Much like many studies, hearings, investigations, and other such things in the US these days, I suspect the result was a forgone conclusion prior to any "deliberation" on the matter.
That is all fine and good that YOU believe that there is no justifaction for others art or expression, or sharing of their sexlife. I whole*fucking*heartedly disagree.
YOU don't get a say over what consenting adults do and wish to share with other consenting adults WHO CHOOSE to view or participate in it.
I don't care whether it is art, for fun, to explore the darker side of their eroticism, or simply because they get off on it.
Any law to restrict production or possession of amateur porn, art films, extreme porn, whatever you want to call it infringes upon my rights; and actually it infringes upon your rights as well. If you don't see how then think of it this way:
You have a person or group of people deciding what behaviors or images are "not normal" or "too extreme."
How, at what level, and by whom this is decided is likely to change over time - therefore, even though at present a censorship law like this may not affect anything you believe in or participate in, (or may even find personally objectionable), it very well could in the future....
What really freaks me out is what will happen if the RIAA gets it's way? The implications for music, file sharing, and privacy are very, very bad - but that's not even the half of it..
It's what would follow this precedent being set in regard to other industries and government intrusion into the home that makes it even scarier...What other industries and government agencies would like to be able to control what you do and use these sorts of tactics and intimidation to do so?
Look at how corrupt our system in the US is. I am not saying that every court or gov. official is corrupt - but it is apparent that when there is a particular precedence that the 'powers that be' would like to have set, they usually find a way to do it. If they lose or get stopped on one front, they proceed on another.
This is why I think even people who think this doesn't affect them because they never downloaded anything, or people who claim to agree with the RIAA (which, for the record, treats artists like shit - they are friends of the big business record labels, NOT the artists) should be concerned - because if they get their way with any of this stuff it is only the beginning.
Yeah...hotline was my first exposure to free music crack as well. That brings back memories. I never hear people around here mention Hotline. I had used the binary NGs prior to that, but in those days they seemed unreliable. Now though, I think nothing beats newsgroups and legal live music torrent sites like dimeadozen.
Hotline was awesome, because anybody could set up a server, and you'd usually find servers with like minded individuals who liked the same type of music. The first week I found one of the main hotline servers I used to participate in (the homie servers) I found several albums that I had been looking for for a couple of years which were out of print. The other thing about Hotline is that it flew below the radar, because you needed more technical knowledge to use it and get into it than you did for something like napster, and you had to find servers to join.
A lot of times it is convenience or lack of access to what I want via traditional retail channels that drives what I download. I'll be looking for indie albums from the 80s which I have on vinyl or used to have but lost and canot find anywhere, but just like with the hotline servers I can find all of this stuff on the binary groups, only there is about 10,000 times more stuff.
I do still buy CDs, but nowehere near as many as I used to. For example, I got a pre-release of the new QOTSA album from the NGs a few weeks before it came out, but I still bought the CD because the band is awesome and their CDs usually come with other stuff and I do feel strongly about supporting artists who make great albums - and they usually give you something extra, a DVD or a download or something. I definitely prefer to purchase stuff on indie labels who aren't RIAA members... I have a CD collection that numbers in thhe thousands. A couple of years ago I moved all of my regular package CDs and their cover inserts into those large CD binders - and it's actually easier for me to just download something I already own than to try to dig it out of one of 20 huge binders.
There have already been great points made about this -
But I will say this - the more we allow authorities to destroy our quality of life over fears of terrorism, the less our country is worthy of such 'protection.' If all of our freedoms are gone, what do we have left that is worth protecting; what remains that makes America so great? Don't get me wrong, I love my country, that is why everytime the government says that they are doing something that goes against our very principles to protect us I am suspicious and disgusted.
It is a fact of life that you could die or be killed at any time. It is just a fact, it doesn't matter how much money you have, who you are, or where you live. 20 year olds can have heart attacks, a meteor impact could hit the planet and start the cycle of life all over again from the beginning. Someone could go nuts and kill you - such is the price of living in freedom.
Besides, this government is way too corrupt and self preserving to truly protect this country and it's people, even if that is what they are truly trying to do on some level.
It's worth it. I would rather live in freedom then take up space in a police state.
I think we would all like to solve the root causes of violence, (economic disparity being a main one) and live in a world where there is no crime or fear of being accosted by criminals. Personally, I feel that banning things is not a solution - maybe banning television, but good luck with that.
SO because YOU'RE afraid, you want to water down the rest of society and force us all to give up our rights? Just because you're scared of someone or of a certain type of person doesn't mean that fear is justified. In a free society (which neither the US or UK are going to be called for much longer, but that's a different post) we don't restrict the rights of all over the fears of one.
