Even then there are some that just don't have a way to re-enable. Like autocompleting URL bars that autocomplete entire URLs, and not just domains or partial URLs. Even more annoyingly, Firefox refuses to autocomplete ports - so if you visit http://localhost8080/ Firefox oh-so-helpfully autocompletes just "http://localhost".
But I go to direct deep URLs on a lot of things.
FF plugin "Calomel SSL Validation" has a checkbox on its Optimizations tab* to toggle the behavior you described. The prefs dialog must be accessed via the Tools menu; the toolbar button's sole functions are: 1) Changing color to indicate a weighted, aggregate measure of the security quality of an encrypted connection, and 2) when clicked, displaying score-points and the details from which they were derived (cert match,cyphers, key lengths, hash algo).
TLS 1.1 & 1.2 were added a couple versions back, but remain off by default. This plugin adds control of some of this functionality. See WP's TLS article and it's cited notes/bug reports regarding FF's implementation details/issues: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transport_Layer_Security
* This plugin's secondary functions are numerous and disparate. I'm tired, so see first link if you want to know anything else about it.
* For example, schoolchildren having to cover their ears several times per hour due to the large number of painfully loud low-flying aircraft that pass endlessly pass overhead.
Citation? Where do Japanese schoolchildren have to cover their ears several times each hour?
Where is this schoolhouse that can't be relocated from the end of some flightpath? This schoolhouse has been subject to some loud jet noise for over 50 years and they haven't moved it? Or is this an attempt to drum up some anti-military sentiment? (Wikipedia only lists 39 overseas Air Force locations not counting the ones closing in Afghanistan.)
"There are approximately 90 U.S. military facilities including major military bases throughout mainland Japan and Okinawa, with an area total of 3,130,000 sq.meters, 75% of which are in Okinawa. They are concentrated in a few areas (prefectures), 37 in Okinawa, 15 in Kanagawa, 11 in Nagasaki, and 7 in Tokyo. About 52,000 U.S. troops are stationed in these bases, 26,000 in mainland and 25,000 in Okinawa (2001)."
[Source] (Note: The US Air Force isn't the sole operator of US military aircraft.)
I'm not an expert on Japanese affairs or US imperialism; (I found the citations you asked for during the composition of this reply — I don't know (for example) why Japan doesn't move around their buildings to satisfy the whims of a foreign occupying force). If you're interested in these subjects, Chalmers Johnson wrote extensively about US/Asian relations and US imperialism in the Pacific, prior to his death in 2010. For current information on areas of interest, I suggest consulting news sources from those locales — US media is pretty sparse and somewhat biased in reporting foreign issues that could cast the US in a less-than-stellar light.
Shouldn't they be pleased? That's exactly what the Japanese ended up doing to a lot of folk. So in a weird sense of justice, it is only fair that they had to endure that. The atomic bombs were too much, even for a nation full of unrepentant war criminals.
I'm no apologist for war criminals, and certainly Imperial Japan's atrocities were among the most inhumane and sickening during WWII, but I'm fairly confidant that the vast majority of people currently affected by nearby US occupying forces had nothing to do with those crimes. In fact, the "doctors" that operated Unit 731 walked free in exchange for their medical data they collected — arbitrary segments of Japan's younger generations instead pay a penance, with no end in sight.
* For example, schoolchildren having to cover their ears several times per hour due to the large number of painfully loud low-flying aircraft that pass endlessly pass overhead. This is just one example of one of the problems inflicted upon the people surrounding one of hundreds of US military bases across the globe, built with no regard for the needs or suffering of those they affect — built only to service the interests of the most expansive (and expensive) empire in human history.
What makes you think you are special enough to deserve their attention?
What makes you so damn selfish that you only care if the government abuses you? Is it not a problem if they abuse anyone? There are people who are 'special enough' for the government to harass.
You're trivializing the issue, and I strongly suspect it's because you don't truly understand the situation.
If sI4shd0rk's post deserves to moderated -1 Troll, so does my reply — I completely agree with what sI4shd0rk wrote here.
