I'm not sure why global job movement is such a sensitive subject to the Trolls, but...I know: Don't Feed the Trolls... so, in the interest of education of those who aren't trolling and don't already know, here is just one of many many sources of information about the link between China, the WTO, and Bill Clinton and Congress' year 2000 activities and the subsequent fallout -
...Bill Clinton, the country's most ardent booster of opening trade with China, looks especially imprudent 10 years later. During a press conference on March 29, 2000, Clinton said that granting China permanent normal trade relations (PNTR), which allowed China to gain entry into the WTO, would be a great deal for America. "We do nothing," Clinton said. "They have to lower tariffs. They open up telecommunications for investment. They allow us to sell cars made in America in China at much lower tariffs. They allow us to put our own distributorships there. They allow us to put our own parts there. We don't have to transfer technology or do joint manufacturing in China any more. This a hundred-to-nothing deal for America when it comes to the economic consequences."
It didn't quite work out that way. Since 2000, the trade deficit with China has surged by 173 percent, from $83 billion in 2000 to $227 billion in 2009. The United States has lost more than one-third of all its manufacturing jobs -- 5.6 million; U.S. wages have declined; the country has suffered a financial meltdown; it has spent $14 trillion on economic stimulus, only to experience the highest unemployment rates in generations and annual federal budget deficits of more than $1 trillion. These trends are not "likely to end"..."
Data from the U.S. Department of Commerce showed that “U.S. multinational corporations, the big brand-name companies that employ a fifth of all American workers cut their work forces in the U.S. by 2.9 million during the 2000s while increasing employment overseas by 2.4 million.”...
...Private equity firms have increased the pressure to cut costs by any means necessary, leading to more overseas outsourcing. Steve Pearlstein, a professor of public and international affairs at George Mason University and a Pulitzer-prize winning columnist, details the overseas outsourcing done by private equity firms in the 1980s, beginning with:
A wave of corporate takeovers, many of them unwanted and uninvited. Corporate executives came to fear that if they did not run their businesses with the aim of maximizing short-term profits and share prices, their companies would become takeover targets and they would be out of a job. Overnight, outsourcing became a manhood test for corporate executives.
For the private equity firms that took over companies, “the standard strategy has been to load up company executives with so much stock and stock options that they don’t hesitate to make difficult decisions such as shedding divisions, closing plants or outsourcing work overseas.”...
I used to believe that Democrats would do the right thing for We The People. I always felt the Republicans were nothing more than shills for the Already Rich. But...
I've watched as Bill "Mr Blue Dress Man" Clinton passed NAFTA and GATT where Papa Bush couldn't. This allowed the Already Rich to move working and middle class jobs to China (over 21million of these jobs last year), knowing that the only effect they were interested in was increasing the value of their stock options so they could make a killing on Wallstreet.
I've watched as Baby Bush invaded a country that had not one single thing to do with the events of 911... and... get away with it. Sure, Mr. Rumsfeld couldn't travel to Germany for awhile during the time they wanted him on war crimes. But that was quickly delt with and not one single person in the Baby Bush administration has gone to jail for what they did.
I've watched as Obama strengthened the Baby Bush-era spying machine... and... has not preserved the liberties nor freedoms formerly guaranteed by the Constitution and it's Amendments. By his own words (as printed in an interview in the Rolling Stone), Obama was to be the blast shield against the Republicans who want to burn the place to the ground. And yet, Obama has proven to be no better than his predecessors in protecting and guaranteeing the liberties and freedoms of We The People. Shouldn't a Constitutional Law professor have known better? Apparently not.
Freedoms? It's only an idea to Americans. Liberties? Not when you're scared or paranoid. In short, the US continues to exist as a pre-Magna Carta, pre-Habeas Corpus state.
Reading The Victorians reminds me that the role of Government is to limit the power of the common people and to enable the powerful elite. In this, the American government has succeeded. Supremely.
The word "sheeple" more than adequately describes the actions of citizens who do nothing.
America, look in the mirror and you will see the embodiment of the word "sheeple". Correcting the ills of your country will take action, not talk, nor worrying, nor hand-wringing, nor anything else that prevents you from getting off your collective asses and _doing_ something about what's been forced on you while you've been distracted by the myriad unimportant distractions you call living.