If the people or situations which make the trains you ride a scary or difficult situation are actually DOING something illegal or threatening, then take action, report it - whatever. But if they are just: too big, too dirty, too stoned, too black, too white, too punk, too metal, too whatever - then maybe the problem is in your head.
Now maybe that is an unfair assumption, maybe you;re worried because there have been incidents on the trains, and you don't want to be a statistic - but the fact is that there are no guarantees in life. We can all get killed or hurt any number of ways every day. Personally I find violence in real life abhorrent and would only turn to it to protect myself or my loved ones - however, I love violent video games - because a lot of them are fun, and because they aren't real. There is no correlation I am aware of that suggests that violent games make a normal person more violent; or even make a violent person more violent for that matter. Personally I think netowrk television is much worse, but I would never say it should be banned (and if I ever did it would be because it is insulting to intelligence and is poorly written dribble that is doing the job it was intended to do: addicting and dumbing down society - but even then it shouldn't be banned.
SO my point is - when you act preemptively based on fear most of the time you're going to do more harm than whatever it is you;re afraid of could ever do, if it were to happen in the first place - and, as I said before - for the few short years of free society we have left, we hopefully don't restrict the rights of all over the fears of one.
So basically they are using the VT shootings as an excuse to further erode our privacy.
This is their modus operandi. Take advantage of a crisis that inspires fear to try to get legislation passed that removes the rights and/or privacy of Americans.
Consider the 14 points of fascism, by political scientist Dr. Laurence W. Britt - who compared the regimes of Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, Suharto, and Pinochet and identified 14 characteristics common to those fascist regimes.
Guess how many apply to modern day America...ONLY ABOUT 14 of them...
1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism
From the prominent displays of flags and bunting to the ubiquitous lapel pins, the fervor to show patriotic nationalism, both on the part of the regime itself and of citizens caught up in its frenzy, was always obvious. Catchy slogans, pride in the military, and demands for unity were common themes in expressing this nationalism. It was usually coupled with a suspicion of things foreign that often bordered on xenophobia.
2. Disdain for the importance of human rights
The regimes themselves viewed human rights as of little value and a hindrance to realizing the objectives of the ruling elite. Through clever use of propaganda, the population was brought to accept these human rights abuses by marginalizing, even demonizing, those being targeted. When abuse was egregious, the tactic was to use secrecy, denial, and disinformation.
3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause
The most significant common thread among these regimes was the use of scapegoating as a means to divert the people's attention from other problems, to shift blame for failures, and to channel frustration in controlled directions. The methods of choice--relentless propaganda and disinformation--were usually effective. Often the regimes would incite "spontaneous" acts against the target scapegoats, usually communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, traditional national enemies, members of other religions, secularists, homosexuals, and "terrorists." Active opponents of these regimes were inevitably labeled as terrorists and dealt with accordingly.
4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism
Ruling elites always identified closely with the military and the industrial infrastructure that supported it. A disproportionate share of national resources was allocated to the military, even when domestic needs were acute. The military was seen as an expression of nationalism, and was used whenever possible to assert national goals, intimidate other nations, and increase the power and prestige of the ruling elite.
5. Rampant sexism
Beyond the simple fact that the political elite and the national culture were male-dominated, these regimes inevitably viewed women as second-class citizens. They were adamantly anti-abortion and also homophobic. These attitudes were usually codified in Draconian laws that enjoyed strong support by the orthodox religion of the country, thus lending the regime cover for its abuses.
6. A controlled mass media
Under some of the regimes, the mass media were under strict direct control and could be relied upon never to stray from the party line. Other regimes exercised more subtle power to ensure media orthodoxy. Methods included the control of licensing and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats. The leaders of the mass media were often politically compatible with the power elite. The result was usually success in keeping the general public unaware of the regimes' excesses.
7. Obsession with national security
Inevitably, a national security apparatus was under direct control of the ruling elite. It was usually an instrument of oppression, operating in secret and beyond any constraints. Its actions were justified under the rubric of protecting "national security," and questioning its activities was portrayed as unpatriotic or even treasonous.
8. Religion and ruling elite tied together
Unlike communist regimes, the fascist and protofascist regimes were never proclaimed as godless by their opponents. In fact, most of the regimes attached themselves to the predominant religi
I don't know you're talking about. I didn't cite anybody - the link in my post (if that is what you are referring to) is an IMAGE of an actual pamphlet that was provided to city police by the FBI JTTF.
