you don't deserve any of the freedoms that our constitution grants us. plain and simple
No, I think it could be said the other way around. If you are not willing to potentially give up a little privacy when calling Al Qaeda contacts overseas, then you do not deserve any of the freedoms that our Constitution (capitalized) grants us, and you will probably lose them. Plain and simple. Trust me, these guys we are fighting against care nothing about our Constitution and the freedoms it grants us. Privacy is not mentioned as one of those rights, by the way. Unreasonable search and seizure is... but when you are talking with suspected Al Qaeda contacts, I'd call that reasonable.
They applauded because Bush's proposals to "fix" social security were terrible and no one wanted them except the investement firms and big business who would get to play with all the money.
That's funny, I am neither an investment banker nor a big business, but I want to be able to own and have some control of MY money. If you die at 64, how much of your Social Security retirement plan do you kids get. Just under 0%. The other applause I hear are from the people in Galveston TX, who somehow managed to opt out of the SSI program and created their own. Their retirees are much better off than the rest of the nation's.
It's funny that to see all these pro-choice Democrats oppose so many of Bush's voluntary programs, like vouchers or the voluntary partial removal of Social Security from George Bush's hands.
Now, back on topic!
I think that performing medical experiments on humans who are not capable of volunteering is wrong. You could even call it torture. What's the difference between experimenting on a fetus and a man in a coma or an invalid?
However, a little genetic modification is OK as long as no one gets hurt.
Speaking of genetic modification, how can you guys support this but want GM crops banned?
I don't know if this particular school is state owned or not, but in the case of public libraries or state sponsored schools, why should the Gov't have to get a warrant to search what they already own? (provided the state is OK with it).
Also, I am sure that if a death threat was sent to this librarian from one of these machines, she would have no problem with the FBI seaching these machines... probably would have done it herself.
You see, that's the attitude of/.'ers. If you are conservative, you are a close minded brown shirt and must be downmodded and shouted down. If you are liberal, you are "insightful" and modded up.
These professors are liberal and some people want them to at least present a conservative view at least for the purpose of discussion and open thought. Well, any discussion contrary to the liberal view shall be viewed as counter revolutionary and will be shouted down and called fascists. That form of speech will not be tolerated.
A prime example is when someone like Ann Coulter is shouted down, called vile names and not allowed to speak because she is seen as being hateful and close minded.
I always find it strange when people accuse academia of unfair bias. When the majority of the best and brightest in the country all lean towards a particular political philosophy, what should that tell you? (Hint: It's not that they were brainwashed and indoctrinated...)
Reminds of the old saying: Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach
What does that tell you? (Hint: teachers make crappy salaries)
One is an operative in the field and the other is a program authorized by the head of our government that aggressively errodes US citizens civil liberties
If by in the field you mean living is suburbia and driving to work every day here in the states, then yeah, I guess she was in the field.
You are correct in that there is no comparrison between these two. One "leak" exposed an on going covert operation and threatened national security and the other made a operative in the field famous. That cover of Vanity fair did more to "out" Plame than anything Scooter did. Did you know what she looked like before then?
I believe, sir, that if ANY president signed on to a program like this there would be yelling from both sides.
Funny, I didn't see the ACLU or MoveOn.org complaining when the previous administration did a warrantless physical search of American citizens. (I know, MoveOn didn't exist yet) At least Bush didn't clutter up the living rooms of these terrorist in his errosion US citizens civil liberties...
Didn't Plame's 5 year old kid just out her in a Houston airport? Should he go to jail with Scooter? If her covertness were so important, would she be meeting reporters, doing photo shoots and signing book deals?
You are correct, there is no comparrison between these two cases.
Ah, the "Yeah, well Clinton did it, too" approach.
There are two reasons for the "Clinton did it" approach: The first is called precedent. It says that Bush is not the first to do it and if it was legal for Clinton (and Carter and Reagan) than it's legal for Bush.
The second and more commonly used reason is partisanship. It proves hypocrisy. It shows that people like you are being hypocritical when you scream and yell "Hitler" every time Bush does something, but you remained completely silent when someone from your own party did the same thing. A prime example would be the war in Iraq. There were, and still are protests, world wide. Unfortunately, I didn't see near the amount or protests when Clinton went to war against Bosnia (also without UN approval). Was Bosnia a threat to US security? What did Milosovich do that Hussein did not? Why are Senators screaming to bring our troops home from Iraq but silent about our troops that are still in Bosnia (weren't they supposed to be home by Christmas... of '98?)? It's pure partisan hypocrisy. You don't like Bush, so you hate everything he does. Face it, if Bush were a democrat, you'd blindly accept everything he does... Just like the 90's.
