Ashcroft's 'rules' are how dictatorships start - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Simple_Min · 06-06-2003, 04:51 AM

Switching gears to domestic issues and so we return to the idiotic moves of the justice department. The first paragraph speaks for itself.

-snip-

Quote:

The First Amendment violations now taking place are more subtle than in decades past and have not been widely reported in the press. Indeed, one of the dangers of the present anti-speech campaign is that most Americans are unaware of it. But all Americans are harmed by the government’s infringements of First Amendment rights, and all are hurt by an atmosphere that squelches dissent and chills debate.

Quote:

ACLU.org
Early in December 2001, Attorney General John Ashcroft issued a stern warning to anyone who questioned the government’s moves to expand its power in the fight against terrorism. “To those who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty,” he told a Senate committee, “my message is this: Your tactics only aid terrorists, for they erode our national unity and diminish our resolve.” On a similar note, White House spokesman Ari Fleischer cautioned that Americans should “watch what they say.”

These statements are a warning, although not the kind of warning that Ashcroft and Fleischer intended to send. Instead, they remind us how easily our precious First Amendment rights can be lost.

As we do every year during Banned Books Week, the ACLU calls on Americans to be active and vocal in the defense of the First Amendment, which guarantees free expression and a free press. This year, as we commemorate the first anniversary of the September 11 attacks, we face unprecedented government restrictions on free speech. The message of Banned Books Week — to cherish and defend the First Amendment — has never been more timely or crucial.

For since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the government has not merely issued vague warnings against subversive speech. In October, in the wake of the attacks, Congress passed a law that allows the government to monitor confidential attorney-client conversations and conduct secret military tribunals for accused terrorists, and which gives the government unprecedented power to tap phones, read private email, and investigate individuals’ medical and financial records.

This measure, the USA Patriot Act, was virtually smuggled into law, approved in a hasty and secretive manner that was at odds with the spirit of free, open discussion that is a part of the normal legislative process. It includes a host of alarming and unconstitutional anti-speech provisions. Perhaps the most disturbing of these is what Village Voice columnist Nat Hentoff has called “the most far-reaching gag order in the First Amendment’s history.”

This part of the Act overrides existing state and federal privacy laws, allowing the FBI to investigate which books have been bought or borrowed by anyone it suspects of being a terrorist — an extremely broad and vague determination. Further, it prevents librarians and booksellers from revealing that such a search has taken place, and it bars the press from reporting on such searches.

Under the Patriot Act, the FBI has the authority to get an order from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, a secret body, to seek “any tangible things (including books, records, papers, documents, and other items),” a list that presumably includes email records, as long as it can claim that these items are part of an anti-terrorism investigation.

The law states, moreover, “No person shall disclose to any other person . . . that the Federal Bureau of Investigation has sought or obtained” these records.

Thus the press and the public have no way of knowing when, where, or how often such searches have been conducted, or what books and readers are being investigated. Normally, when a court imposes a gag rule on pretrial or trial participants, including the press, it may be fought and, in many cases, overturned. The Patriot Act makes such challenges impossible.

What is more, when challenges are brought to these provisions of the Patriot Act, as they almost surely will be, those cases too will likely be held in secret, closed to the press and the public.

As Hentoff writes, “this chilling incursion on the First Amendment right to read remains as hidden as some of the security operations of the People’s Republic of China.”

But the Attorney General was not satisfied with the new powers granted by the Patriot Act. In May, Ashcroft decided to rewrite longstanding restrictions on domestic spying by law enforcement. Under the new guidelines, the FBI can freely infiltrate mosques, churches, synagogues, and other houses of worship, listen in on online chat rooms, and read message boards, even if it has no evidence that a crime might be committed.

As Andy Rooney has said, Ashcroft’s new guidelines have put the “fear of God” into reporters, creating a repressive climate where “you’re a bad American if you ask a question.” Rooney, a CBS News correspondent, noted that Ashcroft’s rules are “how dictatorships get started.”

It is not surprising that the government has used the September 11 attacks as an excuse to restrict Americans’ freedom and expand its power. Throughout history, in times of war, our nation’s government has done just that.

In 1861, for example, during the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln arrested 13,000 draft resisters and Southern sympathizers, in defiance of a Supreme Court ruling. Several newspapers were shut down for expressing pro-South views, and editors were among those jailed for supporting the South.