It's your choice whether you want to take something seriously. To me, the sorts of things that have been happening in America with respect to our rights are extremely serious.
If you want to live in denial, that's your choice, but unless you have something specific and of substance to say, other than referring to (what exactly were you referring to)? as a "crackpot," your post adds nothing to the conversation - no clarification, no information.....kind of a waste.
I guess this would fall under "attempting to police the police" (which IS needed in a lot of cases) and is one of the actions listed in the FBI JTTF pamphlet as being the action of a "potential domestic terrorist."
This is bullshit. It's clear that this is an abuse of power to stop people from being able to document further abuses of power. It's meant to also have a chilling effect and prevent others from doing the same.
Remember, one of the stated definitions of "terrorist" by the current administration is people who:
are Defenders of the Constitution reference the constitution and the bill of rights are property rights advocates are loners
this is from an FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force pamphlet which you can see here:
If a cop is doing his or her job, he or she should be proud to be videotaped.
Now if someone was following a cop all day with a videocam for no good reason, I can see where that could maybe be an issue - but it should be fine to videotape a traffic stop on a public street, especially if you are the one being stopped.
You are right - it is possible that anything happened; but with that scene in the first episode of season6pt2, and the fact that they had it in a flashback at the end of the the previous episode to this one; coupled with the symbolism and David Chase's comments make me feel that he took one to the head.
It's amazing to me how many people really just didn't get it.
The ending left a lot open to speculation, but one thing that it didn't leave open (IMO) is Tony's fate.
Tony is dead - if you watch episode #78 "Soprano Home Movies," while Tony and Bobby are on the lake they are talking about what happens to people like them, and specifically about what it's like to get killed. Tony says something along the lines of "you don't hear the one that gets you," and Bobby asks "what do you tin happens when you die," to which Tony replies "nothing, everything just goes black."
Then, in last week's episode, "#85 The Blue Comet," Tony flashes back to this scene while he is lying in bed "everything just goes black."
Even David Chase said in an interview that the key to how it ends is in that first episode (Soprano Home Movies), and to make sure people would remember this he put Tony flashing back to that moment at the end of "#85 The Blue Comet."
On top of all of that there was so much death symbolism in the episode...I definitely had to watch it twice, but he definitely got clipped - and I think the finale was awesome.
In addition to the death symbolism and foreshadowing, the show made a lot of points about America - hence the title.
Every day that this continues (and I am not just talking about the warrantless wiretapping, I am not just talking about the Bush admin, because even if the presidency changes it's not like we're going to have some altruistic person there who is going to just give us our rights back - it's just going to be another de facto dictator (assuming we even get that far, because when you look at things like NSPD51 it's pretty clear that Bush and those behind him expect another catalyzing event and martial law).
Every day that this continues further cements the former United States of America as a banana republic which is descending further into fascism.
Every day that the congress does nothing allows this; and I consider things like this attempt to pass this legislation pretty lame, these congresspeople should be outraged, they should be sounding serious alarm bells - if the mainstream media ignores them (which is, unfortunately quite likely because it's apparent that they have abdicated/are compromised and would rather talk about Paris Hilton than things like NSPD51) they should be out in front of the capital yelling about how the executive branch has declared itself supreme ruler of all and checks and balances are dead.
Every day that people sit back and think another election is going to change anything just allows this to continue - even if the elections weren't complete shams at the presidential level - the choices you have, the restrictions (both financial and otherwise) on getting on the ballot - it's ridiculous.
Every day we pretend that this is the America that has the "Bill of Rights" and believes in the Constitution (and all of the other stuff we teach children in school) and is still "free" we prevent anything real being done about it.
People will say "how is America not free, when is the last time the govt stopped you from doing something you wanted to do" - and I'll say that it's already happened, I am living in fear of what's coming, as are a lot of people. I have seen someone I love go into the psych ward for months in a depressive psychosis brought on by the constant news about this kind of stuff, worrying that her political views have her on a subversives list subject to a black bag job at any moment, but aside from that I would also say that it's not right now that I am worried about - it's in the short term future when the gloves come off and the illusion of democracy isn't needed anymore, because that's when you're going to have jackbooted thugs in the street.
Before my current gig as an IT director I used to build computers and servers - especially audio video production workstations and media servers.
As far as RAID is concerned for a home media server dealing with video recording and other such you are going to want speed.
You want SATA (Sata2 300 if poss.) drives of at least 7200 rpm in an array that will provide increased performance; I personally have built several media servers for myself (I used to end up selling them to people after using them for 6 months so I could build a new one, but I have quit that after my last one).