The first step is to stop using the word "sheeple."
What maybe Americans don't yet realize is why this such a huge deal here in Europe, and why, in particular, Germany was "OK" with the whole NSA spying scandal, at first.
It turns out that a rather large trade deal between Europe and US was in process when the NSA spying scandal broke. The Germans had the trade pact right where they wanted it. The French did not. You perhaps noted the German hand waving that they were outraged by the NSA spying, but really weren't going to do anything to torpedo the trade deal. The French, OTOH, were prepared to back completely out.
Now it seems that the Germans found something they clearly do not like.
Think "leverage." Each country is looking for more favorable terms with the Americans.
Huawei was banned because the company is the technology tool of the People's Liberation Army where there is complete transparency between the two entities (in ways that US defense contractors many times don't have). Huawei was banned because they stole a rather large piece of telecommunications software from a US company, slapped their own name on it and tried to sell it back to the US. Huawei was banned because they are up to their necks in intellectual property theft from the West. Huawei was banned because the Chinese government directed the installation of their own "backdoors" into nearly everything they tried to sell back to the West so that China could better spy on us (and they're already doing an incredibly good job of it).
Need I go further?
Perhaps this is why Huawei equipment was banned, it didn't have the right backdoors for the NSA to monitor everything...
A very surprisingly large number of corporations do NOT spend money on security.
Which is why the FBI surprised over 70 companies a couple years back when the FBI told them their systems had been hacked for the company's intellectual property. The companies in question had _no_ idea they'd been hit. Which is also why the NSA makes a point of touring US-based companies to present corporate execs (primarily in the IT end of things) un-classified reports on the latest security threats (if you don't already know, take a look at the NSA Information Assurance program). Which is why I was laid off because one such company was not going to listen to someone suggesting to them their computer security really sucked and were actually in the process of slashing intellectual property protection and computer security jobs. Again. For the eighth time in four years. So they could use the money "saved" on the salaries of people at my level who were also laid off to "buy" low level grunt "talent" in their China operations. That company's security still sux and remains far too easily hacked, and this is in a sixty year old high tech company that would've known better had they not be bought out by an aggressive "rollup" company to then be run by a bunch of greedy WallStreet-types who extract, literally, $100's of millions of dollars for themselves from the companies they've absorbed and stripped of assets.
So, no, many companies could give a rat's rear about security.
Only large corps really spend money on security...
It's actually easier than racial profiling anyone. Simply require the agencies of Law and Order to do their jobs and to track people who actually _are_ terrorists.
Short of that, does anyone really feel safer for all this "security state" oversight? Come on! Oh paranoid and fearful do you need to be to "buy into" this BS? Apparently quite fearful and paranoid, from the looks of things.
Er... then why did 'ol Tim McV hang out with that wacked out christian identity group? To convert them to agnostism? I think not.
In America, if you are Muslim and spew rhetoric against the State, you are arrested, "tried", and sent to jail. In the self-same America, if you are a Christian and spew rhetoric against the State, you are allowed to continue based on your 1st amendment rights. So much for equal application of the American ideal...
Westboro Baptist is worse than Christian terrorist Timothy McVeigh?
Timothy McVeigh was raised as a Roman Catholic, but later claimed to be agnostic. There is no evidence that there was any religious motivation for his actions.
American's "know" a lot of things, but never seem to have the time to take any action to right the wrongs perpetrated on them (and others around the world). Taking no action means agreement. Therefore, why do Americans agree that spending massive amounts of taxpayer monies on illegal spying operations is a Good Thing(tm)? Are you that paranoid and fearful that someone will "get you?" Does this illegal spying help you sleep soundly at night? What? Please explain.
It's terribly difficult for younger generations to deal with hard reality in terms of just how dangerous some people and certain technologies and weapons can be. After all, all they need to do is hit the "reset" button on their favorite video game and they suddenly "come back to life." I shudder to think how the advancement of humanity may be stalled.
You guys are all laughing about this, But when I was in the USAF I was stationed at Beale, Armageddon Air Force Base. They had more B-52s loaded full of bombs ready to carpet-nuke Russia than you could count... Go ahead and laugh, we have more than global warming and asteroids to worry about.
