a guy saying he wants to live like a lion isn't really going to get an action-filled life.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    142. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and you can only eat the first two, while all of them may be chewy...

      Speak for yourself, meatbag.

    143. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyone stupid enough to think that he's supposed to represent a free meal...

      ...is probably Catholic. Body of Christ, nom nom nom.

    144. Re:Scare tactics by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

      In fact, I'd say on the whole, big cities have much much much lower corruption per capita. I live in a small city, and we actually have checks and balances, as well as some basic governmental transparency requirements. I never saw a hint of that from the small town I went to K12 in.

    145. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A coward dies a thousand deaths, the brave, only one.

      But this is the biggest problem, i.e., people who are so afraid they're give up anything to be safe (or have the illusion of security). It's not the public's fault for being afraid. Look at who our so-called role models are. The President of the U.S. has squads of body guards as do "key" members of the Congress. Our public buildings are now fortresses and you need to pass through metal detectors to enter. All of our elected officials act like their personal security is vital to the safety of the nation.

      So sad what this country has become.

    146. Re:Scare tactics by i+kan+reed · · Score: 2

      Mutton never meant goat, especially not in the U.S.

    147. Re:Scare tactics by Strawser · · Score: 1

      This is why it's so frustrating to hear people defend the Patriot Acts because they "only target terrorists", but almost anything can be called 'terrorism' if the government want to.

      --
      The louder he talked of his honour, the faster we counted our spoons. -- Ralph Waldo Emerson
    148. Re:Scare tactics by number6x · · Score: 2

      For the most part you are probably correct.

      I live in Chicago, your assumption is not true here, and not true at the state level in Illinois.

      For most larger cities, there are enough groups vying for power that too much corruption in any one group could be used by rivals to expose the more currupt and cause them to lose power. A kind of check and balance based on power grubbing and greed.

      Here, people keep voting for whoever got them their patronage based job, so the checks and balances are almost non-existent.

    149. Re:Scare tactics by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      I have to concur, just take a peek at that rape thread yesterday.

    150. Re:Scare tactics by intermodal · · Score: 1

      the funny thing about symbolic language is that it's vital for people to examine it and call bullshit on it when necessary.

      --
      In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
    151. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But not often enough, thus laws, rules and regulations exist. This is why capitalism can't exist without regulation lest it become something more ancient.

    152. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You Have Nothing To Be Afraid Of. We Checked Your Email And Phone Conversations And They Are Okay. Live In Peace, And May God Bless You!

      - NSA

    153. Re:Scare tactics by operagost · · Score: 1

      So I guess that we were supposed to nicely ask the Taliban to give up Bin Laden and stop harboring Al Qaeda? The Taliban were the government in the region harboring Al Qaeda. We did the best we could, by soliciting the assistance of the Northern Alliance. We couldn't exactly use diplomacy to execute a "police action" and bring Bin Laden in for a trial. In case you didn't notice, Afghanistan was run by warlords. Your continued argument is nonsense.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    154. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't have to be terrified to take actions against terrorists. Just making the judgment that it is prudent to prevent mass slaughter of your fellow citizens is enough.

      There are over ten times as many people dying on American highways every single year as have been killed by terrorists in America in the last half century. How does that math work? It seems far more prudent to spend the TSA money on guard rails than frisking airline passengers and ignoring the Constitution. You're more likely to die at the hand of a relative than from a terrorist.

      The math says the terrorists are no threat. Unless you lived in New York City ten years ago or Oklahome City fifteen years ago, chances are you never ever met anyone who was harmed by terrorists. I'll bet you've known people who died in car wrecks, though.

      Don't be such a pussy. Sheesh, god damned wimpy fuckers these days, bad enough you're a sissy, but you're stupid as well.

    155. Re:Scare tactics by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      It appears to be bound by the rule of law because they have outlawed presentation of any evidence to the contrary.

    156. Re:Scare tactics by operagost · · Score: 1

      Jesus is a lamb and they want to live in eternity in heaven as lambs.

      You probably think you're clever, but you pretty much come off as an unfunny ignoramus. He is the lamb because he was sacrificed-- a reference to the Passover feast. Jesus used the analogy of himself as the Good Shepherd, but that doesn't make us lambs.

      Life is more fulfilling if you aren't the guy who is trying to fire off snide AC comments all the time instead of joining a rational discussion.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    157. Re:Scare tactics by ArcadeX · · Score: 2

      that was baaaaaaaahhhd

      --
      An I.T. motto in the hands of an idiot is a dangerous thing...
    158. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Parked cars are rarely a danger to anyone, especially a pedestrian.

      Except the Chevrolet Corvair. Those were "Unsafe at any speed."

    159. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The level of proof and citations you provided simply blew me away. My mind boggles that you seem to think that your comment contains any more semantic value than the one to which you were replying.

    160. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One of those things eats the other.

      Yeah, but in our metaphor, the lamb gets to go 1000 years without getting eaten. Just how bad can being eaten be compared to 1000 years of peace? I mean, centuries of life in exchange for one horrible day? Is that one day as a lion really that awesome to trade at 365,000 to 1 ratio?

      Hint: The lion only fears other lions. The lamb fears that big scary yellow ball chasing it over the horizon every morning.

      Lions fear man and hyenas, both of which are their top predators. Saltwater crocodiles will kill and eat a lion in the middle of a lion trying to kill something else in the water. Elephants and hippos will also just ruin an overly ambitious lion's day. (Hippos are terrifying, though. They kill far more people than lions do.) And that doesn't include all the things that'll kill and eat a lion cub.

      Also, I'm pretty sure lambs aren't native to the Serengeti or farmed in any significant quantity there, but this metaphor is getting really silly.

    161. Re: Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, I knew about that...

      Sure. Sure, you did.

    162. Re:Scare tactics by In+hydraulis · · Score: 1

      Says you.

      Has it been tested? Any reason why it wouldn't scale?

    163. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, go live in a feedlot pen, then march in line for a bolt through your head. That's the reality of it. Go ahead, be a dumb piece of domesticated livestock.

    164. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      “Cowards die many times before their deaths;
      The valiant never taste of death but once.
      Of all the wonders that I yet have heard,
      It seems to me most strange that men should fear;
      Seeing that death, a necessary end,
      Will come when it will come.”

        William Shakespeare, Julius Caesar

    165. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm terrified of Sharks, we should put them on the Terrorist watch lists..

    166. Re:Scare tactics by njnnja · · Score: 1

      Pretty much. It wasn't exactly a nobility/peasant distinction as a cuisine/non-cuisine split. The French had good cooks (even then) and so the terms for the dishes "mutton," "pork" and "beef" come from French while the terms for the animals, "sheep," "pig" and "cow" retained the terms from English/German. The cuisine/non-cuisine breakout probably had elements of a high/low language thing, but if the Anglo-Saxons were better cooks we would probably be eating SLT's (sheep, lettuce, and tomato sandwiches, where the sheep is nice and lean and the tomato is ripe), pig chops, and ground cow.

    167. Re:Scare tactics by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      Has it been tested?

      Imagine one-way streets becoming two-way without notice. Imagine gridlock without traffic lights. Watch videos from Indian cities.

      Any reason why it wouldn't scale?

      Tighter quarters, less visibility, less civility, and more pure asses.

    168. Re:Scare tactics by Chickan · · Score: 2

      I don't know about you, but I've never seen a pine tree explode.

    169. Re:Scare tactics by Chickan · · Score: 1

      Are you actually terrified of them? Have you ever skipped a trip, or stayed home out of fear? We were outraged as a country after 9/11, not scared. We were sad and angry, but went back to work the next day anyway.

    170. Re:Scare tactics by thoromyr · · Score: 1

      I think people tend to underrate what you can discover from land title records. My brother works for a certain state government and deals (indirectly) with some of the shenanigans. Its a different angle from the one you describe, but in general things start to make more sense as to why certain deals are struck, laws passed, etc., when you discover who owns adjacent property.

    171. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The government's number one tool in the fight against terrorism.

      Agreed, wholeheartedly.

      The government is absolutely a number one tool.

    172. Re: Scare tactics by JonJ · · Score: 1

      Finland, Norway, Denmark and Sweden has lions on their coat of arms.

      --
      -- Linux user #369862
    173. Re:Scare tactics by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      Perhaps they are just so repulsed by the hyenas that they loose their appetite :)

    174. Re: Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you didn't. You didn't get the reference and now you are backtracking to try to save face. But we've seen through your lies and you are forever marked as a foolish flopdoodle who cannot read properly.

    175. Re:Scare tactics by cangrejoinmortal · · Score: 1

      No, is your close-mindedness, proneness to be offended and bigotry what makes you lambs.Religious people demand respect while condemning other who not share their views to hell (literally), is painful to live in a world where the most rational opinion on things we have no way to figure out is the only one that is politically correct to make fun of.

    176. Re:Scare tactics by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Not to mention that pesky little First Amendment....

      Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

      (Emphasis is mine).

      So, exercising one's rights under the First Amendment is now a terrorist act?