Back OnTopic: Brittain has to monitor everyone equally. If they only monitored the criminals, or those that are "most likely" to commit a crime, then everyone would be screaming PROFILING!!! So, like here in the US, the little old ladies must get strip searched just as often as the Muslem man, 18-25, wearing a padded vest.
Way off base. The US is practically alone in the democratic world in having such lax gun control. Gun regulations (that apply equally to everyone) are about as typical of fascism as breathing oxygen is.
Why is it when the US restricts liberties, it's called fascist, but when it allows rights to that "apply equally to everyone" based in the Constitution, it's called fascist?
I guess that's why fascism has done so well in Europe and not in the US. The US allows its citizens to arm themselves against tyranny.
I seriously believe this is treason. This action DEFINES treason. Not some weak "censure" or "impeachment." This is stand-before-a-judge-jury-and-firing-squad serious.
Then you better be ready to line up a few more former Presidents in front of that firing squad!
"The Department of Justice believes, and the case law supports, that the president has inherent authority to conduct warrantless physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes." President Clinton's deputy attorney general, Jamie Gorelick
Finally: WASH POST, July 15, 1994: Extend not only to searches of the homes of U.S. citizens but also -- in the delicate words of a Justice Department official -- to "places where you wouldn't find or would be unlikely to find information involving a U.S. citizen... would allow the government to use classified electronic surveillance techniques, such as infrared sensors to observe people inside their homes, without a court order."
Deputy Attorney General Jamie S. Gorelick, the Clinton administration believes the president "has inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches for foreign intelligence purposes."
Secret searches and wiretaps of Aldrich Ames's office and home in June and October 1993, both without a federal warrant
I would argue that Gilliam drew heavily from "1984". I would argue that 1984 was based on Nazi Germany.
I would argue that the Bush administration is using the same techniques as Hitler to transform Democracy into totalitarianism.
GW is a greater threat to the US than Osama Bin Laden. There is NOTHING that OBL can do to remove our civil rights.
Didn't the brownshirts shout down and harrass anyone that had an opinion different than their own? Isn't that what happens to any conservative speaker who visits a college campus these days? Maybe you should ask Ann Coulter. I'm sure you don't agree with what she says, but doesn't she have a right to say it?
If GWB was half as bad as you make yourself believe he is, you'd already be dead. Michael Moore would be thin, living in a work camp and Babs Streisand would be in line for the "Showers" at Bush's Death Camps in West Texas.
In other words, your hyperbole of comparing Bush to Hitler makes you look like an idiot. So until we have forced labor camps and we're filling gas chambers daily, I suggest you rethink your position and keep your mouth shut.
BTW, Osama Bin Laden killed more Americans in a couple of hours than we've lost in Iraq in three years. Osama's victims were not volunteers who died for a cause they believe in. No one got to vote because of the people Bin Laden killed. Again, more hyperbole.
So I call BullShit. If you really, truely and honestly feel that GWB is as dangerous as Hitler and worse than Bin Laden, why are you sitting on your ass behind a keyboard? If you were in 1938 Germany, wouldn't it be your duty to pick up a rifle and fight the Nazis? So, go ahead, join what's left of the Taliban if that is what your truly belive.
I can see it now: You're running down the hall, flak cannon in hand. There are only two of you left. You hear the ca-chink-ca-chink of a rocket launcher loading up, you turn to the right where you opponent is standing ready to fire, but you've got the jump on him... you fire, but instead of seeing his giblets scattered all over the wall behind him, you see you chat window pop up because the button for "chat" is too close to your secondary fire button.
You lose.
Napalming civilians? I have to call Bullshit
on
Set PHASRs On Stun
·
· Score: 0, Insightful
Have you seen this? We're napalming civilians, now. But we didn't sign the 1980 UN Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, so it's okay.
Napalm was not used in the article you sited. The article mentions WP (White Phosphorus or Willie Pete) which is used more for illumination than as a weapon. If a soldier fires a flare, it's more than likely WP.
The reasoning behind the article was photograhic evidence of burned civilians. I'm not saying civilians were not caught in the crossfire, because I really don't know, and neither do you. I am saying that civilians were not targeted by American soldiers. I'm also saying that the enemies we are fighting in Iraq make a habbit of intentionally targeting civilians, mainly because they are less armed than the military.