During World War I, Woodrow Wilson’s Espionage and Sedition Act allowed the government to censor the foreign language press and bar it from publishing anti-war sentiments. The foreign-language press, which served the nation’s massive community of European immigrants, was an important voice for dissent, including support of socialism and anarchism. Among the 2,000 people prosecuted under the Act was Charles Schenck, who served ten years in prison for writing and distributing a pamphlet claiming that the military draft was illegal. The Supreme Court upheld his conviction.

Later, during the anti-Communist hysteria of the Cold War, Americans were jailed simply for studying the works of Marx and Lenin. These convictions too were upheld by the Supreme Court.

The First Amendment violations now taking place are more subtle than in decades past and have not been widely reported in the press. Indeed, one of the dangers of the present anti-speech campaign is that most Americans are unaware of it. But all Americans are harmed by the government’s infringements of First Amendment rights, and all are hurt by an atmosphere that squelches dissent and chills debate.

Democracy can thrive only when the government acts openly and when the people feel safe to read and express themselves freely. The current anti-speech campaign, which is being waged in the name of national security, poses as great a danger to America as does any threat of terrorism. All who cherish our First Amendment rights must be vigilant and speak out against any and all government restrictions on these pre-cious liberties. Banned Books Week is a time to celebrate reading and all forms of expression, and to renew our efforts to protect the free expression of everyone in America.

Daval · 06-06-2003, 05:05 AM

very scary stuff.

Liquor Dealer · 06-06-2003, 05:37 AM

Let's make a deal! We'll give ya' Ashcroft. This is one part of the administration that should never have been put in place. He's a total looney.

rogue49 · 06-06-2003, 05:55 AM

Done deal.

He's a BIG burden on the Bush administration.

Sparhawk · 06-06-2003, 08:30 AM

When people would rather vote for a dead man than for him, you KNOW he's gotta be bad.

Jizzosh · 06-06-2003, 09:43 AM

It seems to me, that by enacting and enforcing these amendments, laws, regulations, and restrictions, our government is in fact causing more dissent and civil disobedience, rather than squelching those desires or limiting the abilities of terrorists.

It's easy when you know me, to know that I have very liberal and socailist attitudes about government and society; however, I love this country, I love the people I call neighbors, and I love the ideas and attitudes that helped to form this country and make it stand out as a nation of freedom. But now, I have grown to dislike the manner in which this country has expressed itself. Subtractions of freedom, military action without UN support, fanatical leadership, and threatening words, not only to our enemies, but to our own citizens.

Our current government mentality reminds me of a rebelious teenager who spits in the face of the authority that would try and help or express disagreement on it's actions. A teenager that acts tough, speaks tough, and looks to prove that strength, even at the risk of losing the respect of their peers. Our country seems to be feeding off of a high of political testosterone and adrenaline, screaming like an immature child, "It's my way or the highway!" Continuing this analogy, I hope that like all teenagers, we can grow to be adults, who learn to function properly with other adults. Our country had a great childhood, and tried hard to do the right thing. I hope that we can, one day, pass this off as a phase and be able to admit that mistakes were made and move on.

Bill O'Rights · 06-06-2003, 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Liquor Dealer
Let's make a deal! We'll give ya' Ashcroft. This is one part of the administration that should never have been put in place. He's a total looney.

Throw in one Rumsfeld and you got yourself a deal!!

The_Dude · 06-06-2003, 09:58 AM

and ashcroft's not done!

in today's frontpage of houston chronicle, it was like "Ashcroft seeks to expand powers
'No apologies' for detentions"

Quote:

WASHINGTON -- Attorney General John Ashcroft asked lawmakers Thursday for wider authority to detain suspected terrorists before trials and to seek the death penalty for terror-related crimes that result in death.

Ashcroft, in his first public comments on a report from his inspector-general that criticized the Justice Department's treatment of 762 illegal immigrants after Sept. 11, said "we make no apologies" for holding suspects as long as necessary to determine whether they had links to terrorism. In the end, none of the 762 suspects were charged as terrorists.

Ashcroft held aloft what he said were copies of terrorist declarations of war against America. One quoted Nasser al-Fahd, a prominent Muslim cleric known to be sympathetic to al-Qaida, as saying it would be permissible if a bomb killed 10 million Americans.

"Al-Qaida is diminished but not destroyed," Ashcroft said during five hours of testimony before the House Judiciary Committee. He said the nation "must be vigilant. We must be unrelenting. We must not forget that al-Qaida's primary terrorist target is the United States of America."