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    177. Re:Scare tactics by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

      ...Sadly the whole south is full of little fiefdoms that are corrupt as hell....I have lived my entire life in the south and one thing you learn, if you get on "the right side" of the local politicians and cops? You have nothing to worry about ever. You try stepping on their toes, rocking the boat? they can turn your world into shit REAL quick, you'd be surprised how many laws are on the books in your average state they can use against you.

      That's terrible. So, move to some place in the North that isn't corrupt like Chicago? NYC, heck NY STATE! Then there's Massachusetts. Tammany hall is alive and well. I.e. they are corrupt as the day is long. Not just a southern thing. It's equal opportunity.

    178. Re: Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The terrorists are us. The homeland security thing and the rest of it are about contolling u.s. citizens. Their financial system is crashing and with it their legal means for keeping us in line.

    179. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you have a pine forest that is practically NEVER harvested, isn't making squat compared to what that same rich land would make if you used it for something else, yet in county after county you see the cops ALL have the exact same setup? Well it don't take Kojack to solve the case of the peculiar pine forest,especially when you know that the longer and bigger you allow a pine forest to get the more it throws off DEA infrared. my USAF buddy said you could have both meth labs and underground pot farms in those and the DEA won't be able to spot it because the pines just put off too much heat.

      I thought I learned every trick when I studied growing weed, but I do not remember coming across pine trees being used to block infra red detectors, and I believe they have smell detecting sensors for both meth labs and pot. It would still be pretty easy to detect a meth lab, so your claims over cops owing forest land to hide what they are doing seem pointless, and more so if they are corrupt because they can probably and easily prevent other agencies DEA, ect.. from catching on.

    180. Re:Scare tactics by s1lverl0rd · · Score: 1

      I used to live near one of the towns where the experiment was done - I believed local politics called it 'Shared Space' or something. It's absolutely terrible.

      While perhaps safer, it's absolutely terrifying, both when driving a car and when going by bike (the latter occuring rather more than you would think). Drivers and cyclists have been trained to obey rules, but when there's no signs and no indication, it's completely unclear what the rules are. There's no magic communication between road users that wouldn't occur otherwise, there's just confusion and chaos.

      As an example, one of the shared-space roads I know had a roundabout that was only marked by a change in the road type (concrete instead of bricks) - remember, no traffic signs allowed. Depending on how you interpreted the pattern, cyclists had priority. The whole thing was of course absolutely invisible in rainy weather (which we get a lot), which meant people sometimes thought it was a regular crossing, only to slam the brakes when they realised their mistake.

      The whole thing is nice in theory, but just reducing the max speed to 5mph would be just as safe IMHO, and that's what the whole Shared Space idea amounts to in practice. Of course, with everyone chugging along at a snail's pace, less accidents will happen - which looks great in reports, even more so when you add nice little graphs in bright colors.

      The article you linked to is quite old, and AFAIK no new Shared Space-experiments have been done.

    181. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It worked for social welfare and education! Oh, wait....

    182. Re:Scare tactics by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Nearly all terms used for sheep (including the word sheep itself) come from Anglo-Saxon / Old English.

      You mean nearly all terms used in English. In which case that's hardly a surprise, is it?

      Offhand, I can't think of any words from French or Romance languages.

      I can, just not in English.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    183. Re:Scare tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mutton means Goat, more often than not.

      No it doesn't, you lying imbecile.

    184. Re: Scare tactics by Stubbyfingers · · Score: 1

      I used to work for a county that is famous for the amount and quality of its moonshine. One day they raided a still and arrested about half a dozen people in one family. Later , I asked the sheriff, "There's dozens more like them up in those hollers, why don't you arrest more?"
      The sheriff replied, "if we arrested all the 'shiners in Franklin County, we wouldn't have a tax base."

    185. Re: Scare tactics by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      I can't speak for the rest of Europe but when I lived in Britain they fluoridated the water.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    186. Re: Scare tactics by stenvar · · Score: 1

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_fluoridation

      "in contrast, most European countries have experienced substantial declines in tooth decay without its use, primarily due to the introduction of fluoride toothpaste in the 1970s.[3]"

    187. Re: Scare tactics by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      So it's not all Europe, just "most Europe" whatever that means.

      WP also says this:

      It has been introduced to varying degrees in many countries and territories outside the U.S., including Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Hong Kong, Ireland, Israel, Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, the Philippines, Singapore, Spain, the UK, and Vietnam

      Ireland, Spain and the UK, I'd be very surprised if there aren't other countries on that list.

      FWIW, I find the sentence you quote raises more questions than answers. It's saying there's been a decline in tooth decay because of flouride toothpaste, but it makes no effort to explain whether the decline is the same as if water had been flouridated in that same area. It's subtly slimy, transmitting an inferance ("Flouridation isn't necessary because other countries don't use it and they've reduced their rates") that isn't backed by the arguement it uses.

      Nasty.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  2. Terrorism. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They should make hiring assholes an act of terrorism.

    1. Re:Terrorism. by kthreadd · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't be surprised if it actually can be an act of terrorism to make a complaint. In that case don't blame the messenger.

    2. Re:Terrorism. by pipatron · · Score: 1

      Actually, someone in the government who hires an asshole to also work for the government do undermine the credibility of the government, thus reducing its power and in the end weakens the state, so yes, it wouldn't be that far fetched.

      --
      c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
    3. Re: Terrorism. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You just arrested every voter in the state

      Net gain.

  3. This has to end.. by Mister+Transistor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Welcome to the new McCarthyism. Any time you do anything "they" don't like, you're a ter'ist...

    --
    -- You are in a maze of little, twisty passages, all different... --
    1. Re:This has to end.. by erroneus · · Score: 1, Troll

      While I generally agree with the concept, there's one problem with McCarthyism you may have missed.

      Turns out, after a lot of documents from the era and before have revealed, Russia and the communist movement actually DID have widespread influence over the US government. The results have been quite visible. For example, one obvious result is that "the people" have this ridiculous notion that the government is "here to protect them."

      The federal government is not here to "protect us." It is charged with the common defense and general welfare. That's just about it.

    2. Re:This has to end.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Turns out it's the terrorists who pollute our water and bodily fluids.

    3. Re:This has to end.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Turns out, after a lot of documents from the era and before have revealed, Russia and the communist movement actually DID have widespread influence over the US government.

      What does that matter? The ends (defeating the communist bogeyman) didn't justify the means (harassing people who were labeled communists, causing people to lose their jobs, etc.).

    4. Re:This has to end.. by amiga3D · · Score: 2

      The purpose of the Federal Government is to guarantee and secure our freedom and rights. Of course this asshole and most others in the Fed have lost sight of this.

    5. Re:This has to end.. by Truekaiser · · Score: 4, Informative

      Umm.
      No, they were unfounded.
      The 'documents' you're referring to are the venona intercepts.
      You can read them here. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/venona/intercepts.html
      It had nothing to do with undermining the entire U.S. Government as McCarthy was paranoid about.
      It was about Our government trying to find soviet spys who were only here for one thing. To get information on the atomic bomb.
      If you actually knew the history of the time, there was a short period where the united states was the only actor to have nuclear weaponry and everyone wanted it.

    6. Re:This has to end.. by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 2

      Of course this asshole and most others in the Fed have lost sight of this.

      SMH. RTFA. Hell, RTFS: "Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation deputy director...not a federal official.

      Anti-federalists who think that state governments would guarantee and secure our freedom and rights if we just got the feds out of the way, would be amusing if they were not dangerously ignorant of history, law, and fact.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    7. Re:This has to end.. by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I am in agreement with Mister Transistor on this one. Abuse of the terrorist label seems to be going up, not down. I was going to suggest we call what's going on now McCarthyism v2.

      --
      http://www.rootstrikers.org/
    8. Re:This has to end.. by Jmc23 · · Score: 4, Informative

      No, the terrorist label is being used exactly in the way it was conceived of by the US governement, as a method to terrorize their citizens to achieve their goals without resistance.

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    9. Re:This has to end.. by Mister+Transistor · · Score: 1

      Or, more importantly, losing or even worse, giving up their personal FREEDOM over the purported "boogeyman".

      --
      -- You are in a maze of little, twisty passages, all different... --
    10. Re:This has to end.. by amiga3D · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't give a shit about him. The Federal Government's job is to guarantee and secure our freedoms and rights. That's the purpose of the Constitution which is supposed to be the basis for all Federal law. From all enemies both foreign and DOMESTIC. Including the dickhead from the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation.

    11. Re:This has to end.. by minstrelmike · · Score: 4, Informative

      The purpose of the Federal Government is to guarantee and secure our freedom and rights. Of course this asshole and most others in the Fed have lost sight of this.

      Let me see if I've got this straight. Other people and the government (which is apparently a different thang than 'other people') are the ones who are supposed to protect each and every one of us against other people and the government taking away our rights?

      There's a reason I think the term 'rights' is pretty much just philosophic bullshit.
      Pretend you're an analyst trying to define the requirement of rights for a society. Splain how that would work.

    12. Re:This has to end.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SMH. RTFA. Hell, RTFS: "Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation deputy director...not a federal official.