If you want to post something on./ that warrants HTTPS, you are probably already doing it wrong.
That's funny, but if you're encrypting only what you think needs to be encrypted, rather than encrypting that which can be encrypted — I think it's you who's doing it wrong. You announce: "Attention: I am now transferring sensitive data!"
It's much like shredding only those documents that contain sensitive information, and throwing away the rest intact: You're answering your adversary's question, "which of these documents should we concentrate on reassembling/examining?"
When your government regards YOU as their biggest enemy,
Yes...
and YOU should thus consider them in reverse,
Uh huh...
https is a false sense of security.
No, it's partially broken, vulnerable-to-attack security, whereas HTTP is completely vulnerable, bare-naked plaintext — nothing to break, no certs to MITM, no bribing CAs for keys — zero security.
As bad as HTTPS may be, comparing it to HTTP in terms of security is idiotic.
Sometimes Americans sound really arrogant. I think you meant to say, that your government is killing humans overseas without a trial. If they are Americans or not shouldn't matter to the point...
It may be arrogance, but it could also be an argument that favors basis upon the laws under which we live over one based on the variability of human morality, international treaties (which are often ignored by the US government, likely with the support of nationalistic citizens), or whatever shit-worldview blind partisanship may produce.
Personally, I am in vehement opposition to the execution of any human being, no matter their nationality, no matter the charge(s) — however, since this view isn't widely shared across the United States, I will often base my own arguments (particularly with other Americans,) on law — our common ground and (hopefully) shared value — rather than insisting that my opinion is right (or more righteous).
Your analogy sucks. Because whatever else we're told, at least we're no longer told we're fucking torturing people (ourselves) anymore.
(FTFY.)
The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence (of USA continuing to torture people, in this case).
Further, torture and torturous conditions (and other human rights violations) run rampant in US jails and prisons: Solitary confinement exceeding a few days (going on for decades for some individuals — systematically so in "supermax" prisons), inadequate medical care (including lack of drug rehabilitation to those who need it, and lack of drugs for those who need them (e.g., pain management)), minimal/non-existent legal recourse for (often violent) crimes committed against inmates by guards/other inmates, minimal/non-existent opportunities for education/rehabilitation (e.g., opportunities for learning and earning advanced degrees, minimal/out-dated libraries (sometimes replaced by television — a cheap means of placating inmates, rather than being used to enhance/supplement education)), prohibition of conjugal visits at many facilities (even among couples that are civilly-united/domestically-partnered/married/whatever-you-wanna-call-it) — which probably serves to increase prisons' incidences of rape, which in turn likely fosters an environment of violent lawlessness...
I could go on, but suffice it to say the US suffers higher recidivism, thanks in part to the model criminals churned out by these inhumane hell-holes. It wouldn't surprise me in the least to learn that US prisons create a large fraction of crime in the US, what with the aforementioned conditions, combined with the difficulty people have securing legal employment even without a criminal record in this capitalist utopia of ours. (Unless of course, those crimes are non-violently committed against the nation as a whole — for these one receives only a slight reduction in bonuses and "street-cred" (Wall Street-cred, specifically).
Perhaps Dubya was trying to let Merkel know at that G8 dinner party in 2006 — one way or another — maybe not that night, and maybe not by him, but someday, she was going to get "tapped" by a US President.
What we need is other sides. That could go in different directions. Serious libertarians (Libertarians, Pirate Party) who champion civil liberties (if they at the same time renounced the government gift of corporate existence and the legal fiction of intellectual "property", I'd be on board). On the other hand, Greens and the like. And there's probably a third (or more) hand.
If what you mean by "need[ing] other sides" is that we need left and right anti-authoritarian parties (unseating Democrat/Republican rule), I agree. These parties already exist — now, if only people would quit wasting their votes on right-authoritarianism and more (slightly more extreme) right-authoritarianism...
Maybe if violations (such as the NSA) were criminalized. But then we'd need prosecutors with the spine to prosecute, and juries that weren't too brainwashed to convict.
The NSA's actions are already prohibited by the US Constitution.