Human error could cause our extinction. Laugh away, guys.
Having said that, the Germans, French, and other European states have publicly denounced NSA spying. Yet, they all quietly continue to work as normal with the US. So... what gives? Are they politically motivated to put limits on NSA spying or is it all for public show?
Why does this whole thing have such a Germany 1930's, or Russia 1920's smell to it? This can't be happening in the "Land of the Free", can it? And if it is, what are you (each and every one of you) going to do about it?
This spin on this article is amazing. What happens if you decline cooperation is classified information. That doesn't mean that declining to cooperate leads to a treason charge, just that whatever happens if you decline, is classified information. Releasing classified information is a treason charge, but that's a separate issue altogether.
Give us an example where a corporation has ever acted based on the ideals set forth in the Constitution. Law? Likely. Secret judge orders? Highly likely. Constitution? Unlikely.
Corporations are constantly working against the citizenry of the USA to ensure higher profits for shareholders. They move your jobs to China. They keep profits off-shore to avoid paying taxes. They sit on TARP monies that you, the taxpayer, gave them because they are too large to fail (instead of investing it in hiring US citizens or product R&D). They launder drug monies (banks, at least) and no one goes to jail. They write laws that your government enacts, to corporate benefit. They receive huge tax breaks at middle-class taxpayer expense.
While I'm not saying Yahoo is doing any of these dastardly things, I am stressing the absurdity that corporations would do anything buy work in their own self interest. Ideologies be damned!
She has a duty to the shareholders of Yahoo to do what is best for them.
And as an American, she also has a duty to her nation and her fellow citizens.
A nation founded on ideals expressed in its written Constitution, over which the NSA secret courts trample.
Her association with a corporation does not excuse her from that responsibility.
Nobody should ever be excused of working against the citizenry of this country simply because the profits of a corporation and its select shareholders were at risk.
Doesn't matter. If the execs are aggressive, they'll lay you off for "not getting with the program." [actual words from one exec I knew] Do you run the risk of not being able to put food on the table? Or do you play their game by their terms and live to work another day?
I warned company execs to exactly these kinds of risks. I angered the president of the company to the point that I was laid-off as soon as he had the paperwork processed. I was surprised he didn't fire me on the spot. That's how badly he demanded that engineering and manufacturing be moved to China. He refused to hear of any risk to company intellectual property. He knew the value of his stock options depended on doing what he, in the end, did.
I got "turfed" for all my hard work. This, after I spent 30 years in the industry and provided product development engineering talent and software technologies that contributed directly to much more than 100's of millions of dollars on their bottom line each year.
Is there really any question why people won't communicate these kinds of things "up stream?"
The actions of the NSA are clearly in violation of the 4th Amendment too. But Americans don't typically stand up and do something about things that are clearly wrong (voting rights for women and civil rights for racial minorities being two on a very very short list where people actually did something). Maybe the French can remind Americans how to right a horrible wrong?
What good are laws when they will not be upheld? What good is a Constitution if it is nothing more than "a piece of paper"? What good is a former Constitutional law professor if he says "CIA [and NSA] get what they want" regardless of the law? What good is an Attorney General if the only people he goes after are writers who are trying to tell the truth, while the AG refuses to go after the CIA, NSA, or any of the crooks that Americans give billions of $$$'s to during the last financial collapse (that the crooks themselves caused)?
...No matter the justification and possible reasons for the NSA program, they can't just ignore the highest law of the land. Or can they? It is a very slippery slope.
... and what do you say to those Americans who after decades of witnessing the growing Farce Royale, tried to re-balance the US system, have had more than enough, knew nothing ever changes in America (yea Jeebus!), called b*llsh*t!, and left for France, Germany, Italy, or Spain? Hubris? I think not.
You at the other side of the pond have generated a farce beyond fantasy
An amazing statement considering recent events in the UK with respect to the Snowden story. Hubris.
The US Farce Royale is acting like a positive feedback loop. As we all know, positive feedback in the absence of anything else is an unbalanced system. Hence the situation Americans now find themselves in.