      Yeah, RTFS where is says the State of Tennessee is threatening action by the Department of Homeland Security. Nothing federal about that. /sarcasm

    13. Re:This has to end.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RTFS where is says the State of Tennessee is threatening action by the Department of Homeland Security

      I can see that working in hicksville: "Little boys who don't behave get et by the federal gubmit!"

    14. Re:This has to end.. by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      No. They were well founded.

      The documents he was referring to are the KGB archives. They are still being read, but much information is out. e.g. CP USA was funded by the Ruskys. Rosenburg was guilty, though it's not clear about his wife. Algir Hiss was a KGB asset. etc etc etc.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    15. Re:This has to end.. by sjames · · Score: 1

      And generally we're better off when protected.

    16. Re:This has to end.. by b4upoo · · Score: 1

      Terrorist is the wrong word. But another truth does linger. Any enemy can cause us to weaken by amplifying negatives about our nation. Money and self defense are related. Economies can be wrecked by lies, exaggerations and false accusations. If someone hates a town and screams loudly about supposedly toxic issues with water or air or whatever then business in that town will suffer. The town weakens. The quality of life spirals downward. The affluent get out early and the poor move in. This same pattern can be used against a state, a region or an entire nation. It is the motive behind the complaint that is the issue.
                                It is very much like the city water vs. the bottled water debate. City water almost always tests better but the public has been twisted so greatly that they will purchase the bottled water and fear the city water. Negativity can be a fear generator.

    17. Re:This has to end.. by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Although it's certainly true that local/state politicians can be just as corrupt as Federal ones, the fact that normal people are more likely to be able to get their calls returned by them is some comfort.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    18. Re:This has to end.. by cusco · · Score: 1

      The Communist Party USA was founded with help from the USSR? No Shit? It's in their official history, I didn't know that it was supposed to be secret or somehow contraversial.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    19. Re:This has to end.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And if you don't vote for a particular party, you're a terrorist. If you don't pay your taxes, you're a terrorist. If you voice political opposition, you're a terrorist. If you don't go to certain Universities and mingle with the right professors, you're a terrorist.

      There's been a fascists political movement taking place in this country for a long time; all under the guise of social equality. Unless you're part of the socialite class, you're a mother-fucking terrorist! DEAL WITH IT BITCH!!! NOW PAY ME....NOW!

    20. Re:This has to end.. by terjeber · · Score: 2

      There are three boxes to defend against a totalitarian government.

      1. The soap box - failed, nobody listened (works well for companies though)
      2. The ballot box - failed, Obama is no different from Bush Jr, they both love(d) violating citizens rights
      3. The ammo box - not yet attempted in scale, and not something I would recommend

      Since the two first boxes do not work, and the third has some serious complications attached, perhaps we need to find some new boxes.

    21. Re:This has to end.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How're you supposed to enact the common defense without protecting people?

    22. Re:This has to end.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't give a shit about him. The Federal Government's job is to guarantee and secure our freedoms and rights. That's the purpose of the Constitution which is supposed to be the basis for all Federal law. From all enemies both foreign and DOMESTIC. Including the dickhead from the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation.

      Oh how I love it when people wax poetic about this thing called the "Constitution" that used to be more than a fucking tourist attraction.

      Wake the fuck up already. Our Government hasn't given a shit about that document in years now, so unless we're giving a US History lesson here, please stop with the references to Rights that you think still exist.

      They don't.

    23. Re:This has to end.. by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Funded, ongoing funding. They denied it at the time. It was founded before the founding of the USSR.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    24. Re:This has to end.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty easy. We are endowed by our creator with unalienable rights. Among these are life, liberty, and property. Our rights extend to the point where they interfere with another persons rights to life, liberty, and private ownership of property. i.e. I cannot physically harm you short of corporal punishment after trial by a jury of your peers. I cannot take your property without aformentioned proceedings, and only then to recompense someone you have wronged. i.e. You stole their TV and broke it. You must now repay the debt. Kill, and be executed.

    25. Re:This has to end.. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      We are endowed by our creator with unalienable rights.

      So we've had them for 6,000 years?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  4. it's true you know by Trepidity · · Score: 3, Funny

    Citizen complaints sometimes terrify people!

    1. Re:it's true you know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And they are trying to achieve political change!

  5. Oh well, it was nice while it lasted... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Land of the fr... forget that.
    Welcome to the american gulag.

    1. Re:Oh well, it was nice while it lasted... by lennier1 · · Score: 2

      The current situation is simply amazing. You just can't make this shit up:
      http://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/1267204/us-cyber-snooping-makes-it-worlds-biggest-villain-our-age-says-xinhua

      Xinhua, China's official news agency, says the US is the world's 'biggest villain' for IT espionage.

    2. Re:Oh well, it was nice while it lasted... by lxs · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't know. I think Terry Gilliam was very close to making this shit up when he wrote the script for Brazil.

    3. Re:Oh well, it was nice while it lasted... by Maritz · · Score: 1

      Bad as the new revelations about the NSA etc are, China really should shut the fuck up about it.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    4. Re:Oh well, it was nice while it lasted... by pipatron · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why? I've read a lot of articles here on slashdot over the past years about the US accusing China for snooping.

      Isn't it fair when it's exposed that the US does the same on an even larger scale, for China to mention this hypocrisy?

      --
      c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
    5. Re:Oh well, it was nice while it lasted... by X0563511 · · Score: 1
      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    6. Re:Oh well, it was nice while it lasted... by fredgiblet · · Score: 1

      How do you know it's on a larger scale? In China most likely everything is monitored all the time and has been since before PRISM and PRISM supposedly requires a warrant for domestic use, most likely the Chinese programs can watch domestically all they want.

    7. Re:Oh well, it was nice while it lasted... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hate to deflate your little theory but China's level of technology in the cyber-snooping dept. is about 10 to 15 years behind the US. Their internal affairs are even more of a tangled, corrupt and inefficient clusterfuck than ours, proving that it is indeed possible, and anyone who's worked for there for contract work knows that. If you're suggesting that they've managed to get their shit together then created and implement something like PRISM in house earlier than we did, you're deluding yourself.

      Everything they manage to achieve on their censorship endeavors has been from virtue of being able to tell the guy at the controls what to do and being able to throw money at a problem until it goes away. When it comes to creating something more complex, they've got nothing on us.

    8. Re:Oh well, it was nice while it lasted... by stox · · Score: 1

      Brazil is actually an Instruction Manual.

      --
      "To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
    9. Re:Oh well, it was nice while it lasted... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep. I work in China on a regular basis - the monitoring is there (and importantly: everyone knows it is there), but it's no-where near as transparent as what the NSA has done; and no-where near as effective either.

    10. Re:Oh well, it was nice while it lasted... by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      More of a "Quick Start for Beginners" guide as it's turning out.

  6. I don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Why don't they just kill everyone and call it a day?

    It's definitely where we're headed to and as nobody seems to care very much, there should be no problem with a referendum for nation-wide suicide going through. That'll show the terrorists, can't scare a dead man. Hah!

    1. Re:I don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a none america that would certainly get my vote.

    2. Re:I don't get it. by click2005 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They dont want you dead, just obedient, subservient, docile and blindly supporting them. How can you make them richer & more powerful if you're dead?

      --
      I am a free slashdotter. I will not be modded, blogged, DRM'd, patented, podcasted or RFID'd. My life is my own.
    3. Re:I don't get it. by EvilSS · · Score: 1

      You do realize we would start with everyone outside our borders first, right? Can't leave a possible terrorist alive somewhere in the world. Think Wool.

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
    4. Re:I don't get it. by easyTree · · Score: 1

      No one left to perform all the menial tasks... duh

    5. Re:I don't get it. by erroneus · · Score: 2

      Because you have to have "someone" to do all the killing. And that's the challenging part. First you have to have a bunch of really stupid people working for you. They're making serious progress in that area. Next, everyone 'else' must be branded as a criminal or terrorist or both. That's the fun part because we're seeing that everywhere too. One of the latest initiatives is electronic license plates! That's right! Imagine how much easier it will be to identify bad people when their license plates are blinking a message to everyone on the road. Every "good citizen" will report you to the authorities at a moment's notice. And of course if your electronic plates aren't working, they'll impound your car.

      So now we've got people who think they are "good" being the finger pointers for the dumbasses with guns. It won't be long as we are all fighting each other for "government love and approval" killing each other in the name of "god" as we always have, only the new god is government.

    6. Re:I don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As cheap feed for their Komodo dragons?

    7. Re:I don't get it. by Maritz · · Score: 1

      "None america"s unite.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    8. Re:I don't get it. by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      They dont want you dead, just obedient, subservient, docile and blindly supporting them. How can you make them richer & more powerful if you're dead?

      that's assuming they have any logic left in their actions. it's just a spiral of decisions that has been spiraling so long that I wouldn't bet that they know the original motivations anymore. maybe that's why they're doing so much surveillance, hoping to find out who put the whole garbage train of shit in motion.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    9. Re:I don't get it. by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Soylent Green?