If money is an issue and redundency isn't a key concern, then go with a RAID 0 array; this will give you about twice the speed of a single drive, but if there is a drive failure you will lose all of the data on the array. 2 drives in a RAID 0 array will give you the total capacity of both drives added together.
If you can afford it, what I really recommend is a RAID 10 (1+0) or 0+1 array (go for the 10 if your controller supports it, it's the better option IMHO). Both RAID 10 (which is really 1+0) or RAID 0+1 require at least 4 drives and will pretty much give you the speed of a RAID 0 array with the redundency of a mirrored (RAID 1) array. In either of these configurations you'll end up with half of the total capacity of all drives but the performance will be spectacular as will the redundency.
The difference between RAID 10 and RAID 0+1? RAID 01 is a mirrored configuration of two striped sets; RAID 10 is a stripe across a number of mirrored sets. Both of these can sustain multiple simoultaneous drive failures without losing data; however, the 1+0 (RAID 10) is slightly better in this area.
In fascist America, these jokes are getting kinda old......
(although, every one in a while if the "ISR" joke is good enough I actually hear it in a Russian accent in my head...then I still laugh....)
I think that this was a severe overreaction by people who should've known better. According to TFA he didn't mention a specific threat against a person of place, so there is no reason that he should have even been singled out, let alone reported to the thought police.
A lot of writing is disturbing; some classic literature is disturbing, journalistic writing (think about accounts of the holocaust and life in Nazi Germany) is disturbing at times. Ifr anythink it shows that the kid's writing style is effective.
Being 18 and living in a country that is in transition from a semi-corrupt republic to a full-fleged surviellance/police state - with all of the inherent disconnects between what America is presented as in our history books and in the complicit/controlled/corrupted mainstream media, and what the day to day reality is can be difficult.
A creative writing class should be a safe place for a student (especialy a straight A student) to express whatever emotions or thoughts they have in writing, whether it's fiction, non-fiction, journaling, whatever - as long as it's not outright threats of violence against specific people or places.
The charge - disorderly conduct? Do I even have to address this? If he had actually threatened anybody they would have charged him with a real charge like "making terroristic threats." What bullshit.
The truth is that the "authorities" want every single person to be tracable every single time they use any form of electronic communication.
An analogy:
Let's say you live in a nice neighborhood and leave your gate to your property and some doors open. A stranger drags a child onto your property and does evil things.
The courts blame you - saying though you didn't actually commit the crime, your failure to secure your property enabled the commission of the crime...
This seems like an apt comparison. I think it's easy for courts to set bad precedents because of the fact that most of the people involved in these rulings barely understand the technology (if they understand it at all) and definitely don't understand the way it is actually used in the real world. If someone piggybacking a wi-fi connection can cause the owner of the router/ap to be charged with child porn - then certainly any other sort of computer offense (hacking a bank or govt website)could be blamed on them as well.
This is wrong - it's like a presumption of possible guilt placed on you because some unknown person who probably doesn't exist may do something bad - it trumps your right to run your network as you see fit, and could even get you in trouble. WTF?!?!?
Is this how we're going to run everything? Let the actions of very, very, very few - a comparitively infinitesimal number of people doing shitty things cause us to be under suspicion and rubber stamp probable cause? I guess that is the new paradigm in the US - especially every time someone does something "evil." You don't have a free and safe society by trying to ban everything and by putting the responsibility for criminal acts on the law abiding.
I manage both my home network and a corporate LAN - both have wired and wireless access points, and I always secure them and instruct family and friends to do the same for their home wireless setups - but, if I or somebody else wants to run an open AP - for whatever reason - whether it is technical, {which is a whole other argument, because even with security there are going to be moments, during setups and upgrades where your security isn't on if you're testing things) or you simply want to allow your friend next door access for a day without having to go over and set up security on their laptop.
I'm just tired to my bones of the incremental ushering in of the control grid; and this is more of the same - they don't want anybody being able to do or say anything without tracability.
Slashdot Mirror
It's okay - I don't blame you. You're just another one of the masses of sheeple - and I see posting as an anonymous coward too.
Whoever moderated this post as "troll" obviously has a political agenda. THe postrer makes valid points, America is now a defacto dictatorship.
That is FUCKING BULLSHIT.
Much like many studies, hearings, investigations, and other such things in the US these days, I suspect the result was a forgone conclusion prior to any "deliberation" on the matter.
That is all fine and good that YOU believe that there is no justifaction for others art or expression, or sharing of their sexlife. I whole*fucking*heartedly disagree.