Ashcroft told lawmakers that the authorities need still greater powers to track terrorists. The Patriot Act, as the sweeping antiterrorism law that grew out of the Sept. 11 attacks is known, has sparked official votes of protest from more than 100 communities around the country because of civil liberties concerns, but Ashcroft said that the law does not go far enough and "has several weaknesses, which terrorists could exploit undermining our defenses."

A strong proponent of capital punishment, Ashcroft said the penalties for some terrorism-related crimes should be toughened to include the death penalty. He also urged Congress to allow the authorities to detain terrorism suspects before trial without bail and to clarify what constitutes illegal "material support" of terrorists.

"We must make it crystal clear that those who train for and fight with a designated terrorist organization can be charged under the material support statutes," he said.

Ashcroft's lengthy and impassioned defense of the Justice Department's counterterrorism campaign and his push for greater authority met with strong endorsement from many, but not all, of the Republicans on the judiciary panel.

Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., the Republican chairman of the panel, said that while the Justice Department had made impressive strides in fighting terrorism, he remained concerned about the potential threat to civil liberties posed by the long reach of counterterrorism efforts.

"To my mind," Sensenbrenner said, "the purpose of the Patriot Act is to secure our liberties and not to undermine them."

Just last month, the Senate rebuffed efforts by senior Republicans to make permanent some critical provisions of the Patriot Act that are to expire in two years. The concerns raised by Sensenbrenner, and echoed in even stronger terms by virtually all the Democrats on the panel, signaled that Ashcroft may face a tough sell in seeking to broaden the Justice Department's authority to pursue terrorists.

"Some of us find that the collateral damage may be greater than it needs to be in the conduct of this war," said Rep. Howard L. Berman, D-Calif.

Democrats said they were particularly concerned about the report released Monday by Glenn Fine, the Justice Department's inspector-general. The report found "significant problems" in the way the authorities arrested and treated hundreds of illegal immigrants as part of the Sept. 11 investigation. The report found that the authorities made little effort to distinguish real terrorist suspects from those who became ensnared by chance in the investigation. Many suspects were jailed for months, often without being formally charged or given access to lawyers, and some inmates in Brooklyn were physically and verbally abused before they were cleared of any terrorist ties, the report said.

While the report drew no conclusions about the legality of the Justice Department's actions, Rep. Robert C. Scott, D-Va., suggested that the denial of the suspects' civil rights and evidence of physical assaults by Justice Department employees may have risen to the level of criminal conduct.

The congressman asked Ashcroft whether he planned to appoint an outside counsel to investigate the allegations further, but the attorney general responded, "I have no plan at this time to employ a special counsel in this matter."

Ashcroft said that the department's civil rights division has investigated 18 complaints of abuse by guards against immigrant prisoners and has found in 14 cases that there was not enough evidence to bring criminal charges. Four investigations are still pending.

"We do not stand for abuse," he said.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/1939689

Jizzosh · 06-06-2003, 10:31 AM

Haha, just remembering a quote from Star Wars. Princess Leia states:

Quote:

The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers.

Charlatan · 06-06-2003, 10:50 AM

This guy is gonna get strung out to dry by election time... Where is that democratic party candidate?

Like shooting fish in a barrel...

ReggErving · 06-06-2003, 11:43 AM

I feel like he is more of a threat to me than the terrorists, not too many popel think about what he is trying to do. Ashcroft took advantage of 911 to get what he wanted to.

seretogis · 06-06-2003, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ReggErving
I feel like he is more of a threat to me than the terrorists, not too many popel think about what he is trying to do. Ashcroft took advantage of 911 to get what he wanted to.

Uhh..

Please, feel free to elaborate on your comparison of someone flying airliners full of people into a bustling office building to someoen who is asking our legislature for more power to find and punish those responsible. I'm sure we'd all love to hear it.

Charlatan · 06-06-2003, 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by seretogis
Uhh..

Please, feel free to elaborate on your comparison of someone flying airliners full of people into a bustling office building to someoen who is asking our legislature for more power to find and punish those responsible. I'm sure we'd all love to hear it.

He isn't comparing them. Read it again.

He is suggesting that Ashcroft is using the fear generated by 9/11 to get people to agree to these new laws.

XenuHubbard · 06-06-2003, 10:12 PM

No, its a great strategy!!! Don't you Americans know that the rest of the world hates you because of:

1. Your freedom

2. Your way of life

Well, Bush Jr's cabinet is taking away your Freedom, and crashing your economy, and your way of life with it! Soon the world will love you again!