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    10. Re:I don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...soylent green ?

    11. Re:I don't get it. by gmuslera · · Score: 2

      It already started. There is no killing like the one done with impunity.

    12. Re:I don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because then they can take your stuff?

    13. Re:I don't get it. by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      The top 1% have more than twice the wealth of everyone in the bottom 80%. They wouldn't want your stuff. One 106" (3D/4k) TV is better than 1,000,000 19" B&W CRT TVs.

    14. Re:I don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You forgot the most important: ... and working hard for the American dream, by serving a big corporation, preferably with zero regulations and zero rights in your favor, because "socialism", spinning the hamster wheel, faster and faster, generating more and more wealth for your masters and power over you.

    15. Re:I don't get it. by dcollins117 · · Score: 1

      that's assuming they have any logic left in their actions. it's just a spiral of decisions that has been spiraling so long that I wouldn't bet that they know the original motivations anymore.

      Even though Mr. Smith spoke without thinking first (an all too common situation these days) it gives you remarkable insight into his thought processes. It also beautifully illustrates the phenominon of confirmation bias. You see what you want to see.

      He's focussed on finding terrorists. Who would complain about the water quality but a terrorist? Makes perfect sense.</sarcasm>

    16. Re:I don't get it. by fredgiblet · · Score: 1

      That's actually a somewhat amusing thought, a vast, worldwide conspiracy to oppress and control, the reason they do it is because that's what they were trained to do when they joined the conspiracy, but no one remembers why, it's just what they've ALWAYS done. I can see a movie where the hero confronts the head of the conspiracy and demands to know why and the villain explains how, then the hero demands to know WHY again, and the villain looks confused "I'm not certain what you mean, there always needs to someone in control of the government, I mean, how ELSE would things be?"

    17. Re:I don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they don't need 40 trillion people for that. i think their estimate is 500 million. so they are over supplied as it is.

    18. Re:I don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so thats business as usual then.

    19. Re:I don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [Soylent Green] is true - you can smell it coming from the aliens who must consume it in order to maintain their human form.

    20. Re:I don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They call it a tradition then to further excuse not thinking.

    21. Re:I don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dead dinosaurs are making oil companies richer and more powerful just fine.

    22. Re:I don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They might not want the TVs, but they probably want the lead and copper from the tubes. More importantly, if you are no longer able to provide useful labor, which is more and more the case with automation and consolidation, then you are a useless burden to them. If you are dead then they no longer have to feed and clothe you, and they can take your land (which everyone wants more of).

    23. Re:I don't get it. by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      The bottom 90% doesn't have much land. They are renters or upside down in debt. And the rich don't feed and clothe the bottom 80% much (the non-1% top 20% do proportionally more of the feeding and clothing than the 1% does).

    24. Re:I don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Still, some is more than none. Everything you don't get is a bit more for them.

  7. Remember kids by fustakrakich · · Score: 0

    Terrorism is determined by its target, not its methods..

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    1. Re:Remember kids by minstrelmike · · Score: 1

      Actually, terrorism is determined by its methods.
      I agree that method of determination is garbage, nevertheless, that is how human social morality works.
      Terrorists target 'innocent' civilians. Of course, if your entire way of life is at stake, no one on the other side is innocent.

      For example, take the Sioux Indians in 1865 getting run off of their land by Caucasian invaders.
      Suppose they sent someone over to Europe to stop the flow of money supporting the invasion, maybe breach a few dikes in Holland and give those Protestant bankers something else to spend their money on.
      It would have definitely been terrorism.
      Of course, that's what running people off their land with soldiers is also, except if its your tribe that ends up with the land, we call it Homeland Security instead of Terrorism.Like I said, Basic human social morality. Popularity makes the name sound like it's right instead of wrong but it's the same exact thing.

    2. Re:Remember kids by dave420 · · Score: 1

      Nearly. Terrorism is a motive, not an action. Terrorism is the use (or threat) of force in order to politically coerce a people.

      Your Sioux example isn't really terrorism, as the motive behind the flooding would not be to scare people, but to divert resources (money). Running people off their land is also not terrorism, as the goal is to destroy a people, which is not coercion but genocide.

      Terrorism isn't what someone does, it's why someone does something.

    3. Re:Remember kids by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Terrorism is the use (or threat) of force in order to politically coerce a people.

      War also fits that description, but most people don't think war and terrorism are the same.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  8. It will give Muzzies another equivocation option by Chrisq · · Score: 0

    As well as "They drew a nasty picture" they will be able to say "Why do you make such a fuss about the Boston Bomber, 9/11, the Fort hood massacre when there are dozens of non-Muslim terrorists who blatantly complain about the water quality"

  9. They sure look like some of them terrorists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now, don't these people look like some of them terrorists to you?

    Let me get my rifle.

  10. I just hate being wrong all the time by folderol · · Score: 5, Insightful

    yet every time I think officialdom can't get any more stupid, they go and prove me wrong... again!

    1. Re:I just hate being wrong all the time by AmazingRuss · · Score: 3, Funny

      Eventually they will reach a singularity of stupid, from which no intelligence can escape.

    2. Re:I just hate being wrong all the time by dcollins117 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Eventually they will reach a singularity of stupid, from which no intelligence can escape.

      We reached that with George W. Bush. Now we're in a black hole of stupid.

    3. Re:I just hate being wrong all the time by powerlinekid · · Score: 1, Funny

      Think what you want about Obama but there is no excuse to be racist.

      --

      can't sleep slashdot will eat me
    4. Re:I just hate being wrong all the time by FlopEJoe · · Score: 1

      Eventually they will reach a singularity of stupid, from which no intelligence can escape.

      We reached that with George W. Bush. Now we're in a black hole of stupid.

      Good thing we elected President Change.

    5. Re:I just hate being wrong all the time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Americans elected someone who performs good speeches. That may be a nice skill, but I think by now most people agree that someone who has good policies would have been better. However, those weren't available in the presidential election due to lack of marketability...

    6. Re:I just hate being wrong all the time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amazing this not-so-subtle racism got modded so highly.

    7. Re:I just hate being wrong all the time by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      The Americans elected someone who performs good speeches. That may be a nice skill, but I think by now most people agree that someone who has good policies would have been better.

      Wouldn't have made any difference. Congress is specifically designed to stop the president doing anything.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  11. Fire Sherwin Smith immediately by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sherwin Smith should be fired immediately. If I threatened my customers, my boss would rightfully fire me on the spot.

    1. Re:Fire Sherwin Smith immediately by easyTree · · Score: 1

      fired, from a cannon

    2. Re:Fire Sherwin Smith immediately by hawguy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sherwin Smith should be fired immediately. If I threatened my customers, my boss would rightfully fire me on the spot.

      Public agencies utilities don't have "customers", they have "captive consumers". You can threaten them or piss them off all you want, they have no choice but to keep buying your product or paying taxes at whatever price you set.

    3. Re:Fire Sherwin Smith immediately by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Let's hear the rest of the recording first. I'm always suspicious of audio clips.

    4. Re:Fire Sherwin Smith immediately by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Nah, they'll say he misspoke and he'll apologize for his poor choice of words. Then when the governor is asked about it he'll say more of the same: we certainly take water quality issues, and that was a very poor choice of words by Mr. Smith.

      Update: I just googled, and the first part already happened.

      The thing is that these folks working together in state agencies for decades are like family to each other. Nobody gets hung out to dry.

    5. Re:Fire Sherwin Smith immediately by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2

      fired, from a cannon

      Into the sun.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    6. Re:Fire Sherwin Smith immediately by macraig · · Score: 1

      Actually he'd promote you, if the threats worked.

    7. Re:Fire Sherwin Smith immediately by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And worse, bureaucrats are often petty tyrants that even the elected officials, even those supposedly over them in hierarchy, fear and it can take more then an act of congress, relatively speaking, to get their employment terminated. Plus, they often have gold leaf parachutes and possibly some bars of it too.

    8. Re:Fire Sherwin Smith immediately by roman_mir · · Score: 0

      Sherwin Smith should be fired immediately. If I threatened my customers, my boss would rightfully fire me on the spot.

      - you are confused.

      You are not a 'customer' to a government agent, you are not a 'customer' to a government department, you are not a 'customer' of any kind to a government in general, you are captive audience from point of view of monopoly on 'services' and what you really are is a slave and the government is your master.

      That's the attitude, you are no longer a citizen, you are a slave. The government is no longer there to 'serve' at your pleasure, it's there to command and terrorise you, it's there to abuse you, steal from you, imprison you, torture and murder you.

      A customer is a client to a private company that is there to try and gain your business, that's entirely different from what you are to a government.

    9. Re:Fire Sherwin Smith immediately by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sun's too far. A thick concrete wall should work well.

    10. Re:Fire Sherwin Smith immediately by Princeofcups · · Score: 1

      Sherwin Smith should be fired immediately. If I threatened my customers, my boss would rightfully fire me on the spot.

      Are you kidding? If he's smart, he'll take the publicity all the way to seat in the Senate.