YOU don't get a say over what consenting adults do and wish to share with other consenting adults WHO CHOOSE to view or participate in it.
I don't care whether it is art, for fun, to explore the darker side of their eroticism, or simply because they get off on it.
Any law to restrict production or possession of amateur porn, art films, extreme porn, whatever you want to call it infringes upon my rights; and actually it infringes upon your rights as well. If you don't see how then think of it this way:
You have a person or group of people deciding what behaviors or images are "not normal" or "too extreme."
How, at what level, and by whom this is decided is likely to change over time - therefore, even though at present a censorship law like this may not affect anything you believe in or participate in, (or may even find personally objectionable), it very well could in the future....
What really freaks me out is what will happen if the RIAA gets it's way? The implications for music, file sharing, and privacy are very, very bad - but that's not even the half of it..
It's what would follow this precedent being set in regard to other industries and government intrusion into the home that makes it even scarier...What other industries and government agencies would like to be able to control what you do and use these sorts of tactics and intimidation to do so?
Look at how corrupt our system in the US is. I am not saying that every court or gov. official is corrupt - but it is apparent that when there is a particular precedence that the 'powers that be' would like to have set, they usually find a way to do it. If they lose or get stopped on one front, they proceed on another.
This is why I think even people who think this doesn't affect them because they never downloaded anything, or people who claim to agree with the RIAA (which, for the record, treats artists like shit - they are friends of the big business record labels, NOT the artists) should be concerned - because if they get their way with any of this stuff it is only the beginning.
Yeah...hotline was my first exposure to free music crack as well. That brings back memories. I never hear people around here mention Hotline. I had used the binary NGs prior to that, but in those days they seemed unreliable. Now though, I think nothing beats newsgroups and legal live music torrent sites like dimeadozen.
Hotline was awesome, because anybody could set up a server, and you'd usually find servers with like minded individuals who liked the same type of music. The first week I found one of the main hotline servers I used to participate in (the homie servers) I found several albums that I had been looking for for a couple of years which were out of print. The other thing about Hotline is that it flew below the radar, because you needed more technical knowledge to use it and get into it than you did for something like napster, and you had to find servers to join.
A lot of times it is convenience or lack of access to what I want via traditional retail channels that drives what I download. I'll be looking for indie albums from the 80s which I have on vinyl or used to have but lost and canot find anywhere, but just like with the hotline servers I can find all of this stuff on the binary groups, only there is about 10,000 times more stuff.
I do still buy CDs, but nowehere near as many as I used to. For example, I got a pre-release of the new QOTSA album from the NGs a few weeks before it came out, but I still bought the CD because the band is awesome and their CDs usually come with other stuff and I do feel strongly about supporting artists who make great albums - and they usually give you something extra, a DVD or a download or something. I definitely prefer to purchase stuff on indie labels who aren't RIAA members... I have a CD collection that numbers in thhe thousands. A couple of years ago I moved all of my regular package CDs and their cover inserts into those large CD binders - and it's actually easier for me to just download something I already own than to try to dig it out of one of 20 huge binders.
yar indeed.
There have already been great points made about this -
But I will say this - the more we allow authorities to destroy our quality of life over fears of terrorism, the less our country is worthy of such 'protection.' If all of our freedoms are gone, what do we have left that is worth protecting; what remains that makes America so great? Don't get me wrong, I love my country, that is why everytime the government says that they are doing something that goes against our very principles to protect us I am suspicious and disgusted.
It is a fact of life that you could die or be killed at any time. It is just a fact, it doesn't matter how much money you have, who you are, or where you live. 20 year olds can have heart attacks, a meteor impact could hit the planet and start the cycle of life all over again from the beginning. Someone could go nuts and kill you - such is the price of living in freedom.
Besides, this government is way too corrupt and self preserving to truly protect this country and it's people, even if that is what they are truly trying to do on some level.
It's worth it. I would rather live in freedom then take up space in a police state.
great points..
I think we would all like to solve the root causes of violence, (economic disparity being a main one) and live in a world where there is no crime or fear of being accosted by criminals. Personally, I feel that banning things is not a solution - maybe banning television, but good luck with that.
midnighttoadstool spouted:
>
SO because YOU'RE afraid, you want to water down the rest of society and force us all to give up our rights? Just because you're scared of someone or of a certain type of person doesn't mean that fear is justified. In a free society (which neither the US or UK are going to be called for much longer, but that's a different post) we don't restrict the rights of all over the fears of one.