Or something.

The_Dude · 06-07-2003, 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by XenuHubbard
No, its a great strategy!!! Don't you Americans know that the rest of the world hates you because of:

1. Your freedom

2. Your way of life

Well, Bush Jr's cabinet is taking away your Freedom, and crashing your economy, and your way of life with it! Soon the world will love you again!

Or something.

HAHAHA, that's true!! however funny it seems!

Phaenx · 06-07-2003, 10:50 AM

The thing about the rest of the world is that they don't like anyone, so it doesn't really matter if they don't like us. Also, I'm interested in see'ing how Bush's plan affects the economy. I heard something about a big "bush rally" on wallstreet the other day while I was writing, but I have no idea if it had something to do with his economic strategery, it sounds like a good plan even though democrats are bitching about not giving poor people more handouts, they're a bunch of communists anyhow though. It isn't neccisarily his fault for the way our economy is right now anyhow, again, the opposing party will always say differently to make you vote for them.

seretogis · 06-07-2003, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Charlatan
He isn't comparing them. Read it again.

He is suggesting that Ashcroft is using the fear generated by 9/11 to get people to agree to these new laws.

If I'm not mistaken, "is worse than" is a comparison. Ashcroft (who I'm not a fan of, by the way) is being compared directly to terrorists. Even if Ashcroft were pro-national-gun-registration, never in my right mind would I say that he is worse than someone who murdered thousands of Americans.

smooth · 06-07-2003, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by seretogis
If I'm not mistaken, "is worse than" is a comparison. Ashcroft (who I'm not a fan of, by the way) is being compared directly to terrorists. Even if Ashcroft were pro-national-gun-registration, never in my right mind would I say that he is worse than someone who murdered thousands of Americans.

Since you couldn't figure this out on your own, I'll help you out: there are other terrorists besides those responsible for the Sept. 11 devestation.

Those "unknown" terrorists are the ones Ashcroft is claiming to be protecting the US from; and those terrorists seem to be a lesser threat than Ashcroft's policies to some people.

seretogis · 06-07-2003, 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by smooth
Since you couldn't figure this out on your own, I'll help you out: there are other terrorists besides those responsible for the Sept. 11 devestation.

The fact that there are others, is sort of the entire point behind attempting to stop them. If you think that other terrorists are not going to try to "top" the 9/11 attack, you are sorely mistaken. The bar has been raised, and I would rather not see thousands more of our citizens die in an attack by terrorists.

Quote:

Originally posted by smooth
Those "unknown" terrorists are the ones Ashcroft is claiming to be protecting the US from; and those terrorists seem to be a lesser threat than Ashcroft's policies to some people.

What is more important to you, the "feelings" of recent immigrants who are under suspicion, or national security and the lives of people who were born and raised here? If temporary suspension of certain rights of certain citizens is necessary to ensure that thousands more don't die, so be it. The chief function of government should be to secure the nation, not to make sure no one's feelings are hurt in the process.

smooth · 06-07-2003, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by seretogis
What is more important to you...

The important thing to me was helping you understand that ReggErving wasn't drawing a comparison between the terrorists responsible for the Sept 11 and Ashcroft.

Other than that I don't really care to argue with you since it's a pointless endeavor.

The_Dude · 06-07-2003, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by seretogis

What is more important to you, the "feelings" of recent immigrants who are under suspicion, or national security and the lives of people who were born and raised here? If temporary suspension of certain rights of certain citizens is necessary to ensure that thousands more don't die, so be it. The chief function of government should be to secure the nation, not to make sure no one's feelings are hurt in the process.

so you are all right as long as some rights of CITIZENS are suspended? what are they going to do next? suspend more rights?

seretogis · 06-07-2003, 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by The_Dude
so you are all right as long as some rights of CITIZENS are suspended? what are they going to do next? suspend more rights?

A wiretap can be viewed as a temporary suspension of a citizen's rights, it's not uncommon.

seretogis · 06-07-2003, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by smooth
The important thing to me was helping you understand that ReggErving wasn't drawing a comparison between the terrorists responsible for the Sept 11 and Ashcroft.

I don't really understand why you wasted the effort to argue semantics. Feel free to substitute the 9/11 attacks with any other terrorist attack. Terrorism is terrorism as far as I'm concerned, and I don't bother to distinguish those involved with the 9/11 attacks to those that bomb US embassies in Africa when it comes to categorizing them. To compare Ashcroft to any terrorist, regardless of how big their explosions are, is ridiculous.