      --
      The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
    11. Re:Fire Sherwin Smith immediately by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I vote for kahoona, you know where.

      jr

    12. Re:Fire Sherwin Smith immediately by stephanruby · · Score: 3, Informative

      Sherwin Smith should be fired immediately.

      And did you notice? Just before that quote, Sherwin Smith had said that all the people who originally complained had backed down once he gave them a phone call, so they didn't have to do any water testing. In light of the terrorist comment, it's now obvious what he told them to make them back down.

      This guy shouldn't just be fired. He should be put on leave on absence and he should be investigated for possible criminal negligence. And all the complaints he received should be re-investigated by an impartial third party.

      If someone, that had formally complained, now dies because this guy didn't want to test the water, it will be his head and the heads of any of his superiors that support him, that will roll because of their willful negligence.

    13. Re:Fire Sherwin Smith immediately by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... now dies because this guy didn't want to test the water ...

      If the water hasn't been tested, how can one prove the water was the weapon?

      ... it will be his head and the heads of any of his superiors ...

      Who promised you that? He's demonstrating negligence and blackmail which his superiors haven't prevented. Moreover, since the water department is a monopoly, the citizens can't choose another vendor but must buy whatever crap he offers. There is no incentive to punish his behaviour.

    14. Re:Fire Sherwin Smith immediately by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Sherwin Smith should be fired immediately."

      He CAN be fired. Fire him in the "social networking" sense--keep him in the news over this shit until he can no longer do his job. Bury him in emails. Bury his DEPARTMENT in emails. Fire off letters to anyone that has ANY official connection to this man. Keep it up until he is no longer able to do anything in that position of government.

      His "official" employers will have no choice but to fire him considering he can longer do his job. As far as I am concerned, he wasn't doing it anyway.

    15. Re:Fire Sherwin Smith immediately by meglon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You are incorrect.

      As often noted by rabid conservative anti-government ideologues wanting to make points through a ludicrous idiotic adulteration of logic: "You choose to remain within the physical area that the government controls, therefor it's your choice.... you can leave anytime you want."

      --
      Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
    16. Re:Fire Sherwin Smith immediately by cusco · · Score: 1

      No, home delivery is the only monopoly, and only then if you want it in convenient pipes. You can buy all the expensive bottled water you want, spend $15,000 to drill your own well, or just fill up buckets in the river.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    17. Re:Fire Sherwin Smith immediately by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you can leave anytime you want."

      Except you can't. Just as the USA has immigration policy, so do all the other countries. You can't simply up sticks and live elsewhere on a whim.

    18. Re:Fire Sherwin Smith immediately by Agent0013 · · Score: 1

      No, you can't drill your own well unless the city allows it in your area.

      --

      -- ssoorrrryy,, dduupplleexx sswwiittcchh oonn.. -Quote found on actual fortune cookie.
  12. A grave threat by DarkOx · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is no doubt the sort of horrifying terrorist plot the NSA telephone surveillance program has been so successful foiling. Thank good we has such dedicated protectors to save us from the terrorists.

    --
    Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    1. Re:A grave threat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must have a PhD in sarcasm. That made so much sense. It's so strongly connected to the issues at hand. I applaud you, Mr. Terrorist, living at 1001 Oak Ridge way, North Belvue, NC. Just ignore that noise outside your front door. Oh, and if you hear a loud bang. Drop to the floor and remain still. Follow directions. Everything is being done for your benefit. Smile when they take your picture.

  13. Surely the HS would charge TDEC with false reports by davecb · · Score: 2

    If the citizen was making false complaints to Homeland Security, that would be actionable, but this is TDEC complaining to HS that the citizen is a terrorist. IMHO, this would render the TDEC official the person wasting Staatssicherheit's time with a false complaint. If that's terrorism, then Mr. Smith is encouraging and/or procuring terrorism by having his staff make the reports.

    --
    davecb@spamcop.net
  14. Looks like Salem Witch Trials by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Everyone is suspect of being a terrorist these days. Let's make some terrrorist cake to identify them.

  15. False threats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Do you think that maybe he was referring to the equivalent of yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theatre? (Poison in the water supply.) Making threats to attack should be taken seriously, whether the method be bombs, guns or poisons.

    1. Re:False threats by Maritz · · Score: 1

      Making threats to attack should be taken seriously, whether the method be bombs, guns or poisons.

      Once you point out the bit where the residents make a threat I'll concede that you have an excellent point here.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  16. Sensationalism by jklovanc · · Score: 0

    As usual the summary is worded to create the most sensational story.

    listed as terrorists for giving official complaints

    The more accurate version would vave been as follows;

    listed as terrorists for giving unfounded official complaints

    Basically the complainants are aledgeing that the water is making them sick with no evidence what so ever as to the link between the water and the sickness. There was an offer to test the water that was declined therefore no evidence could be gathered.

    1. Re:Sensationalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't see how this is sensational. The official is trying to squelch people from petitioning their government by making people fear that their complaints will be deemed (legitimately or not) as unfounded and thus labeled as terrorism.

    2. Re:Sensationalism by DarkOx · · Score: 5, Insightful

      listed as terrorists for giving unfounded official complaints

      Fine even if that is the case we have other laws that cover things like that. "Making false reports", "libel", and "slander", would be some potential examples. These laws carry with them what most people consider to be appropriate penalties and restitution requirements. Slapping the term "terrorist' on everyone who steps even slightly out line has all sorts of negative consequences.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    3. Re:Sensationalism by PPH · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Right. And lets take this a step further. What is an "official complaint"? Making a public statement I can understand as designed to instill fear among the general population. But raising the issue either through official channels for such feedback? Nope. They asked for comments, they got them. If they don't like them, tough.

      Its also my understanding that the complaints were along the lines of: "This water makes me/my kids sick." Not, "There's poison in the water." The former is subjective and purely dependent on the sensitivity of the particular consumer to some attribute of the water.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    4. Re:Sensationalism by gl4ss · · Score: 2

      If you're making a water quality complaint you can't know usually 100% that there's something officially wrong with the water.
      you see, sometimes if water has a color problem that is not actually a water quality problem. same goes to some tastes the water might have.

      so basically he threatened that you can't make a water quality complaint unless there's turds floating in your water... the reason why it's a complaint and not an alarm is that subjectively something about the water feels suspect.

      it's friggin stupid to threaten with that, there's other ways they can sue people doing malevolent water quality reports just for the sake of making them extra work. threatening that the federal government is going to kill or take them away if they complain is just stupid(make no mistake that is how "bababa is a terrorist!" threatening is intended to work).

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    5. Re:Sensationalism by anyaristow · · Score: 2

      Perhaps what was meant was don't incite panic making a false claim, as in don't yell "Fire!"

      The department would like to fully assess what was said in the meeting. I am told that the meeting was far longer than the audio clip provided by SOCM and that Mr. Smith actually clarified his remarks.

    6. Re:Sensationalism by minstrelmike · · Score: 1

      Basically the complainants are aledgeing that the water is making them sick with no evidence what so ever as to the link between the water and the sickness. There was an offer to test the water that was declined therefore no evidence could be gathered.

      egads. Shades of Monsanto. that means if I complain about the taste of fracking fluids in my water, the oil companies can tell me it is unfounded and ship me off to Guantanamo?
      Damn. "Uh, no officers, I tole the doc that this water gives off such a wondrous aroma of money that it makes me shit funny."

    7. Re:Sensationalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      listed as terrorists for giving unfounded official complaints

      Basically the complainants are aledgeing that the water is making them sick with no evidence what so ever as to the link between the water and the sickness. There was an offer to test the water that was declined therefore no evidence could be gathered.

      That could clearly be handled with regular criminal law.
      The point of bringing the terrorist bullshit in is to avoid having to actually prove anything.

    8. Re:Sensationalism by jklovanc · · Score: 1

      First Monsanto is a seed producer and has nothing to do with fracking. Second The authorities asked to test the water to find the foundation for the issue but were refused. If they can't test the water what are the authorities supposed to do? Basically they are saying "Let us test the water or shut up".

  17. Terrorism is so overrated. by Fuzzums · · Score: 1

    People abusing "terrorism" for bullshitting society are a terrorist threat to society themselves.
    Cars kill more people, smoking kills more people, alcohol kills more people.
    Educate the sheep. Stop this bullshit.

    --
    Privacy is terrorism.
    1. Re:Terrorism is so overrated. by Azure+Flash · · Score: 1

      People coming up with new forms of terrorist threats are a terrorist threat

  18. Treating free speech as terrorism IS terrorism by schwit1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This government official needs to be brought up on charges of making verbal threats and abuse of power.

    1. Re:Treating free speech as terrorism IS terrorism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you missed the lesson here.

    2. Re:Treating free speech as terrorism IS terrorism by Skapare · · Score: 1

      Seems to me he nailed it.

      --
      now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
    3. Re:Treating free speech as terrorism IS terrorism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No he didn't. The lesson is shut the fuck up and do what you're told and he is most certainly not doing that. He'll be one of the first up against the wall...