You at the other side of the pond have generated a farce beyond fantasy. Create secret court, abuse powers, secret court says "non", ignore, expand and repeat.
As a tech I'd say your system has found a resonance point where the loop-gain is so much greater than one that it might cause the earth's rotation to change....
What you write is precisely how I too have experienced it. Americans are filled with fear and paranoia.
Consider the odds of being killed by a "terrist" vs dying in a car accident, or dying of natural airborne anthrax, or winning the lottery. Then consider the size of the supposed security screen the NSA has built. Some beliefs are clearly out of sync with reality.
As hard as it is to believe or understand, there are many places around the world where one does not live in fear, where people are not paranoid (to the degree Americans are), and where liberties and freedoms are more than just words.
The "security apparatus" isn't the real problem here. They're just the symptom, the manifestation of a deep fear that permeates societies... and may I add, irrational fears at that. Why irrational? Because the number of casualties from traffic accidents is of many orders of magnitude higher than those of terror attacks. But nobody seriously intends to forbid cars and people from driving. Yet when it comes to "terrism", regular people just kind of shut off their rational thinking and go into total obedience mode (to the almighty State). This tells more about human nature than we ever wanted to know, doesn't it?
The decision of who the people get to vote for is made ahead of anyone voting.
Even if there was a massive write-in candidate (which I very seriously doubt as Americans don't seem to know how to organize around anything but religion, NASCAR, iPhones/Android, and continued consumer consumption), I'm confident that the Two Party System would find a way to invalidate it thru vote fraud, character assassination, or influence peddling. It, therefore, stands to reason that you will be given two choices. One Republicunt. One Democrap. Both choices will be nothing more than another Ray-Gun/Papa-Bush/StainedBlueDressMan/Baby-Bush/Obama-Hope clone.
I seriously hope this is the breaking point, but I just don't see it. No one is taking to the streets. No one is occupying the halls of Congress. No one is taking meaningful action. Not in the USA. Not in the UK. Everyone has too much to loose by standing up and behaving as free people.
...This is the breaking point. Will people vote in politicians who will stop the wars (terror, drugs, guns, privacy)? Or are we going to get another Bush/Obama clone?
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure why global job movement is such a sensitive subject to the Trolls, but...I know: Don't Feed the Trolls... so, in the interest of education of those who aren't trolling and don't already know, here is just one of many many sources of information about the link between China, the WTO, and Bill Clinton and Congress' year 2000 activities and the subsequent fallout -
It didn't quite work out that way. Since 2000, the trade deficit with China has surged by 173 percent, from $83 billion in 2000 to $227 billion in 2009. The United States has lost more than one-third of all its manufacturing jobs -- 5.6 million; U.S. wages have declined; the country has suffered a financial meltdown; it has spent $14 trillion on economic stimulus, only to experience the highest unemployment rates in generations and annual federal budget deficits of more than $1 trillion. These trends are not "likely to end"..."
Further, a few more facts might help clarify things -
Data from the U.S. Department of Commerce showed that “U.S. multinational corporations, the big brand-name companies that employ a fifth of all American workers cut their work forces in the U.S. by 2.9 million during the 2000s while increasing employment overseas by 2.4 million.”...
A wave of corporate takeovers, many of them unwanted and uninvited. Corporate executives came to fear that if they did not run their businesses with the aim of maximizing short-term profits and share prices, their companies would become takeover targets and they would be out of a job. Overnight, outsourcing became a manhood test for corporate executives.
For the private equity firms that took over companies, “the standard strategy has been to load up company executives with so much stock and stock options that they don’t hesitate to make difficult decisions such as shedding divisions, closing plants or outsourcing work overseas.”...
I hope this helps.
I used to believe that Democrats would do the right thing for We The People. I always felt the Republicans were nothing more than shills for the Already Rich. But...
I've watched as Bill "Mr Blue Dress Man" Clinton passed NAFTA and GATT where Papa Bush couldn't. This allowed the Already Rich to move working and middle class jobs to China (over 21million of these jobs last year), knowing that the only effect they were interested in was increasing the value of their stock options so they could make a killing on Wallstreet.