I agree with your statement about prosecutors and juries, but it'll be a long wait until there are no defenseless/under-defended poor left to exploit via selective enforcement, nor private prisons with room for additional slave labor.
"One of the biggest reasons the libertarian and Green Parties get glossed over is that about 80% of their platforms are functionally identical or compatible to existing platforms of other parties."
Just no.
Yet, you continue...
First, the Greens are primarily a one-issue party.
Resident inspectors have a real fun life, they aren't allowed to stay in any one town for more than 2 years before moving on to the next inspection post.
Is this practice meant to discourage regulatory capture, replacing it with some sort of regulatory "catch & release?"
[W]e were told if there was a fire to first order a pizza, then tell the firemen to follow the delivery to the fire. A lumber yard caught on fire one night, and we watched as the sirens and flashing lights on the fire trucks zig zagged around the neighborhood - 45 minutes later, the fire was out and they still hadn't found it.
From the details you provided, it sounds like you neglected to order a pizza before calling the fire department — is that what happened?
I was watching a Werner Herzog documentary about trappers in the Siberian taiga and, long story short, one trapper was complaining about trappers who will trap before some kind of critter's coat was really ready, on the basis that a few coins in his pocket now is better than someone else getting full price for the pelt later if they trap it instead of him.
It's universal, and it's the reason why I'm a liberal and not an anarchist; without adequate restrictions on commerce it rapidly becomes first and foremost an instrument of tyranny.
I'm with you.
Conceivably, a local game warden could enable the community to maximize their overall pelt yield — though, in this particular environment, I imagine that the pervasive threat of regulatory capture could make the position cost-prohibitive to fill.
How about using it against someone besides some poor schmuck found with a roach in the ashtray? Beats the hell out of giving the bastard free room and board...
Yes, because making it profitable to arrest someone is such a good idea. What could possibly go wrong?
The possibilities are endless... They could make it illegal to carry "too much" cash. They could assume that someone they busted for selling dime-bags came by all of their possessions illegally — (guilty until proven innocent — that's our system, isn't it?). If things got really our of control, we might even live to see the day they build private prisons in this country.
Your life and freedom are at the whims of soulless government agents most of which are stupider, less educated, low paid, and resentful of anyone with the means to travel.
Democrats want to expand this experience to the whole country.
Republicans want the same thing but give you a pass if you are white and not obviously poor.
Who can I vote for who will support an addendum to the 4th amendment: Government agents are required to obtain a warrant in order to get ANY information not readily available to the public.
If you lean left, vote Green. If you lean right, vote Libertarian. Those parties (at least purport to) support the Bill of Rights; no addendum is necessary, we simply need elected officials who're willing to follow what's written there in plain English. (For those who support the ever-expanding authoritarian police state, keep on voting D/R — and since you're fucking us all over by doing so, you may as well go fuck yourselves while you're at it.)
Actually, it could apply. Color is about the capacity you are working under. A Valet isn't allowed to search anything, he's just a private citizen. If he has been granted a legal right to perform the search (presumed since he's been ordered to do it by a 'competent' authority), then he is searching under the color of law. If he is NOT under color of law then his searches are criminal acts in the first place.
With no warrants issued nor probable cause, these searches are already criminal acts.
Please have a look at the Wikipedia article "Terrorism in the United States: Attacks by type" , and you'll see that (just in the US,) nearly every sort of group/ideology you can imagine has (or has had) violent, extremist elements. I believe the only reason Islamic violence is played up in western media is because Muslim extremism is the government's boogeyman du jour, and using those events in its fear-mongering propaganda helps garner support for the MIC and the government's drive towards (ever-greater) authoritarianism.
Please also see the links in a comment I wrote earlier for evidence that shows why profiling is not only less effective, but also substantially less secure than random screening.
I added you to my Slashdot friend list due to your compassionate and insightful posts on poverty, political corruption, war, wealth disparity, and you technical knowledge. Please read the links I provided; I am not prepared to write you off as a mere bigot based on one post.