So, who do you think burned the civilians found after all action in Falluja? The US Military, who goes out of their way to avoid targeting civilians, or the terrorists (sorry, you probably call them "Freedom Fighters") who intentionally target markets, schools and mosques?
Is it possible to oppose the war and NOT want Saddam Hussein back in power?
but instead simply charged it to the national debt, while simultaneously lowering taxes.
If you took the time to research the facts and accepted truths that are different than your opinion, you'd know that the Fed has actually received MORE money because of the tax cuts. It's called the Laffer curve, google it.
The problem with the deficit is that the feds are spending too much. There is way too much blame to go around on both sides for me to touch that one. (I'm off topic enough already... and before some Lib mods me down for being OT, Why is the parent not modded down as well?)
Dude! Put down the bong for awhile and throw your Xfiles DVD away!
Stop toppling democratically elected governments.
Um like what? Iraq? Kuwait?
Stop preaching about democracy when your own government is controlled by corporate lobbyists.
Which ones? Delta? United Airlines? Oh, I know, Haliburton right. Of course! They do something with oil so they must be evil. Or is it the jews? I can never remember.
Stop torturing people.
Putting panties on head is torture? A naked pyramid is torture? (I've known people who have paid for more) Where are the American rape rooms? How many hands of "dissidents" has GWB cut off.
Stop imprisonment without trial.
Yeah, I see they've arrested you as well. The American prisons are overflowing with Democrats who have been arrested and will be so indefinitely. That's how Bush wins elections; he imprisons the opposition. I'm sorry, but I have to agree with the whole "not giving lawyers to terrorists captured on the battlefield" thing.
Clean up your pollution.
Shouldn't you be directing this criticism elsewhere? The US is not world's largest polluter. The US is producing more and polluting less than it was 30 years ago. Why are you not protesting China, Russia or India? Why are you not protesting to stop the next volcano?
I respect free speech and gave you your chance to voice yours, so now you must respect mine. I assume you are not in the "States" or I'd say your "free speech" has gotten very close to the line of "treason". Then again, I've seen people say much worse in front of the white house. I guess the best thing about free speech is that it gives people like you enough room to hang yourself.
It's funny how when America overthrows a government that was cutting the hands off of its policial opposition and mailing video tapes of a woman getting raped to her children, America is somehow the bad guy. It's funny how when the UN is proven to be corrupt at the highest levels, America is accused of being ruled by it's coorporate lobbiests.
I saw a great protest sign yesterday. It said: Freedom Scorecard: Bush 20000000+ freed Anti-war protestors 0
Slashdot Mirror
It's also a violation of the fundamental rights we all have as citizens, you know that whole stupid "unreasonable search and seizure" thing?
If you are talking to an Al Qaeda contact, I'd call that reasonable.
you don't deserve any of the freedoms that our constitution grants us. plain and simple
No, I think it could be said the other way around. If you are not willing to potentially give up a little privacy when calling Al Qaeda contacts overseas, then you do not deserve any of the freedoms that our Constitution (capitalized) grants us, and you will probably lose them. Plain and simple. Trust me, these guys we are fighting against care nothing about our Constitution and the freedoms it grants us. Privacy is not mentioned as one of those rights, by the way. Unreasonable search and seizure is... but when you are talking with suspected Al Qaeda contacts, I'd call that reasonable.
They applauded because Bush's proposals to "fix" social security were terrible and no one wanted them except the investement firms and big business who would get to play with all the money.
That's funny, I am neither an investment banker nor a big business, but I want to be able to own and have some control of MY money. If you die at 64, how much of your Social Security retirement plan do you kids get. Just under 0%.
The other applause I hear are from the people in Galveston TX, who somehow managed to opt out of the SSI program and created their own. Their retirees are much better off than the rest of the nation's.
It's funny that to see all these pro-choice Democrats oppose so many of Bush's voluntary programs, like vouchers or the voluntary partial removal of Social Security from George Bush's hands.
Now, back on topic!
I think that performing medical experiments on humans who are not capable of volunteering is wrong. You could even call it torture. What's the difference between experimenting on a fetus and a man in a coma or an invalid?
However, a little genetic modification is OK as long as no one gets hurt.
Speaking of genetic modification, how can you guys support this but want GM crops banned?
I don't know if this particular school is state owned or not, but in the case of public libraries or state sponsored schools, why should the Gov't have to get a warrant to search what they already own? (provided the state is OK with it).
Also, I am sure that if a death threat was sent to this librarian from one of these machines, she would have no problem with the FBI seaching these machines... probably would have done it herself.
tiananmen - Google Image Search in China.