I've watched as Baby Bush invaded a country that had not one single thing to do with the events of 911... and... get away with it. Sure, Mr. Rumsfeld couldn't travel to Germany for awhile during the time they wanted him on war crimes. But that was quickly delt with and not one single person in the Baby Bush administration has gone to jail for what they did.
I've watched as Obama strengthened the Baby Bush-era spying machine... and... has not preserved the liberties nor freedoms formerly guaranteed by the Constitution and it's Amendments. By his own words (as printed in an interview in the Rolling Stone), Obama was to be the blast shield against the Republicans who want to burn the place to the ground. And yet, Obama has proven to be no better than his predecessors in protecting and guaranteeing the liberties and freedoms of We The People. Shouldn't a Constitutional Law professor have known better? Apparently not.
Freedoms? It's only an idea to Americans. Liberties? Not when you're scared or paranoid. In short, the US continues to exist as a pre-Magna Carta, pre-Habeas Corpus state.
Reading The Victorians reminds me that the role of Government is to limit the power of the common people and to enable the powerful elite. In this, the American government has succeeded. Supremely.
The word "sheeple" more than adequately describes the actions of citizens who do nothing.
America, look in the mirror and you will see the embodiment of the word "sheeple". Correcting the ills of your country will take action, not talk, nor worrying, nor hand-wringing, nor anything else that prevents you from getting off your collective asses and _doing_ something about what's been forced on you while you've been distracted by the myriad unimportant distractions you call living.
The first step is to stop using the word "sheeple."
Oh, Obama knows.
What maybe Americans don't yet realize is why this such a huge deal here in Europe, and why, in particular, Germany was "OK" with the whole NSA spying scandal, at first.
It turns out that a rather large trade deal between Europe and US was in process when the NSA spying scandal broke. The Germans had the trade pact right where they wanted it. The French did not. You perhaps noted the German hand waving that they were outraged by the NSA spying, but really weren't going to do anything to torpedo the trade deal. The French, OTOH, were prepared to back completely out.
Now it seems that the Germans found something they clearly do not like.
Think "leverage." Each country is looking for more favorable terms with the Americans.
that Obama probably doesn't know either way.
Huawei was banned because the company is the technology tool of the People's Liberation Army where there is complete transparency between the two entities (in ways that US defense contractors many times don't have). Huawei was banned because they stole a rather large piece of telecommunications software from a US company, slapped their own name on it and tried to sell it back to the US. Huawei was banned because they are up to their necks in intellectual property theft from the West. Huawei was banned because the Chinese government directed the installation of their own "backdoors" into nearly everything they tried to sell back to the West so that China could better spy on us (and they're already doing an incredibly good job of it).
Need I go further?
Perhaps this is why Huawei equipment was banned, it didn't have the right backdoors for the NSA to monitor everything...
A very surprisingly large number of corporations do NOT spend money on security.
Which is why the FBI surprised over 70 companies a couple years back when the FBI told them their systems had been hacked for the company's intellectual property. The companies in question had _no_ idea they'd been hit. Which is also why the NSA makes a point of touring US-based companies to present corporate execs (primarily in the IT end of things) un-classified reports on the latest security threats (if you don't already know, take a look at the NSA Information Assurance program). Which is why I was laid off because one such company was not going to listen to someone suggesting to them their computer security really sucked and were actually in the process of slashing intellectual property protection and computer security jobs. Again. For the eighth time in four years. So they could use the money "saved" on the salaries of people at my level who were also laid off to "buy" low level grunt "talent" in their China operations. That company's security still sux and remains far too easily hacked, and this is in a sixty year old high tech company that would've known better had they not be bought out by an aggressive "rollup" company to then be run by a bunch of greedy WallStreet-types who extract, literally, $100's of millions of dollars for themselves from the companies they've absorbed and stripped of assets.
So, no, many companies could give a rat's rear about security.
Only large corps really spend money on security...
It's actually easier than racial profiling anyone. Simply require the agencies of Law and Order to do their jobs and to track people who actually _are_ terrorists.
Short of that, does anyone really feel safer for all this "security state" oversight? Come on! Oh paranoid and fearful do you need to be to "buy into" this BS? Apparently quite fearful and paranoid, from the looks of things.