When your luggage is searched by the TSA they leave notes on it also. It's a courtesy so you don't freak out and think someone illegally ruffled through your belongings.
Unless that note is a search warrant, someone has illegally rifled through your belongings.
The full text of the Fourth Amendment reads:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Note the lack of exemptions that would legally permit the TSA to do this. Some might like to point to the ambiguity of the word "unreasonable" — if so, what's reasonable about assuming probable cause to rifle through every single passenger's papers and effects? We're meant to accept that we're all criminal suspects? I don't accept that, and it's one more reason why this post-9/11 hysteria has me deciding never to set foot in an airport again.
Pretending that anyone from an 80-year old grandmother to a four year old presents an equal probability of trouble...
A grandmother would be an excellent candidate for recruiting to carry a proxy bomb. TSA drone SuperKendall would likely wave her right through.
Takes a lot of acting chops to claim that's a good idea with a straight face.
I'm confident that that grandmother will come up with whatever "acting chops" are necessary to get that package through in order to spare the life of her kidnapped grandchild.
Note: Despite this post, I am not a supporter of TSA's draconian "security" practices, which I consider to be in violation of our rights under the Fourth Amendment. I stopped flying seven years ago, and won't fly again until airport security practices resemble those practiced here prior to 2001-09-11; (yes, I'm prepared to never fly again). Liberty > safety.
Slashdot Mirror
Even then there are some that just don't have a way to re-enable. Like autocompleting URL bars that autocomplete entire URLs, and not just domains or partial URLs. Even more annoyingly, Firefox refuses to autocomplete ports - so if you visit http://localhost8080/ Firefox oh-so-helpfully autocompletes just "http://localhost".
But I go to direct deep URLs on a lot of things.
FF plugin "Calomel SSL Validation" has a checkbox on its Optimizations tab* to toggle the behavior you described. The prefs dialog must be accessed via the Tools menu; the toolbar button's sole functions are: 1) Changing color to indicate a weighted, aggregate measure of the security quality of an encrypted connection, and 2) when clicked, displaying score-points and the details from which they were derived (cert match,cyphers, key lengths, hash algo).
TLS 1.1 & 1.2 were added a couple versions back, but remain off by default. This plugin adds control of some of this functionality. See WP's TLS article and it's cited notes/bug reports regarding FF's implementation details/issues: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transport_Layer_Security
* This plugin's secondary functions are numerous and disparate. I'm tired, so see first link if you want to know anything else about it.
You're welcome.
* For example, schoolchildren having to cover their ears several times per hour due to the large number of painfully loud low-flying aircraft that pass endlessly pass overhead.
Citation? Where do Japanese schoolchildren have to cover their ears several times each hour?
http://www.japan-press.co.jp/modules/news/index.php?id=3128
http://www.stripes.com/news/pacific/okinawa/okinawa-residents-testify-in-class-action-lawsuit-over-noise-from-military-flights-1.158246
Where is this schoolhouse that can't be relocated from the end of some flightpath? This schoolhouse has been subject to some loud jet noise for over 50 years and they haven't moved it? Or is this an attempt to drum up some anti-military sentiment? (Wikipedia only lists 39 overseas Air Force locations not counting the ones closing in Afghanistan.)
[Source] (Note: The US Air Force isn't the sole operator of US military aircraft.)
I'm not an expert on Japanese affairs or US imperialism; (I found the citations you asked for during the composition of this reply — I don't know (for example) why Japan doesn't move around their buildings to satisfy the whims of a foreign occupying force). If you're interested in these subjects, Chalmers Johnson wrote extensively about US/Asian relations and US imperialism in the Pacific, prior to his death in 2010. For current information on areas of interest, I suggest consulting news sources from those locales — US media is pretty sparse and somewhat biased in reporting foreign issues that could cast the US in a less-than-stellar light.
Shouldn't they be pleased? That's exactly what the Japanese ended up doing to a lot of folk. So in a weird sense of justice, it is only fair that they had to endure that. The atomic bombs were too much, even for a nation full of unrepentant war criminals.