If the people or situations which make the trains you ride a scary or difficult situation are actually DOING something illegal or threatening, then take action, report it - whatever. But if they are just: too big, too dirty, too stoned, too black, too white, too punk, too metal, too whatever - then maybe the problem is in your head.
Now maybe that is an unfair assumption, maybe you;re worried because there have been incidents on the trains, and you don't want to be a statistic - but the fact is that there are no guarantees in life. We can all get killed or hurt any number of ways every day. Personally I find violence in real life abhorrent and would only turn to it to protect myself or my loved ones - however, I love violent video games - because a lot of them are fun, and because they aren't real. There is no correlation I am aware of that suggests that violent games make a normal person more violent; or even make a violent person more violent for that matter. Personally I think netowrk television is much worse, but I would never say it should be banned (and if I ever did it would be because it is insulting to intelligence and is poorly written dribble that is doing the job it was intended to do: addicting and dumbing down society - but even then it shouldn't be banned.
SO my point is - when you act preemptively based on fear most of the time you're going to do more harm than whatever it is you;re afraid of could ever do, if it were to happen in the first place - and, as I said before - for the few short years of free society we have left, we hopefully don't restrict the rights of all over the fears of one.
So basically they are using the VT shootings as an excuse to further erode our privacy.
This is their modus operandi. Take advantage of a crisis that inspires fear to try to get legislation passed that removes the rights and/or privacy of Americans.
Thanks SerialK1llr;
Consider the 14 points of fascism, by political scientist Dr. Laurence W. Britt - who compared the regimes of Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, Suharto, and Pinochet and identified 14 characteristics common to those fascist regimes.
Guess how many apply to modern day America...ONLY ABOUT 14 of them...
1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism
From the prominent displays of flags and bunting to the ubiquitous lapel pins, the fervor to show patriotic nationalism, both on the part of the regime itself and of citizens caught up in its frenzy, was always obvious. Catchy slogans, pride in the military, and demands for unity were common themes in expressing this nationalism. It was usually coupled with a suspicion of things foreign that often bordered on xenophobia.
2. Disdain for the importance of human rights
The regimes themselves viewed human rights as of little value and a hindrance to realizing the objectives of the ruling elite. Through clever use of propaganda, the population was brought to accept these human rights abuses by marginalizing, even demonizing, those being targeted. When abuse was egregious, the tactic was to use secrecy, denial, and disinformation.
3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause
The most significant common thread among these regimes was the use of scapegoating as a means to divert the people's attention from other problems, to shift blame for failures, and to channel frustration in controlled directions. The methods of choice--relentless propaganda and disinformation--were usually effective. Often the regimes would incite "spontaneous" acts against the target scapegoats, usually communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, traditional national enemies, members of other religions, secularists, homosexuals, and "terrorists." Active opponents of these regimes were inevitably labeled as terrorists and dealt with accordingly.
4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism
Ruling elites always identified closely with the military and the industrial infrastructure that supported it. A disproportionate share of national resources was allocated to the military, even when domestic needs were acute. The military was seen as an expression of nationalism, and was used whenever possible to assert national goals, intimidate other nations, and increase the power and prestige of the ruling elite.
5. Rampant sexism
Beyond the simple fact that the political elite and the national culture were male-dominated, these regimes inevitably viewed women as second-class citizens. They were adamantly anti-abortion and also homophobic. These attitudes were usually codified in Draconian laws that enjoyed strong support by the orthodox religion of the country, thus lending the regime cover for its abuses.
6. A controlled mass media
Under some of the regimes, the mass media were under strict direct control and could be relied upon never to stray from the party line. Other regimes exercised more subtle power to ensure media orthodoxy. Methods included the control of licensing and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats. The leaders of the mass media were often politically compatible with the power elite. The result was usually success in keeping the general public unaware of the regimes' excesses.
7. Obsession with national security
Inevitably, a national security apparatus was under direct control of the ruling elite. It was usually an instrument of oppression, operating in secret and beyond any constraints. Its actions were justified under the rubric of protecting "national security," and questioning its activities was portrayed as unpatriotic or even treasonous.
8. Religion and ruling elite tied together
Unlike communist regimes, the fascist and protofascist regimes were never proclaimed as godless by their opponents. In fact, most of the regimes attached themselves to the predominant religi
I don't know you're talking about. I didn't cite anybody - the link in my post (if that is what you are referring to) is an IMAGE of an actual pamphlet that was provided to city police by the FBI JTTF.
It's your choice whether you want to take something seriously. To me, the sorts of things that have been happening in America with respect to our rights are extremely serious.