    4. Re:Treating free speech as terrorism IS terrorism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You two guys don't realize that you're reacting the exact same way Sherwin Smith did, only from the anti-government rather than the pro-government side.

      We'll denounce the behavior we find repulsive as.... TERRORISM!

      Think about it. You're doing exactly what Sherwin Smith did.

    5. Re:Treating free speech as terrorism IS terrorism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's possible what he did can be considered 'civil rights intimidation' under Tennessee law.

    6. Re:Treating free speech as terrorism IS terrorism by alexo · · Score: 1

      This government official needs to be brought up on charges of making verbal threats and abuse of power.

      Since when where's personal accountability for government officials?
      Have I missed the memo?

  19. (SMACK) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    BAD TENNESSEE! bad! we don't do that! no! no!

    don't make me put you on the leash again.

  20. Any civil servant threatening by kawabago · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Any civil servant threatening terrorism charges for complaints from the public should be immediately fired. He/she does not have the public interest at heart.

    1. Re:Any civil servant threatening by fredgiblet · · Score: 1

      I'm not certain what the problem is. If someone holds extremist beliefs then it doesn't matter if their a veteran or not, they're as much of a risk as anyone else who holds their beliefs. In fact if anything they're more of a risk since they have training and experience. Would you argue that someone heading an anti-government militia agitating for revolution shouldn't be watched solely because they were in the military? If so, why?

    2. Re:Any civil servant threatening by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only fired but arrested. We need to start arresting people who abuse the power of their post.

    3. Re:Any civil servant threatening by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would you argue that someone heading an anti-government militia agitating for revolution shouldn't be watched solely because they were in the military? If so, why?

      Perhpas you can show me where Janet said this. She said ALL vetrans should be considered possible terrorists.

      fredgiblet is a bigot that thinks is just fine by him as long as the government is oppressing people he doesn't like. Just like the racists in the 50s-60s thought laws against blacks were fine since they were the "trouble makers".

    4. Re:Any civil servant threatening by fredgiblet · · Score: 1

      She said ALL vetrans should be considered possible terrorists.

      I missed that part, that would indeed be an issue.

    5. Re:Any civil servant threatening by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is there a code of conduct to fire such a**holes ?
      Is this being pushed by coal seam gas drillers - and how dare people complain of that oily smell.

      I would like to see the county doctor and hospital refuse to see such community thugs/ terrorists. Sorry, we can't treat you, the water is contaminated - you may get infected and sue ... sure you understand.

      Anyway, any complaint HAS to be correct, as getting pure water is impossible - there will be a contaminant in there.

      The industry motto is 'Dilution is the solution to pollution' meaning it is ok to water in nuclear waste, as long as it is undetectable or background. So moving on to 'dont complain about our acceptable use standards' whatever they may be. Indeed!

  21. Are you a terrorist if... by Streetlight · · Score: 1

    Are you a terrorist when driving if you come to a stop just beyond the white line at a stop sign or traffic signal? If we allow water board employees to decide who's a terrorist think what traffic cops can do to you for the most minor infraction.

    --
    In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
  22. Re:Tennessee = hotbed of fascism and idiot redneck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Rest Area" has nothing to do with rest. it's short for "Arrest Area" everybody knows that!

  23. Mr. Smith is the terrorist... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Threatening people, terrorizing them with these threats is the definition of terrorism.

    Personally, I'd like to see some true justice on this asshat, as well as others who threaten to call others terrorists or enemies of the state just because they call into question the acts or quality of service of their product.

    Obama should be impeached for allowing and supporting illegal acts of the government.
    The entire Attorney General's office should be thrown into gitmo for doing and supporting illegal acts, including murder.
    The CIA and FBI should be given receive the death sentence for illegal and treasonous (against the constitution) actions.
    The IRS should be shot on general principle (as well as for millions of acts against the H.I.P.A. act)
    Judges who support their political party than the laws should be de-benched and made to wear low rise pants in prison.

    In short, our entire current government are a bunch of treasonous thugs hellbent on ruining the lives of anyone who doesn't make a million or more a year.

  24. Dang it! by PPH · · Score: 0

    Yer supposed to chew before you swallow. Din't yo' mama teach yo' nuthin'?

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  25. arrogant local official playing the terrorist card by Wansu · · Score: 1

    This water quality official is projecting his frustration onto the people he is supposed to serve. If he can't do his job, he should resign. Instead, he's trying to play the terrorist card. Embarrassed by this outrage, his superiors have gone into damage control mode saying his remarks were taken out of context and that he later clarified his position.

    Wow. Is this what we have to look forward to?

    --
    Wansu, th' chinese sailor
  26. And this is why we should fear government by naasking · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And this is why we should fear how much the government should be allowed to intrude into our lives. Because who knows what sort of low-level bitter bureaucrat may just take a disliking to you, and end up abusing government powers.

    1. Re:And this is why we should fear government by wijnands · · Score: 0

      Your government intrudes all your lives. That's something you brought upon yourself with 8 years of Bush to put it all in place and 4 years of Obama doing nothing about it.

    2. Re:And this is why we should fear government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As opposed to managers at the utilities, cable companies and ISPs, oil companies, banks, mortgage and credit card companies, who never abuse their powers according to the Republicans...

    3. Re:And this is why we should fear government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So your take away message from all of this is that we need more intrusive government, right? If someone points out the damage that government can do in an article specifically about government abuse, then they must be a Republican who wants to give corporations infinite power. It's an either-or scenario for you, right: we either get all-powerful abusive governments or all-powerful abusive corporations?

      Why can't you shove your stupid partisan false dichotomy up your stupid Democrat ass and grow a spine? Your (D) oppressors are no better than your fictional archenemy (R) oppressors. They both suck. You're part of the problem.

  27. Email by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    sherwin.smith@tn.gov

    Go on. You know you want to. I did.

    1. Re:Email by fredgiblet · · Score: 1

      One problem, you're most likely harassing his secretary, not him.

    2. Re:Email by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't do it! He'll tell his daddy gubbamint on you and show you good!

      If I were an idiot, I'd assume that the DoHS would filter out and toss any of this guy's complaints about people complaining about water.

      Alas, they're probably mandated to take every complaint about terrorists seriously, no matter how fucked up.

  28. WTF by joseph90 · · Score: 1

    America is becoming a strange place.

    (when I previewed this post I saw I had accidentally type strangle instead of strange - Freudian slip?)

  29. Hello slippery slope! Stalin would be so proud! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We warned that this would happen. Now it is happening.

    Just like with Stalin's regime (the actual inspiration for "1984"), every time the gulags / work prisons used their inmates up (that's meant literally), Stalin declared a new group to be the designated enemy, and incarcerated them.

    Girl... America... what happened to you? :/

    1. Re:Hello slippery slope! Stalin would be so proud! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We warned that this would happen. Now it is happening.

      Just like with Stalin's regime (the actual inspiration for "1984"), every time the gulags / work prisons used their inmates up (that's meant literally), Stalin declared a new group to be the designated enemy, and incarcerated them.

      Girl... America... what happened to you? :/

      Maybe France should get back the Statue of Liberty. It serves no purpose anymore in New York.

  30. The proper damage control ... by Skapare · · Score: 1

    ... would be to fire Sherwin Smith immediately. There is no context for this kind of outrageous behavior. Then hire someone who will be more positive about making the water better.

    --
    now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
    1. Re:The proper damage control ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... would be to fire Sherwin Smith immediately. There is no context for this kind of outrageous behavior. Then hire someone who will be more positive about making the water better.

      As long as by "fire" you mean "incinerate with a blowtorch" (yes, I know, "verbing nouns weirds language").

  31. Sodium Fluoride by Reliable+Windmill · · Score: 1

    Everyone will have their daily forced medication of sodium fluoride. No complaints are allowed!

    --
    Signature intentionally left blank.
    1. Re:Sodium Fluoride by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

      I get my water from a well on my property, which is not treated with Sodium Fluoride. Therefore, your first statement is false, because I am a member of the set "Everyone."

    2. Re:Sodium Fluoride by Streetlight · · Score: 1

      Depending on where you live your well water may be providing more NaF in your drinking water than that added by water companies. True in the area where I live. A problem is now showing up because mothers are using bottled water to make baby formula and we're seeing major tooth decay problems in teeth of those children. Win for dentists!

      --
      In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
    3. Re:Sodium Fluoride by PhxBlue · · Score: 1

      Yes, because God forbid people should have the chance to grow up with all their teeth. Moron.

      --
      !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
    4. Re:Sodium Fluoride by Reliable+Windmill · · Score: 1

      My statement is correct; you get what I mean.

      --
      Signature intentionally left blank.
    5. Re:Sodium Fluoride by Reliable+Windmill · · Score: 1

      Yes, because God forbid people should have the chance to grow up with all their teeth. Moron.

      Do you think you have better oral health than people in the rest of the world where fluoridation is mostly non-existant? Do you think people in f.ex Sweden and Norway have bad teeth? Do you think you don't get enough fluoride from your tooth paste, so that you must also swallow it and wash yourself in it to get strong teeth, which is where most of it goes? You seem to be a brainwashed sheep and an absolute moron yourself to be honest.