I'm no apologist for war criminals, and certainly Imperial Japan's atrocities were among the most inhumane and sickening during WWII, but I'm fairly confidant that the vast majority of people currently affected by nearby US occupying forces had nothing to do with those crimes. In fact, the "doctors" that operated Unit 731 walked free in exchange for their medical data they collected — arbitrary segments of Japan's younger generations instead pay a penance, with no end in sight.
* For example, schoolchildren having to cover their ears several times per hour due to the large number of painfully loud low-flying aircraft that pass endlessly pass overhead. This is just one example of one of the problems inflicted upon the people surrounding one of hundreds of US military bases across the globe, built with no regard for the needs or suffering of those they affect — built only to service the interests of the most expansive (and expensive) empire in human history.
It could also be that they are still a bit hung up about when the US tested their new nukes by dropping two on them.
Nor are they too pleased about being occupied (complete with raping and pillaging) for nearly seven decades following that obscenity.
What makes you think you are special enough to deserve their attention?
What makes you so damn selfish that you only care if the government abuses you? Is it not a problem if they abuse anyone? There are people who are 'special enough' for the government to harass.
You're trivializing the issue, and I strongly suspect it's because you don't truly understand the situation.
If sI4shd0rk's post deserves to moderated -1 Troll, so does my reply — I completely agree with what sI4shd0rk wrote here.
If you want to post something on ./ that warrants HTTPS, you are probably already doing it wrong.
That's funny, but if you're encrypting only what you think needs to be encrypted, rather than encrypting that which can be encrypted — I think it's you who's doing it wrong. You announce: "Attention: I am now transferring sensitive data!"
It's much like shredding only those documents that contain sensitive information, and throwing away the rest intact: You're answering your adversary's question, "which of these documents should we concentrate on reassembling/examining?"
When your government regards YOU as their biggest enemy,
Yes...
and YOU should thus consider them in reverse,
Uh huh...
https is a false sense of security.
No, it's partially broken, vulnerable-to-attack security, whereas HTTP is completely vulnerable, bare-naked plaintext — nothing to break, no certs to MITM, no bribing CAs for keys — zero security.
As bad as HTTPS may be, comparing it to HTTP in terms of security is idiotic.
Sometimes Americans sound really arrogant. I think you meant to say, that your government is killing humans overseas without a trial.
If they are Americans or not shouldn't matter to the point...
It may be arrogance, but it could also be an argument that favors basis upon the laws under which we live over one based on the variability of human morality, international treaties (which are often ignored by the US government, likely with the support of nationalistic citizens), or whatever shit-worldview blind partisanship may produce.
Personally, I am in vehement opposition to the execution of any human being, no matter their nationality, no matter the charge(s) — however, since this view isn't widely shared across the United States, I will often base my own arguments (particularly with other Americans,) on law — our common ground and (hopefully) shared value — rather than insisting that my opinion is right (or more righteous).
Your analogy sucks. Because whatever else we're told, at least we're no longer told we're fucking torturing people (ourselves) anymore.
(FTFY.)
The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence (of USA continuing to torture people, in this case).
Further, torture and torturous conditions (and other human rights violations) run rampant in US jails and prisons: Solitary confinement exceeding a few days (going on for decades for some individuals — systematically so in "supermax" prisons), inadequate medical care (including lack of drug rehabilitation to those who need it, and lack of drugs for those who need them (e.g., pain management)), minimal/non-existent legal recourse for (often violent) crimes committed against inmates by guards/other inmates, minimal/non-existent opportunities for education/rehabilitation (e.g., opportunities for learning and earning advanced degrees, minimal/out-dated libraries (sometimes replaced by television — a cheap means of placating inmates, rather than being used to enhance/supplement education)), prohibition of conjugal visits at many facilities (even among couples that are civilly-united/domestically-partnered/married/whatever-you-wanna-call-it) — which probably serves to increase prisons' incidences of rape, which in turn likely fosters an environment of violent lawlessness...