(source: Littlegreenfootballs)You see, that's the attitude of /.'ers. If you are conservative, you are a close minded brown shirt and must be downmodded and shouted down. If you are liberal, you are "insightful" and modded up.
These professors are liberal and some people want them to at least present a conservative view at least for the purpose of discussion and open thought. Well, any discussion contrary to the liberal view shall be viewed as counter revolutionary and will be shouted down and called fascists. That form of speech will not be tolerated.
A prime example is when someone like Ann Coulter is shouted down, called vile names and not allowed to speak because she is seen as being hateful and close minded.
Reminds of the old saying: Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach
What does that tell you? (Hint: teachers make crappy salaries)
It's not so much the bacteria I worry about on a toilet seat. It's the shit-splatters, urine and ass sweat that keeps me from playing the away game!
That's ridiculous... a stack that high would fall over!
If by in the field you mean living is suburbia and driving to work every day here in the states, then yeah, I guess she was in the field.
You are correct in that there is no comparrison between these two. One "leak" exposed an on going covert operation and threatened national security and the other made a operative in the field famous. That cover of Vanity fair did more to "out" Plame than anything Scooter did. Did you know what she looked like before then?
Funny, I didn't see the ACLU or MoveOn.org complaining when the previous administration did a warrantless physical search of American citizens. (I know, MoveOn didn't exist yet) At least Bush didn't clutter up the living rooms of these terrorist in his errosion US citizens civil liberties...
Didn't Plame's 5 year old kid just out her in a Houston airport? Should he go to jail with Scooter? If her covertness were so important, would she be meeting reporters, doing photo shoots and signing book deals?
You are correct, there is no comparrison between these two cases.
I've heard of people using dot matrix printers to do Jingle Bells, but this takes the cake!
BTW... Now we are going to have a bunch of teens "Air-Scanning"
There are two reasons for the "Clinton did it" approach:
The first is called precedent. It says that Bush is not the first to do it and if it was legal for Clinton (and Carter and Reagan) than it's legal for Bush.
The second and more commonly used reason is partisanship. It proves hypocrisy. It shows that people like you are being hypocritical when you scream and yell "Hitler" every time Bush does something, but you remained completely silent when someone from your own party did the same thing. A prime example would be the war in Iraq. There were, and still are protests, world wide. Unfortunately, I didn't see near the amount or protests when Clinton went to war against Bosnia (also without UN approval). Was Bosnia a threat to US security? What did Milosovich do that Hussein did not? Why are Senators screaming to bring our troops home from Iraq but silent about our troops that are still in Bosnia (weren't they supposed to be home by Christmas... of '98?)? It's pure partisan hypocrisy. You don't like Bush, so you hate everything he does. Face it, if Bush were a democrat, you'd blindly accept everything he does... Just like the 90's.
Back OnTopic:
Brittain has to monitor everyone equally. If they only monitored the criminals, or those that are "most likely" to commit a crime, then everyone would be screaming PROFILING!!! So, like here in the US, the little old ladies must get strip searched just as often as the Muslem man, 18-25, wearing a padded vest.
Why is it when the US restricts liberties, it's called fascist, but when it allows rights to that "apply equally to everyone" based in the Constitution, it's called fascist?
I guess that's why fascism has done so well in Europe and not in the US. The US allows its citizens to arm themselves against tyranny.
Then you better be ready to line up a few more former Presidents in front of that firing squad!
"The Department of Justice believes, and the case law supports, that the president has inherent authority to conduct warrantless physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes." President Clinton's deputy attorney general, Jamie Gorelick
Also Jimmy Carter Signed Executive Order on May 23, 1979: "Attorney General is authorized to approve electronic surveillance to acquire foreign intelligence information without a court order."
And Bill Clinton Signed Executive Order that allowed Attorney General to do searches without court approval
Finally:
WASH POST, July 15, 1994: Extend not only to searches of the homes of U.S. citizens but also -- in the delicate words of a Justice Department official -- to "places where you wouldn't find or would be unlikely to find information involving a U.S. citizen... would allow the government to use classified electronic surveillance techniques, such as infrared sensors to observe people inside their homes, without a court order."
Deputy Attorney General Jamie S. Gorelick, the Clinton administration believes the president "has inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches for foreign intelligence purposes."