The_Dude · 06-07-2003, 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by seretogis
A wiretap can be viewed as a temporary suspension of a citizen's rights, it's not uncommon.

ok, they started w/ a wiretap.

then they moved on to monitor attorney client talks. something that should NEVER happen. when a person talks to his/her attorney, he/she expects an utmost level of privacy (which the supreme court recognizes under the 9th).

so, if we're going to listen to attorney/client talks now, what's next?

tap every phone call? every email?

Dilbert1234567 · 06-07-2003, 09:32 PM

go magic lantern, go carnivore, cant wait till i get arrested because i have a copy of the ACB on my computer

KillerYoda · 06-08-2003, 05:32 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Liquor Dealer
Let's make a deal! We'll give ya' Ashcroft. This is one part of the administration that should never have been put in place. He's a total looney.

Quote:

Originally posted by rogue49
He's a BIG burden on the Bush administration.

I think slowly you guys will realize the whole administration is as fucked as Mr. "Afraid of Statue Titty" Ashcroft is. The people who picked him run the show. I actually dislike Rumsfeld more than Ashcroft since he acts like we shouldn't know why we're bombing people we've never met, from the way he acts at press conferences.

The_Dude · 06-08-2003, 08:41 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by KillerYoda
I think slowly you guys will realize the whole administration is as fucked as Mr. "Afraid of Statue Titty" Ashcroft is. The people who picked him run the show. I actually dislike Rumsfeld more than Ashcroft since he acts like we shouldn't know why we're bombing people we've never met, from the way he acts at press conferences.

i think that ashcroft is more of an imminent threat to us than rumsfeld is.

if ashcroft takes away our right to petition the government, we wouldnt be able to complain about rumsfeld's actions.

guthmund · 06-10-2003, 09:01 PM

I seem to remember a time when you had to have some sort of evidence to slap a wiretap on.........instead of the 'heebie jeebies'

I'll throw my two cents in...

Quote:

The report found that the authorities made little effort to distinguish real terrorist suspects from those who became ensnared by chance in the investigation. Many suspects were jailed for months, often without being formally charged or given access to lawyers, and some inmates in Brooklyn were physically and verbally abused before they were cleared of any terrorist ties, the report said.

I'm sure these guys were happy to suspend their citizen rights to get yelled at and beaten because they might have been a terrorist

Quote:

The congressman asked Ashcroft whether he planned to appoint an outside counsel to investigate the allegations further, but the attorney general responded, "I have no plan at this time to employ a special counsel in this matter."

Of course not

It seems funny to me that the department who is being charged is the same department that gets to decide whether there is an investigation or not.

Sure the counsel is supposed to be independent, but whats the motivation for sicking the dogs on your own ass?

chavos · 06-10-2003, 10:45 PM

I once saw a very intresting arguement for "flooding" the survelance network, where ordinary citizens would choose to act in a few selectively suspicious ways in order to get the attention of Carnivore, Eschelon, etc... The premise would be that these intrusions could be shut down by sheer overload. I'd hate to think that our only recourse to such invasions of privacy is to spam back.

saladami82 · 06-14-2003, 05:26 PM

Somebody should send Ashcroft a copy of "1984."

-saladami

Nad Adam · 06-15-2003, 07:36 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by saladami82
Somebody should send Ashcroft a copy of "1984."

-saladami

My guess is that he's already got one on his nightstand already, just in case he gets tired of jerking of to the bible.

06-06-2003, 05:05 AM	#2 (permalink)
Daval Junkie Location: The True North Strong and Free!	very scary stuff. __________________ "It is impossible to obtain a conviction for sodomy from an English jury. Half of them don't believe that it can physically be done, and the other half are doing it." Winston Churchill

06-06-2003, 05:37 AM	#3 (permalink)
Liquor Dealer Super Agitator Location: Just SW of Nowhere!!! In the good old US of A	Let's make a deal! We'll give ya' Ashcroft. This is one part of the administration that should never have been put in place. He's a total looney. __________________ Life isn't always a bowl of cherries, sometimes it's more like a jar of Jalapenos --- what you say or do today might burn your ass tomorrow!!!

06-06-2003, 08:30 AM	#5 (permalink)
Sparhawk Dubya Location: VA	When people would rather vote for a dead man than for him, you KNOW he's gotta be bad. __________________ "In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work. It's incredibly hard. It's - and it's hard work. I understand how hard it is. I get the casualty reports every day. I see on the TV screens how hard it is. But it's necessary work. We're making progress. It is hard work."