I could go on, but suffice it to say the US suffers higher recidivism, thanks in part to the model criminals churned out by these inhumane hell-holes. It wouldn't surprise me in the least to learn that US prisons create a large fraction of crime in the US, what with the aforementioned conditions, combined with the difficulty people have securing legal employment even without a criminal record in this capitalist utopia of ours. (Unless of course, those crimes are non-violently committed against the nation as a whole — for these one receives only a slight reduction in bonuses and "street-cred" (Wall Street-cred, specifically).
Perhaps Dubya was trying to let Merkel know at that G8 dinner party in 2006 — one way or another — maybe not that night, and maybe not by him, but someday, she was going to get "tapped" by a US President.
What we need is other sides. That could go in different directions. Serious libertarians (Libertarians, Pirate Party) who champion civil liberties (if they at the same time renounced the government gift of corporate existence and the legal fiction of intellectual "property", I'd be on board). On the other hand, Greens and the like. And there's probably a third (or more) hand.
The Green Party is left libertarian; the Libertarian party is right-libertarian. The Democratic and Republican parties are right-authoritarian (no Wikipedia article on this political ideology, but you should already be familiar, as we're being subjected to it). These qualities are illustrated by this chart indicating the positions of 2012 US presidential candidates.
If what you mean by "need[ing] other sides" is that we need left and right anti-authoritarian parties (unseating Democrat/Republican rule), I agree. These parties already exist — now, if only people would quit wasting their votes on right-authoritarianism and more (slightly more extreme) right-authoritarianism...
Maybe if violations (such as the NSA) were criminalized. But then we'd need prosecutors with the spine to prosecute, and juries that weren't too brainwashed to convict.
The NSA's actions are already prohibited by the US Constitution.
I agree with your statement about prosecutors and juries, but it'll be a long wait until there are no defenseless/under-defended poor left to exploit via selective enforcement, nor private prisons with room for additional slave labor.
Spying on friends is a good way to know how to push them diplomatically or to know how to reach a bargain with them. Happens ALL the time.
Murdering competitors is a "good" way to push competitors out of your way. It happens all the time.
Given your moral compass, you might as well have dispensed with the "ofSoul" appended to your nick. (I'm saying you seem to think like a mafioso.)
"One of the biggest reasons the libertarian and Green Parties get glossed over is that about 80% of their platforms are functionally identical or compatible to existing platforms of other parties."
Just no.
Yet, you continue...
First, the Greens are primarily a one-issue party.
You mean "grassroots democracy", or something you derived from the party's name? There's a bit more, similar to how the Tea Party is not primarily a single-beverage party.
"Green Party" is the merely the name of USA's left-libertarian party.
Resident inspectors have a real fun life, they aren't allowed to stay in any one town for more than 2 years before moving on to the next inspection post.
Is this practice meant to discourage regulatory capture, replacing it with some sort of regulatory "catch & release?"
[W]e were told if there was a fire to first order a pizza, then tell the firemen to follow the delivery to the fire. A lumber yard caught on fire one night, and we watched as the sirens and flashing lights on the fire trucks zig zagged around the neighborhood - 45 minutes later, the fire was out and they still hadn't found it.
From the details you provided, it sounds like you neglected to order a pizza before calling the fire department — is that what happened?
Now we know that they can't even handle a bunch of simple systems that have a tank, a hose and a pump.
Do you mean to say that nuclear engineers are incapable of procreation?
I'm surprised cold fjord isn't all over this, given the anti-NSA sentiment expressed.
Or is he not working because of the government shutdown?
After learning of this situation, he's probably curled up at the foot of James Clapper's bed, whimpering between gulps of Victory Gin.
I was watching a Werner Herzog documentary about trappers in the Siberian taiga and, long story short, one trapper was complaining about trappers who will trap before some kind of critter's coat was really ready, on the basis that a few coins in his pocket now is better than someone else getting full price for the pelt later if they trap it instead of him.
Indeed, tragedy of the meta-trap.
It's universal, and it's the reason why I'm a liberal and not an anarchist; without adequate restrictions on commerce it rapidly becomes first and foremost an instrument of tyranny.