If you want to live in denial, that's your choice, but unless you have something specific and of substance to say, other than referring to (what exactly were you referring to)? as a "crackpot," your post adds nothing to the conversation - no clarification, no information.....kind of a waste.
I guess this would fall under "attempting to police the police" (which IS needed in a lot of cases) and is one of the actions listed in the FBI JTTF pamphlet as being the action of a "potential domestic terrorist."
This is bullshit. It's clear that this is an abuse of power to stop people from being able to document further abuses of power. It's meant to also have a chilling effect and prevent others from doing the same.
Remember, one of the stated definitions of "terrorist" by the current administration is people who:
are Defenders of the Constitution
reference the constitution and the bill of rights
are property rights advocates
are loners
this is from an FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force pamphlet which you can see here:
http://www.welfarestate.com/pamphlet/
If a cop is doing his or her job, he or she should be proud to be videotaped.
Now if someone was following a cop all day with a videocam for no good reason, I can see where that could maybe be an issue - but it should be fine to videotape a traffic stop on a public street, especially if you are the one being stopped.
The fascism keeps creeping.
I guess that's the beauty of it
You are right - it is possible that anything happened; but with that scene in the first episode of season6pt2, and the fact that they had it in a flashback at the end of the the previous episode to this one; coupled with the symbolism and David Chase's comments make me feel that he took one to the head.
It's amazing to me how many people really just didn't get it.
The ending left a lot open to speculation, but one thing that it didn't leave open (IMO) is Tony's fate.
Tony is dead - if you watch episode #78 "Soprano Home Movies," while Tony and Bobby are on the lake they are talking about what happens to people like them, and specifically about what it's like to get killed. Tony says something along the lines of "you don't hear the one that gets you," and Bobby asks "what do you tin happens when you die," to which Tony replies "nothing, everything just goes black."
Then, in last week's episode, "#85 The Blue Comet," Tony flashes back to this scene while he is lying in bed "everything just goes black."
Even David Chase said in an interview that the key to how it ends is in that first episode (Soprano Home Movies), and to make sure people would remember this he put Tony flashing back to that moment at the end of "#85 The Blue Comet."
On top of all of that there was so much death symbolism in the episode...I definitely had to watch it twice, but he definitely got clipped - and I think the finale was awesome.
In addition to the death symbolism and foreshadowing, the show made a lot of points about America - hence the title.
Years?
I think that we're looking at months....
Every day that this continues (and I am not just talking about the warrantless wiretapping, I am not just talking about the Bush admin, because even if the presidency changes it's not like we're going to have some altruistic person there who is going to just give us our rights back - it's just going to be another de facto dictator (assuming we even get that far, because when you look at things like NSPD51 it's pretty clear that Bush and those behind him expect another catalyzing event and martial law).
Every day that this continues further cements the former United States of America as a banana republic which is descending further into fascism.
Every day that the congress does nothing allows this; and I consider things like this attempt to pass this legislation pretty lame, these congresspeople should be outraged, they should be sounding serious alarm bells - if the mainstream media ignores them (which is, unfortunately quite likely because it's apparent that they have abdicated/are compromised and would rather talk about Paris Hilton than things like NSPD51) they should be out in front of the capital yelling about how the executive branch has declared itself supreme ruler of all and checks and balances are dead.
Every day that people sit back and think another election is going to change anything just allows this to continue - even if the elections weren't complete shams at the presidential level - the choices you have, the restrictions (both financial and otherwise) on getting on the ballot - it's ridiculous.
Every day we pretend that this is the America that has the "Bill of Rights" and believes in the Constitution (and all of the other stuff we teach children in school) and is still "free" we prevent anything real being done about it.
People will say "how is America not free, when is the last time the govt stopped you from doing something you wanted to do" - and I'll say that it's already happened, I am living in fear of what's coming, as are a lot of people. I have seen someone I love go into the psych ward for months in a depressive psychosis brought on by the constant news about this kind of stuff, worrying that her political views have her on a subversives list subject to a black bag job at any moment, but aside from that I would also say that it's not right now that I am worried about - it's in the short term future when the gloves come off and the illusion of democracy isn't needed anymore, because that's when you're going to have jackbooted thugs in the street.
Before my current gig as an IT director I used to build computers and servers - especially audio video production workstations and media servers.
As far as RAID is concerned for a home media server dealing with video recording and other such you are going to want speed.
You want SATA (Sata2 300 if poss.) drives of at least 7200 rpm in an array that will provide increased performance; I personally have built several media servers for myself (I used to end up selling them to people after using them for 6 months so I could build a new one, but I have quit that after my last one).