Secret searches and wiretaps of Aldrich Ames's office and home in June and October 1993, both without a federal warrant
Didn't the brownshirts shout down and harrass anyone that had an opinion different than their own? Isn't that what happens to any conservative speaker who visits a college campus these days? Maybe you should ask Ann Coulter. I'm sure you don't agree with what she says, but doesn't she have a right to say it?
If GWB was half as bad as you make yourself believe he is, you'd already be dead. Michael Moore would be thin, living in a work camp and Babs Streisand would be in line for the "Showers" at Bush's Death Camps in West Texas.
In other words, your hyperbole of comparing Bush to Hitler makes you look like an idiot. So until we have forced labor camps and we're filling gas chambers daily, I suggest you rethink your position and keep your mouth shut.
BTW, Osama Bin Laden killed more Americans in a couple of hours than we've lost in Iraq in three years. Osama's victims were not volunteers who died for a cause they believe in. No one got to vote because of the people Bin Laden killed. Again, more hyperbole.
So I call BullShit. If you really, truely and honestly feel that GWB is as dangerous as Hitler and worse than Bin Laden, why are you sitting on your ass behind a keyboard? If you were in 1938 Germany, wouldn't it be your duty to pick up a rifle and fight the Nazis? So, go ahead, join what's left of the Taliban if that is what your truly belive.
I can see it now:
You're running down the hall, flak cannon in hand. There are only two of you left. You hear the ca-chink-ca-chink of a rocket launcher loading up, you turn to the right where you opponent is standing ready to fire, but you've got the jump on him... you fire, but instead of seeing his giblets scattered all over the wall behind him, you see you chat window pop up because the button for "chat" is too close to your secondary fire button.
You lose.
The reasoning behind the article was photograhic evidence of burned civilians. I'm not saying civilians were not caught in the crossfire, because I really don't know, and neither do you. I am saying that civilians were not targeted by American soldiers. I'm also saying that the enemies we are fighting in Iraq make a habbit of intentionally targeting civilians, mainly because they are less armed than the military.
So, who do you think burned the civilians found after all action in Falluja? The US Military, who goes out of their way to avoid targeting civilians, or the terrorists (sorry, you probably call them "Freedom Fighters") who intentionally target markets, schools and mosques?
Is it possible to oppose the war and NOT want Saddam Hussein back in power?
I'd say Steve is the worst Jobs.
If you took the time to research the facts and accepted truths that are different than your opinion, you'd know that the Fed has actually received MORE money because of the tax cuts. It's called the Laffer curve, google it.
The problem with the deficit is that the feds are spending too much. There is way too much blame to go around on both sides for me to touch that one. (I'm off topic enough already... and before some Lib mods me down for being OT, Why is the parent not modded down as well?)
Zero!
You mean that teams finished this year? Amazing!
I though IRobot was made by US Robotics?
Dude! Put down the bong for awhile and throw your Xfiles DVD away!
Um like what? Iraq? Kuwait?
Which ones? Delta? United Airlines? Oh, I know, Haliburton right. Of course! They do something with oil so they must be evil. Or is it the jews? I can never remember.
Putting panties on head is torture? A naked pyramid is torture? (I've known people who have paid for more) Where are the American rape rooms? How many hands of "dissidents" has GWB cut off.
Yeah, I see they've arrested you as well. The American prisons are overflowing with Democrats who have been arrested and will be so indefinitely. That's how Bush wins elections; he imprisons the opposition. I'm sorry, but I have to agree with the whole "not giving lawyers to terrorists captured on the battlefield" thing.
Shouldn't you be directing this criticism elsewhere? The US is not world's largest polluter. The US is producing more and polluting less than it was 30 years ago. Why are you not protesting China, Russia or India? Why are you not protesting to stop the next volcano?
I respect free speech and gave you your chance to voice yours, so now you must respect mine. I assume you are not in the "States" or I'd say your "free speech" has gotten very close to the line of "treason". Then again, I've seen people say much worse in front of the white house. I guess the best thing about free speech is that it gives people like you enough room to hang yourself.
It's funny how when America overthrows a government that was cutting the hands off of its policial opposition and mailing video tapes of a woman getting raped to her children, America is somehow the bad guy. It's funny how when the UN is proven to be corrupt at the highest levels, America is accused of being ruled by it's coorporate lobbiests.
I saw a great protest sign yesterday. It said:
Freedom Scorecard:
Bush 20000000+ freed
Anti-war protestors 0
If I heard that announcement right.
And if you tree huggers would let GWB drill for it, maybe we wouldn't be paying $3.25 a fuckin gallon!
Oh wait, it may inconvienence the cariboo sex habbits.