06-06-2003, 09:43 AM	#6 (permalink)
Jizzosh Insane Location: Beijing, China	It seems to me, that by enacting and enforcing these amendments, laws, regulations, and restrictions, our government is in fact causing more dissent and civil disobedience, rather than squelching those desires or limiting the abilities of terrorists. It's easy when you know me, to know that I have very liberal and socailist attitudes about government and society; however, I love this country, I love the people I call neighbors, and I love the ideas and attitudes that helped to form this country and make it stand out as a nation of freedom. But now, I have grown to dislike the manner in which this country has expressed itself. Subtractions of freedom, military action without UN support, fanatical leadership, and threatening words, not only to our enemies, but to our own citizens. Our current government mentality reminds me of a rebelious teenager who spits in the face of the authority that would try and help or express disagreement on it's actions. A teenager that acts tough, speaks tough, and looks to prove that strength, even at the risk of losing the respect of their peers. Our country seems to be feeding off of a high of political testosterone and adrenaline, screaming like an immature child, "It's my way or the highway!" Continuing this analogy, I hope that like all teenagers, we can grow to be adults, who learn to function properly with other adults. Our country had a great childhood, and tried hard to do the right thing. I hope that we can, one day, pass this off as a phase and be able to admit that mistakes were made and move on. __________________ I'm never gonna know you now... but I'm gonna love you anyhow -Elliott Smith

06-06-2003, 10:50 AM	#10 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	This guy is gonna get strung out to dry by election time... Where is that democratic party candidate? Like shooting fish in a barrel... __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke

06-06-2003, 05:55 AM	#4 (permalink)
rogue49 Loser	Done deal. He's a BIG burden on the Bush administration.

06-06-2003, 11:43 AM	#11 (permalink)
ReggErving Addict	I feel like he is more of a threat to me than the terrorists, not too many popel think about what he is trying to do. Ashcroft took advantage of 911 to get what he wanted to. __________________ ...sitting on your bed with a samauri pose.

06-06-2003, 10:12 PM	#14 (permalink)
XenuHubbard Cute and Cuddly Location: Teegeeack.	No, its a great strategy!!! Don't you Americans know that the rest of the world hates you because of: 1. Your freedom 2. Your way of life Well, Bush Jr's cabinet is taking away your Freedom, and crashing your economy, and your way of life with it! Soon the world will love you again! Or something. __________________ The above was written by a true prophet. Trust me. "What doesn't kill you, makes you bitter and paranoid". - SB2000

06-07-2003, 10:50 AM	#16 (permalink)
Phaenx The Northern Ward Location: Columbus, Ohio	The thing about the rest of the world is that they don't like anyone, so it doesn't really matter if they don't like us. Also, I'm interested in see'ing how Bush's plan affects the economy. I heard something about a big "bush rally" on wallstreet the other day while I was writing, but I have no idea if it had something to do with his economic strategery, it sounds like a good plan even though democrats are bitching about not giving poor people more handouts, they're a bunch of communists anyhow though. It isn't neccisarily his fault for the way our economy is right now anyhow, again, the opposing party will always say differently to make you vote for them. __________________ "I went shopping last night at like 1am. The place was empty and this old woman just making polite conversation said to me, 'where is everyone??' I replied, 'In bed, same place you and I should be!' Took me ten minutes to figure out why she gave me a dirty look." --Some guy

06-07-2003, 09:32 PM	#25 (permalink)
Dilbert1234567 Devils Cabana Boy Location: Central Coast CA	go magic lantern, go carnivore, cant wait till i get arrested because i have a copy of the ACB on my computer __________________ Donate Blood! "Love is not finding the perfect person, but learning to see an imperfect person perfectly." -Sam Keen

06-10-2003, 10:45 PM	#29 (permalink)
chavos Banned Location: St. Paul, MN	I once saw a very intresting arguement for "flooding" the survelance network, where ordinary citizens would choose to act in a few selectively suspicious ways in order to get the attention of Carnivore, Eschelon, etc... The premise would be that these intrusions could be shut down by sheer overload. I'd hate to think that our only recourse to such invasions of privacy is to spam back.

06-14-2003, 05:26 PM	#30 (permalink)
saladami82 Upright Location: NJ	Somebody should send Ashcroft a copy of "1984." -saladami