If money is an issue and redundency isn't a key concern, then go with a RAID 0 array; this will give you about twice the speed of a single drive, but if there is a drive failure you will lose all of the data on the array. 2 drives in a RAID 0 array will give you the total capacity of both drives added together.
If you can afford it, what I really recommend is a RAID 10 (1+0) or 0+1 array (go for the 10 if your controller supports it, it's the better option IMHO). Both RAID 10 (which is really 1+0) or RAID 0+1 require at least 4 drives and will pretty much give you the speed of a RAID 0 array with the redundency of a mirrored (RAID 1) array. In either of these configurations you'll end up with half of the total capacity of all drives but the performance will be spectacular as will the redundency.
The difference between RAID 10 and RAID 0+1? RAID 01 is a mirrored configuration of two striped sets; RAID 10 is a stripe across a number of mirrored sets. Both of these can sustain multiple simoultaneous drive failures without losing data; however, the 1+0 (RAID 10) is slightly better in this area.
Hope you find this information helpful.
...Shit usng windows mobile the bombers are more likely to blow themselves up or have the bomb go off a day late.
A treo with palm is what all the trendy geek terrorists are using these days....
In fascist America, these jokes are getting kinda old...... (although, every one in a while if the "ISR" joke is good enough I actually hear it in a Russian accent in my head...then I still laugh....)
"Administration Official?" Hardly...
Shit, with a resume like that it's more like "President;" add in the whiskey, cocaine, and DUI and he's a shoe in.
>>But, more importantly, a number of countries look to the US for a model of what it means to be free.
Tell them that the current state of affairs reflects more on th...
tell them that, in general we're still....uh.
aw fuck.
Seriously...
I think that this was a severe overreaction by people who should've known better. According to TFA he didn't mention a specific threat against a person of place, so there is no reason that he should have even been singled out, let alone reported to the thought police.
A lot of writing is disturbing; some classic literature is disturbing, journalistic writing (think about accounts of the holocaust and life in Nazi Germany) is disturbing at times. Ifr anythink it shows that the kid's writing style is effective.
Being 18 and living in a country that is in transition from a semi-corrupt republic to a full-fleged surviellance/police state - with all of the inherent disconnects between what America is presented as in our history books and in the complicit/controlled/corrupted mainstream media, and what the day to day reality is can be difficult.
A creative writing class should be a safe place for a student (especialy a straight A student) to express whatever emotions or thoughts they have in writing, whether it's fiction, non-fiction, journaling, whatever - as long as it's not outright threats of violence against specific people or places.
The charge - disorderly conduct? Do I even have to address this? If he had actually threatened anybody they would have charged him with a real charge like "making terroristic threats." What bullshit.
This is such bullshit.
The truth is that the "authorities" want every single person to be tracable every single time they use any form of electronic communication.
An analogy:
Let's say you live in a nice neighborhood and leave your gate to your property and some doors open. A stranger drags a child onto your property and does evil things.
The courts blame you - saying though you didn't actually commit the crime, your failure to secure your property enabled the commission of the crime...
This seems like an apt comparison. I think it's easy for courts to set bad precedents because of the fact that most of the people involved in these rulings barely understand the technology (if they understand it at all) and definitely don't understand the way it is actually used in the real world. If someone piggybacking a wi-fi connection can cause the owner of the router/ap to be charged with child porn - then certainly any other sort of computer offense (hacking a bank or govt website)could be blamed on them as well.
This is wrong - it's like a presumption of possible guilt placed on you because some unknown person who probably doesn't exist may do something bad - it trumps your right to run your network as you see fit, and could even get you in trouble. WTF?!?!?
Is this how we're going to run everything? Let the actions of very, very, very few - a comparitively infinitesimal number of people doing shitty things cause us to be under suspicion and rubber stamp probable cause? I guess that is the new paradigm in the US - especially every time someone does something "evil." You don't have a free and safe society by trying to ban everything and by putting the responsibility for criminal acts on the law abiding.
I manage both my home network and a corporate LAN - both have wired and wireless access points, and I always secure them and instruct family and friends to do the same for their home wireless setups - but, if I or somebody else wants to run an open AP - for whatever reason - whether it is technical, {which is a whole other argument, because even with security there are going to be moments, during setups and upgrades where your security isn't on if you're testing things) or you simply want to allow your friend next door access for a day without having to go over and set up security on their laptop.
I'm just tired to my bones of the incremental ushering in of the control grid; and this is more of the same - they don't want anybody being able to do or say anything without tracability.