I'm with you.
Conceivably, a local game warden could enable the community to maximize their overall pelt yield — though, in this particular environment, I imagine that the pervasive threat of regulatory capture could make the position cost-prohibitive to fill.
Yes, because making it profitable to arrest someone is such a good idea. What could possibly go wrong?
The possibilities are endless... They could make it illegal to carry "too much" cash. They could assume that someone they busted for selling dime-bags came by all of their possessions illegally — (guilty until proven innocent — that's our system, isn't it?). If things got really our of control, we might even live to see the day they build private prisons in this country.
If it ever got to that point, though, we'd be well and truly fucked. Could you imagine the headlines? "US industrial prison system exceeds peak of Soviet gulag system!"
Heh, yeah, right... I'd better off my aluminum foil hat now... I don't want to give myself nightmares.
Your life and freedom are at the whims of soulless government agents most of which are stupider, less educated, low paid, and resentful of anyone with the means to travel.
Democrats want to expand this experience to the whole country.
Republicans want the same thing but give you a pass if you are white and not obviously poor.
Who can I vote for who will support an addendum to the 4th amendment: Government agents are required to obtain a warrant in order to get ANY information not readily available to the public.
If you lean left, vote Green. If you lean right, vote Libertarian. Those parties (at least purport to) support the Bill of Rights; no addendum is necessary, we simply need elected officials who're willing to follow what's written there in plain English. (For those who support the ever-expanding authoritarian police state, keep on voting D/R — and since you're fucking us all over by doing so, you may as well go fuck yourselves while you're at it.)
Actually, it could apply. Color is about the capacity you are working under. A Valet isn't allowed to search anything, he's just a private citizen. If he has been granted a legal right to perform the search (presumed since he's been ordered to do it by a 'competent' authority), then he is searching under the color of law. If he is NOT under color of law then his searches are criminal acts in the first place.
With no warrants issued nor probable cause, these searches are already criminal acts.
Please have a look at the Wikipedia article "Terrorism in the United States: Attacks by type" , and you'll see that (just in the US,) nearly every sort of group/ideology you can imagine has (or has had) violent, extremist elements. I believe the only reason Islamic violence is played up in western media is because Muslim extremism is the government's boogeyman du jour, and using those events in its fear-mongering propaganda helps garner support for the MIC and the government's drive towards (ever-greater) authoritarianism.
Please also see the links in a comment I wrote earlier for evidence that shows why profiling is not only less effective, but also substantially less secure than random screening.
I added you to my Slashdot friend list due to your compassionate and insightful posts on poverty, political corruption, war, wealth disparity, and you technical knowledge. Please read the links I provided; I am not prepared to write you off as a mere bigot based on one post.
When your luggage is searched by the TSA they leave notes on it also. It's a courtesy so you don't freak out and think someone illegally ruffled through your belongings.
Unless that note is a search warrant, someone has illegally rifled through your belongings.
The full text of the Fourth Amendment reads:
Note the lack of exemptions that would legally permit the TSA to do this. Some might like to point to the ambiguity of the word "unreasonable" — if so, what's reasonable about assuming probable cause to rifle through every single passenger's papers and effects? We're meant to accept that we're all criminal suspects? I don't accept that, and it's one more reason why this post-9/11 hysteria has me deciding never to set foot in an airport again.
Pretending that anyone from an 80-year old grandmother to a four year old presents an equal probability of trouble...
A grandmother would be an excellent candidate for recruiting to carry a proxy bomb. TSA drone SuperKendall would likely wave her right through.
Takes a lot of acting chops to claim that's a good idea with a straight face.
I'm confident that that grandmother will come up with whatever "acting chops" are necessary to get that package through in order to spare the life of her kidnapped grandchild.
Note: Despite this post, I am not a supporter of TSA's draconian "security" practices, which I consider to be in violation of our rights under the Fourth Amendment. I stopped flying seven years ago, and won't fly again until airport security practices resemble those practiced here prior to 2001-09-11; (yes, I'm prepared to never fly again). Liberty > safety.