      --
      Signature intentionally left blank.
    6. Re:Sodium Fluoride by Reliable+Windmill · · Score: 1

      This crap is put in bottled water too, and there are no requirements of putting it on the label.

      --
      Signature intentionally left blank.
    7. Re:Sodium Fluoride by PhxBlue · · Score: 1

      Do you think you have better oral health than people in the rest of the world where fluoridation is mostly non-existant?

      Having never had a cavity in my life, I'm going to say yes.

      Do you think people in f.ex Sweden and Norway have bad teeth?

      Are you willing to pay for a socialized health care system in lieu of fluoride? I think that would be a much better solution, but something tells me you wouldn't go for that either.

      Do you think you don't get enough fluoride from your tooth paste, so that you must also swallow it and wash yourself in it to get strong teeth, which is where most of it goes?

      I think fluoride is basically like Vitamin C: There are no ill effects, and it'd be pretty damn hard, if not impossible, to overdose on the stuff through normal consumption. I also think that sodium fluoride washes off the skin like pretty much anything else that happens to be in the water -- or like soap, for that matter.

      You seem to be a brainwashed sheep and an absolute moron yourself to be honest.

      Right. A "brainwashed sheep" with perfect dental health who's done enough homework on his own to know that water fluoridation has no ill effects and has a great deal of benefits in addition to fluoridated toothpaste.

      Protip: Sodium fluoride doesn't have any harmful effects at normal levels, but aluminum toxicity is a real thing, so you should probably stop chewing on your tinfoil hat before it causes you any more brain damage.

      --
      !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
    8. Re:Sodium Fluoride by Reliable+Windmill · · Score: 1

      Right. A "brainwashed sheep" with perfect dental health who's done enough homework on his own to know that water fluoridation has no ill effects and has a great deal of benefits in addition to fluoridated toothpaste.

      Protip: Sodium fluoride doesn't have any harmful effects at normal levels, but aluminum toxicity is a real thing, so you should probably stop chewing on your tinfoil hat before it causes you any more brain damage.

      So you're arrogant as well, claiming to know better than the governments, health and research institutes that have decided against it around the world? Let's disagree and leave it at this.

      --
      Signature intentionally left blank.
    9. Re:Sodium Fluoride by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Fluoride prevents decay, it doesn't cause it.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  32. Abuse of authority by tarellel · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Talk about a massive abuse of authority, it's getting ridiculous how anything that the government doesn't agree with or makes them look bad and they'll use terrorism as excuse to indefinitely detain, control, and slander you.

    --
    http://theworkaround.com/
  33. Excessive unfounded complaints, probably by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If there's several simultaneous valid complaints alleging something like a serious illness, the water system may have to be shut down while it's tested or risk spread of a contamination. We've had that happen several times where I live (and I live in a major metropolitan area) when initial tests have shown a possible bacterial problem and they've needed several days for comprehensive tests to tell whether there really is a problem or not. I'd be outraged if a single complaint would have them labeling the complainant a terrorist, but I suspect the missing context is that they're discussing concerted multiple reports filed with the intent of forcing a shutdown and possibly where the complainants are aware they don't have a reasonable basis for the complaints (think anti-fluoridation kooks wanting to "send a message").

    1. Re:Excessive unfounded complaints, probably by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      yet there are other laws for fining or imprisoning people for that kind of crime.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    2. Re:Excessive unfounded complaints, probably by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mr. inner party. talks about how he would defend the people's right to meekly complain if they weren't such crazy terrorists...you're brainwashed and unaware of it.

    3. Re:Excessive unfounded complaints, probably by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's send a meek complaint about water poisoning to the water authority once a week. The reason why we're sending this complaint is because we have bad information about the nature of the water and we feel we need to get them to act. Instead of getting better knowledge about water and the water system, we'll simply bother the public utility because of our unfounded claims.

  34. Re:Why is this a problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If a certain place in Tennessee wants to outlaw such behavior then so be it. That part of the country has alwayas been associated with conservative politics so if it's a problem just ignore it. Noone ever said that the residents have to live there, and who is going to constantly complaining about the water anyway? This whole issues is moot.

    Yes, and if a certain place in Alabama wants to bring back slavery, so be it. That part of the country has alwayas been associated with conservative politics so if it's a problem just ignore it. Noone ever said that the residents have to live there.

    Idiot.

  35. Thanks, Sherwin! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was looking for a good examplar for the term "scuttlefish", for those here who were unfamiliar with the term. Archie Bunker couldn't have said it better than you did. Actually, though, you're more a self-important buffoon trying to intimidate scuttlefish, but close enough I guess.

    By, the way, Mr. Smith, did you know that if you step on a crack, you'll break your mother's back?! What a fucking maroon! I see people like you every time I go into City Hall around here, though.

  36. I too am an amateur lawyer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I see the deputy director is an amateur lawyer. I too dabble at interpreting complex laws.

    It seems to me that by (with force of office) threatening to prevent US laws from being carried out he and is coworkers could be guilty of seditious conspircacy (18 USC 2384). This has a penalty of 20 years in prison.

    I haven't looked much, so there could be other laws with harsher penalties that might also fit.

  37. Illiterate Authorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Terrorrism implies the use of violence.
    Alarmism, rumor-mongering, scare-mongering, mythomania, lying, delusion, ... and the rest of the populist right's usual operating lexicon are not terrorrism. Technically. The authorities offering that memorable, sorry, lamentable declaration might as well have been wearing pointed hoods while doing so.

  38. [GodwinPoint attribute="intentional"] by AncalagonTotof · · Score: 1

    The word "terrorism" seems to me more and more like the yellow star of WWII.
    [/GodwinPoint]

    --
    Totof
    1. Re:[GodwinPoint attribute="intentional"] by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      Red triangle.

    2. Re:[GodwinPoint attribute="intentional"] by AncalagonTotof · · Score: 1

      You're right, it would fit the context much better than the yellow star. The latter is by far the most known, though.
      The fact is that I didn't know about the other signs; or I didn't remembered. Anyway, shame on me, a French should know that. That's frightening me : losing memories like this one. I didn't know war. I barely spoke of it with my grand parents before they die. And I see the world committing the same mistakes than 50 or 100 years ago.

      Oh, sorry, I forgot the [CheapPhilosophy] tags ...

      --
      Totof
  39. Weird.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't supplying dangerous fluids to a large population and pretending it to be water more an act of terrorism? It tends to affect a lot of people, instead of some petty official..

  40. Politics make my stomach turn by Guru80 · · Score: 1

    Everything is scare tactics and threats...

  41. Surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is just the next step. Burn a constitution in the name of fighting terrorism and the people agree. Change what is means to be considered a terrorist and you neutralise anyone that doesn't agree. The US is heading along a path where anyone not in government is a terrorist... About time. Now Obama might actually be able to get the guns out of the hands of all those NRA terrorists...

  42. Blowing Hot Air by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The State of Tennessee has no authority to enforce Federal Law, and the Federal Government will laugh at any TN official who tries to have a complaintant charged under Homeland Security as a terrorist for complaining about TDEC's miserable fucking water management skills.

  43. The other way... by countach · · Score: 1

    Isn't Sherwin Smith's threat against the citizens in itself an act of terror? Complaining about the water might upset one government official. But Sherwin's comments have upset and terrorized everybody.

  44. Fuck you too, "The Tennessean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "You must have browser cookies enabled to view our site."

    Does anyone have a copy of the article?

  45. Brought to you by fracking corporations. by boorack · · Score: 1

    So if you complain that some corporation drilling in your neighborhood will turn your groundwated into shit, you'll be labeled terrorist, stripped of your rights and sent right to the nearest supermax prison. Welcome to the United Fascist States of America. Your corporate overlords don't like you compaining about shit they bring upon you to improve their profits.

  46. Mr Smith's statement... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    should be considered an act of terrorism.

  47. Act of terrorism my a$$ by msmonroe · · Score: 1

    Sounds like repression of free speech using saying act of terrorism as an excuse. I'd get the ACLU involved and sue them for repression of free speech. Ironically isn't threatening these people like this an act of terror in itself.

  48. Fairness by Time_Ngler · · Score: 1

    The government has the sole right to define terrorism, not the people. It's one of the checks and balances we have, so the people can't overpower the government at every turn by voting our elected officials out of office, protesting, or expressing dissent.

    Even a single person's act could snowball into something which could throw a monkey wrench in the government's long term plans for shaping society. If someone does something that the severely upsets the government, but is technically within a constitutional right, what other recourse does the government have? Forming new laws takes time and a lot of arm wrenching of politicians to enact it. No politician wants to be directly identified with suppressing the people. And even if laws were formed, government does not have a crystal ball. It can't know what and how something that someone outside of it may turn out. No, for things that might actually affect the government, it must be able to act fast and decisively.

    So, a broad interpretation of terrorism gives the government a way of dealing with this, by grabbing hold of people from its icy depths of bureaucracy, and no one knows who did it or why. In this way, the people have a right to make changes in the little things, but it keeps our government at the helm of the ship.