Er... then why did 'ol Tim McV hang out with that wacked out christian identity group? To convert them to agnostism? I think not.
In America, if you are Muslim and spew rhetoric against the State, you are arrested, "tried", and sent to jail. In the self-same America, if you are a Christian and spew rhetoric against the State, you are allowed to continue based on your 1st amendment rights. So much for equal application of the American ideal...
Westboro Baptist is worse than Christian terrorist Timothy McVeigh?
Timothy McVeigh was raised as a Roman Catholic, but later claimed to be agnostic. There is no evidence that there was any religious motivation for his actions.
American's "know" a lot of things, but never seem to have the time to take any action to right the wrongs perpetrated on them (and others around the world). Taking no action means agreement. Therefore, why do Americans agree that spending massive amounts of taxpayer monies on illegal spying operations is a Good Thing(tm)? Are you that paranoid and fearful that someone will "get you?" Does this illegal spying help you sleep soundly at night? What? Please explain.
I think this is a brilliant idea. You're right, the Statue of Liberty does not apply any longer. Well, certainly not in America, at least.
So will the french demand the return of the Statue of Liberty that they gifted to the americans?
Not so much as retribution, simply because it doesn't apply, any more.
"Good" is a relative term. They're sure "good" at providing a stage and the play that entertain the masses, aren't they?
As for actual, meaningful good: No.
Do they do ANYTHING for the actual good of the country?
It's terribly difficult for younger generations to deal with hard reality in terms of just how dangerous some people and certain technologies and weapons can be. After all, all they need to do is hit the "reset" button on their favorite video game and they suddenly "come back to life." I shudder to think how the advancement of humanity may be stalled.
You guys are all laughing about this, But when I was in the USAF I was stationed at Beale, Armageddon Air Force Base. They had more B-52s loaded full of bombs ready to carpet-nuke Russia than you could count... Go ahead and laugh, we have more than global warming and asteroids to worry about.
Human error could cause our extinction. Laugh away, guys.
This is an interesting development.
Having said that, the Germans, French, and other European states have publicly denounced NSA spying. Yet, they all quietly continue to work as normal with the US. So... what gives? Are they politically motivated to put limits on NSA spying or is it all for public show?
Irrational fears, indeed. We all know that you're eight times more likely to die at the hands of a policeman in the US than by acts of terrorism, right?
Gods! Neither the STASI nor the KGB ever had it this good or this easy, did they?
Why does this whole thing have such a Germany 1930's, or Russia 1920's smell to it? This can't be happening in the "Land of the Free", can it? And if it is, what are you (each and every one of you) going to do about it?
This spin on this article is amazing. What happens if you decline cooperation is classified information. That doesn't mean that declining to cooperate leads to a treason charge, just that whatever happens if you decline, is classified information. Releasing classified information is a treason charge, but that's a separate issue altogether.
Ideology, meet reality.
Give us an example where a corporation has ever acted based on the ideals set forth in the Constitution. Law? Likely. Secret judge orders? Highly likely. Constitution? Unlikely.
Corporations are constantly working against the citizenry of the USA to ensure higher profits for shareholders. They move your jobs to China. They keep profits off-shore to avoid paying taxes. They sit on TARP monies that you, the taxpayer, gave them because they are too large to fail (instead of investing it in hiring US citizens or product R&D). They launder drug monies (banks, at least) and no one goes to jail. They write laws that your government enacts, to corporate benefit. They receive huge tax breaks at middle-class taxpayer expense.
While I'm not saying Yahoo is doing any of these dastardly things, I am stressing the absurdity that corporations would do anything buy work in their own self interest. Ideologies be damned!
She has a duty to the shareholders of Yahoo to do what is best for them.
And as an American, she also has a duty to her nation and her fellow citizens. A nation founded on ideals expressed in its written Constitution, over which the NSA secret courts trample. Her association with a corporation does not excuse her from that responsibility.
Nobody should ever be excused of working against the citizenry of this country simply because the profits of a corporation and its select shareholders were at risk.
Doesn't matter. If the execs are aggressive, they'll lay you off for "not getting with the program." [actual words from one exec I knew] Do you run the risk of not being able to put food on the table? Or do you play their game by their terms and live to work another day?