  49. This is why laws need to change. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Laws should be annotated with their spirit, i.e. the reason why they were signed into being. Anti terrorist laws are intended to deter terrorists, not as a mechanism shut up citizens about water complaints. Any lawyer abusing a law beyond its spirit should lose their job.

  50. Funny you should mention that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I heard almost that exact story from a friend of my dad's years ago in regards to how his family moved to California.

    I almost think he'd said his dad was a cop at the time too. Wasn't corrupt and stepped on the toes of a local sheriff leading to a rather hasty departure from whichever state it was (Didn't turn violent, but it was heading that way.)

  51. Fuck Sherwin Smith & anyone else in a position by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    of power that will run off at the mouth using such tactics. I am increasingly frustrated with this "post-9/11 world" where any dissent can be met with threats of reprisal from anyone from the dog catcher to the President. Seriously, I pay my taxes, do my job, educated my kids, drive safely and love my fellow man. Enough is enough, however!

  52. Welcome to the new America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where everyone is a terrorist.

  53. Threatening the populace is a crime. by betterprimate · · Score: 1

    Terrorism is a high chrime, the usage of the term should not be taken lightly. It should not be allowed to persist unchecked. False accusations and threats of persecution to the populace (and his constituency!)) cannot stand. It is criminal. Not only should officials be socially denounced, but in severe cases, it warrants prosecution.

  54. Jewish supremacists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who else do you think is behind all this bullshit, the denial of your free speech, the elevation of Jews to 'untouchables', while they are destroying your country all around you... Sickening.

  55. how the tables turn by fonitrus · · Score: 1

    Welcome to Obamanist russ.sorry...America comarades. in my country we used to call them political prisoners but i like your pronounciation better. Terrorist. the sheer unknown of what or who they terrorise alows for more freedom of abuse of human right. Love it. Shuld be more of it. Stalin would be proud of what the USA has become. lol

    For a country hell bent on individual rights protected under the constitution America is doing sweet fk all to protect itself from the terrorist within its government. Even the 2nd amendment doesnt seem to be working as intended since it seems most of recent troubles and anti people agendas can be leviated by a simple revolution but no one is willing to go to gitmo for standing up and being counted :) :)

    lucky we have avganistan to vent our anger on them 'real' terrorists ah?

  56. Unintended consequences by RogueWarrior65 · · Score: 1

    First they say a city water system is a good idea. Then they make it illegal for you to drill your own well. Then they increase the rates (over and over and over and...). All the while making the water taste like crap. And then they give you static for complaining. (And for those of you who aren't familiar with regional water rights disputes, it gets much worse.)

    Aren't you glad you turned over healthcare to the gumint?

    First they came for the tobacco smokers and I said nothing because I don't smoke.
    Then they came for the huge soda drinkers and I said nothing because I don't drink soda.
    Then they came for the foie gras eaters and I said nothing because I don't eat goose liver.
    If they ever come for the bacon, THAT will result in an ginormous asskicking.

    1. Re:Unintended consequences by shikaisi · · Score: 1

      Mmmmmmmmmmmm, bacon!

      --
      No left turn unstoned.
  57. This is the nation you want? by GrahamCox · · Score: 1

    Well, is it?

    1. Re:This is the nation you want? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, if it is what it takes for us to be safe, then it is better to err on the side of caution, and if the occasional innocent is caught in the net from time to time, so be it.

      If it saves lives, it is worth a trivially minor inconvenience from time to time. Seriously, why is it such a hassle to remove one's shoes for a few minutes if it helps prevent a plane full of 200 people exploding in mid air, killing everyone?

  58. because... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the best way to fight an invisible enemy of a few misguded religous zelots is to create a totalitaran dictator to root them out and stand guard so they can't scare anyone ever again.

  59. Hmmm. Gee I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let me guess, Tennessee does a lot of fracking.

  60. 1st amendement hidden part by manu0601 · · Score: 1

    Here we discover the hidden part of 1st amendment. You have free speech, but using it will put you on a terror list.

    1. Re:1st amendement hidden part by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not hidden. It is how our government works. For example, no one is required to carry ID, but police can still arrest you and hold you until you can be identified. The constitution "guarantees" the right to peacefully assemble, but try doing so in most municipalities without a permit...

  61. The John Birch Society is not dead! by MarkvW · · Score: 1

    That's extreme right wing crazy talk!

  62. Spied on == Terrorist by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

    Of course, since the NSA is spying on almost everybody, almost everybody are terrorists. These water police just make sure that the rest of the populace don't fall through the cracks.

    Now stay in line citizen and don't spill that cup of water...

    --
    Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
  63. Don't be ridiculus by bussdriver · · Score: 1

    There is nothing wrong with democracy and having the people govern themselves as they see fit. If the people are fools, they will have a useless government that fails to serve them which will ultimately fall into despotism and shall no longer be a democracy. That is the cycle is the history and future of all democratic governments (to paraphrase Ben Franklin.)

    Healthcare wasn't turned over to the "gumint" you ignoramus! I would be glad it if was actually turned over to the government; any failures of an actual healthcare system (what existed was nearly anarchy and is not that much further from it after The Heritage Foundation's "Obamacare" begins in 2014) -- i repeat: any failures of a government system, would be the responsibility of the citizens and they would deserve whatever they managed it to become.

    The limitations imposed on the people's will (such as liberties that are out of reach of government) always end up failing eventually to the majority which again leads to despotism imposed upon minority groups (smokers for example) which undermines ideals -- the importance of which is really just an indicator of the lack of wisdom of the public. It's not long until they begin relinquish their powers as well.

  64. Nazi state by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...and so the gradual, inexorable march to a totalitarian state continues...

  65. There is no such thing as terrorism. by intermodal · · Score: 1

    i've been saying it since 9/11. there's literally no such thing. It's a red herring, always has been. A way of conveniently labeling people to brand them as enemies. This is just one example in a long line of examples.

    --
    In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
  66. You Are A Terrorist by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

    If you report or publicly mention a bug in my software, then you are trying to scare people into not using my software. Thus, you are a terrorist.

    If you give a movie or product a bad review, you might scare them into not seeing said movie or buying said product. Thus, you are a terrorist.

    If you ever complain about anything, your negativity might badly affect other people. Thus, you are a terrorist.

    Everyone, just walk around with a smile at all times and keep saying that everything is fine. The first person who grumbles gets sent off to Gitmo. (And the second... and the third...)

    I don't know about you, but I feel happier already. See? *extremely big (slightly nervous looking) smile*

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  67. My water is making me sick, you are a terroristNow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Welcome to American People, the land of the corporate freedom, where people get screw up and big corporations don't. This is what you get for letting politicians win elections based on how much money they can collect from individuals and big corporations during their campaigns and not because of the ideas and good intentions those politicians bring to the table to help their people and get justice for them. The system is just rotten and corrupt.

    This is just ridiculous. Every time a pipe breaks and contaminates local water supplies, the local authorities come back and say everything is fine and the water is ok just because some big corporation paid for the research to cover their asses. This law is basically making everything worse because now people cannot try to speak up when big corporations screw up, but now they will become terrorists because of that??????. How can you prove the water is contaminated, when the corporations that owns the pipes pay for the research to prove if the water is really contaminated. Common people can never win against that.

  68. *Lines up golf club* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We're gonna get those terrorists.

  69. the Sovereign People's Democratic Republic of Tenn by swschrad · · Score: 1

    motto: "with drones we love"

    state flower: Zeiss Ikon 85mm f2.1

    state bird: "yeah, well THIS says you're number ONE!"

    state pen: border to border

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  70. Who is their customer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sherwin Smith should be fired immediately. If I threatened my customers, my boss would rightfully fire me on the spot.

    In the mindset of many regulatory agencies -- especially as you get further down and closer to the local level -- the people they regulate and thus have regular contact with and who pay license fees to them are their customers. Citizens are a just nuisance that need to be managed for the people they really serve.

  71. More than water problems... by _BrianMahoney · · Score: 1

    People who shoot undercover videos of animal cruelty in stockyards are terrorists also, in many states, not just one. Can't you just smell the freedom?

  72. Impossibru by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's this? The government's new powers to define, locate, and stop both existing and potential future terrorists are being used to threaten innocent but potentially inconvenient behavior from normal citizens? This is shocking and unexpected!

  73. Heart disease by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apparently the terror of terrorism scared many Americans to death.

  74. Wow. by carys689 · · Score: 1

    Sounds like Mr. Smith either needs to review the U.S. Constitution or transfer to another field of endeavor.

  75. Complaints "can be considered" as acts of TERRORIS by MikeJameson · · Score: 1

    Ha ha ha ha! God, I so hate the ignoramuses who run states like Tennessee.

  76. Die On My Feet by srobert · · Score: 1

    Another way of stating it is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.

  77. Erin Brockovich Shipped to Gitmo by srobert · · Score: 1

    According to a reliable rumor that I just started, Erin Brockovich is being held in Guantanamo Bay prison. A government spokesperson, who shall remain nameless, would neither confirm nor deny the rumor.