I warned company execs to exactly these kinds of risks. I angered the president of the company to the point that I was laid-off as soon as he had the paperwork processed. I was surprised he didn't fire me on the spot. That's how badly he demanded that engineering and manufacturing be moved to China. He refused to hear of any risk to company intellectual property. He knew the value of his stock options depended on doing what he, in the end, did.
I got "turfed" for all my hard work. This, after I spent 30 years in the industry and provided product development engineering talent and software technologies that contributed directly to much more than 100's of millions of dollars on their bottom line each year.
Is there really any question why people won't communicate these kinds of things "up stream?"
The actions of the NSA are clearly in violation of the 4th Amendment too. But Americans don't typically stand up and do something about things that are clearly wrong (voting rights for women and civil rights for racial minorities being two on a very very short list where people actually did something). Maybe the French can remind Americans how to right a horrible wrong?
What good are laws when they will not be upheld? What good is a Constitution if it is nothing more than "a piece of paper"? What good is a former Constitutional law professor if he says "CIA [and NSA] get what they want" regardless of the law? What good is an Attorney General if the only people he goes after are writers who are trying to tell the truth, while the AG refuses to go after the CIA, NSA, or any of the crooks that Americans give billions of $$$'s to during the last financial collapse (that the crooks themselves caused)?
...No matter the justification and possible reasons for the NSA program, they can't just ignore the highest law of the land. Or can they? It is a very slippery slope.
... and what do you say to those Americans who after decades of witnessing the growing Farce Royale, tried to re-balance the US system, have had more than enough, knew nothing ever changes in America (yea Jeebus!), called b*llsh*t!, and left for France, Germany, Italy, or Spain? Hubris? I think not.
You at the other side of the pond have generated a farce beyond fantasy
An amazing statement considering recent events in the UK with respect to the Snowden story. Hubris.
The US Farce Royale is acting like a positive feedback loop. As we all know, positive feedback in the absence of anything else is an unbalanced system. Hence the situation Americans now find themselves in.
You at the other side of the pond have generated a farce beyond fantasy. Create secret court, abuse powers, secret court says "non", ignore, expand and repeat.
As a tech I'd say your system has found a resonance point where the loop-gain is so much greater than one that it might cause the earth's rotation to change....
What you write is precisely how I too have experienced it. Americans are filled with fear and paranoia.
Consider the odds of being killed by a "terrist" vs dying in a car accident, or dying of natural airborne anthrax, or winning the lottery. Then consider the size of the supposed security screen the NSA has built. Some beliefs are clearly out of sync with reality.
As hard as it is to believe or understand, there are many places around the world where one does not live in fear, where people are not paranoid (to the degree Americans are), and where liberties and freedoms are more than just words.
The "security apparatus" isn't the real problem here. They're just the symptom, the manifestation of a deep fear that permeates societies... and may I add, irrational fears at that. Why irrational? Because the number of casualties from traffic accidents is of many orders of magnitude higher than those of terror attacks. But nobody seriously intends to forbid cars and people from driving. Yet when it comes to "terrism", regular people just kind of shut off their rational thinking and go into total obedience mode (to the almighty State). This tells more about human nature than we ever wanted to know, doesn't it?
The decision of who the people get to vote for is made ahead of anyone voting.
Even if there was a massive write-in candidate (which I very seriously doubt as Americans don't seem to know how to organize around anything but religion, NASCAR, iPhones/Android, and continued consumer consumption), I'm confident that the Two Party System would find a way to invalidate it thru vote fraud, character assassination, or influence peddling. It, therefore, stands to reason that you will be given two choices. One Republicunt. One Democrap. Both choices will be nothing more than another Ray-Gun/Papa-Bush/StainedBlueDressMan/Baby-Bush/Obama-Hope clone.
I seriously hope this is the breaking point, but I just don't see it. No one is taking to the streets. No one is occupying the halls of Congress. No one is taking meaningful action. Not in the USA. Not in the UK. Everyone has too much to loose by standing up and behaving as free people.
...This is the breaking point. Will people vote in politicians who will stop the wars (terror, drugs, guns, privacy)? Or are we going to get another Bush/Obama clone?