Slashdot Log In
Maryland Police Put Activists' Names On Terror List
Posted by
timothy
on Wed Oct 08, 2008 04:46 PM
from the bad-incentive-to-remain-peaceful dept.
from the bad-incentive-to-remain-peaceful dept.
aaandre writes with word of a Washington Post story which begins:
"The Maryland State Police classified 53 nonviolent activists as terrorists and entered their names and personal information into state and federal databases that track terrorism suspects, the state police chief acknowledged yesterday. The police also entered the activists' names into the federal Washington-Baltimore High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area database, which tracks suspected terrorists. One well-known antiwar activist from Baltimore, Max Obuszewski, was singled out in the intelligence logs released by the ACLU, which described a 'primary crime' of 'terrorism-anti-government' and a 'secondary crime' of 'terrorism-anti-war protesters.'"
According to the article, "Both [former state police superintendent Thomas] Hutchins and [Maryland Police Superintendent Terrence] Sheridan said the activists' names were entered into the state police database as terrorists partly because the software offered limited options for classifying entries." Reader kcurtis adds "The State Police say they are purging the data, but this is one more example (on top of yesterday's news that datamining for terrorists is not feasible due to false positives) of just how badly the use of these lists can be abused."
Related Stories
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
In Soviet-America... (Score:5, Insightful)
...those jokes are getting less and less funny.
That's all I have to say about that.
Re:In Soviet-America... (Score:5, Informative)
This isn't new to America by any means. The only new part about it is that we learn about it quicker.
In the 1950's, J Edgar Hoover wanted to arrest over suspected of being disloyal. [nytimes.com]
Lincoln suspended habeus corpus (later to be found that it was done unconstitutionally) and arrested 1000's of newspaper writers, editors, political dissidents and even 2 congressmen.
Parent
Re:In Soviet-America... (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure *we* learn about it quicker, but what we need is the average American to hear about it.. and understand what is going on.
Until then, *we* will just be pushed aside, and added to the lists.
Parent
OT: Sig (Score:5, Insightful)
its not meant to disparage anything or anyone. it is to demonstrate how relative things are depending on who gets to write the history books, and to make people think.
Parent
In every country ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately most people fail to see the connection between lists and any danger. The lists are being made to influence people who speaking out against the ones in power. But most people fail to see the danger of giving the power seekers ever more data to mine on everyone. Knowledge is power and the ones in power seek the use that knowledge to prevent people standing against their point of view.
With ever more detailed lists on peoples views, soon we end up with people fearful of what they say on the phone and in emails, for fear of their views could even just risk being taken out of context and in any way critical of the people in power. At that point, the ones in power are influencing people directly.
At that point, we live in a police state, where freedom is gone and replaced by fear of the ones in power. Problem is, we are getting there now, and from here on out, its simply a matter of consolidation of ever more detailed data mining.
The central reason why centuries ago votes were made in secret, was to prevent the ones in power, from seeking to influence the voters. Yet the power seekers are forever seeking to game the system to gain ever more information on peoples opinions. Now the ones in power are building automated systems to influence people.
Throughout history its been shown time and time again that the ones in power become ever more corrupt over time without any feedback on how they are behaving. Its been show so many times through history.
Most people don't realise the the game people in power are playing. People in power are not so interested in individuals. The ones in power are interested in adding everyone to different lists so they can then control and profiling groups of people, so they can then use divide and conquer tactics, to break groups of people up. The goal is that the fragmented groups cannot then stand and oppose the point of view of the ones in power. That is why they data mine.
The lessons of history have not been learned by enough people. Looks like the world is seeking to repeat the mistakes of the past. Freedom and democracy are constantly undermined by a minority of people in power for their own gain. Its just a matter of time and how far we are going to let them all game the system to push the excesses ever more unfairly in their favour. After all, its not as if they are robbing hundreds of billions of tax payers money to keep their rich lifestyles while millions risk loosing everything.
Anyway, if the millions of people can't buy bread, then let them eat cake. ... My point is, the names in history change and the names of their ideologies change. But what remains is basic human psychology and that doesn't change. The lack of empathy of the ones in power over their powerless minions never changes. For all their words, its only their actions which count and millions now face loosing their jobs and millions are treated unfairly by the ones in power.
In such a world, its no surprise that the ones in power would want to watch their minions very closely. After all, people could start to complain its getting all to unfair. But we cannot have that. We need ever more laws to protect the ones in power and ever more laws to keep the minions down and away from power.
The world will never change until everyone worldwide realises that people who constantly seek power over others have a recognisable cluster B personality disorder. All cluster B personality disorders are ultimately driven by fear. And the ones with the disorder constantly seek to control that fear and control everyone around them based on their fear. (There are multiple fears, two examples are lack of attention and the other is fear of lack of power. The attention seekers want more attention (they were deprived of parental attention as children. The ones who want power seek to prevent anyone ever having power over them again, the way they were treated unfairly as children).
These are not the kinds of people who should have power over anyone. They need
Parent
Re:In every country ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Sad, but true.
Parent
Re:In every country ... (Score:5, Interesting)
soon we end up with people fearful of what they say on the phone and in emails
If you were friends or colleagues with anyone who has ever worked in the intelligence community, you would know that there are plenty of people who already act likes this. I was first cut off with a curt "not over the phone" talking to a friend who was ex-DSD (Aust. intel) in the mid nineties. To say that things have deterioated somewhat since then would be an understatement.
The most recent trend with my ex-intel friends, by the way, is to use private nameservers. I have absolutely no evidence as to why that might be necessary. I am just sayin', that's what they're doing now.
Parent
Re:In every country ... (Score:5, Interesting)
Technically speaking the technology is now appearing that will force change. A simple genetic test for sociopathic and psychopathic tendencies and a permanent block being placed upon those individuals from ever running for public office, of becoming company executives , or pretty much being banned from any position where they can gain control of or exploit other people.
Which pretty much means all those current arse holes at the top will be permanently prevented from ever getting there again and, oh boy, will they lie, cheat, kill and steal kill to prevent that from happening. It is likely to happen but that implementation period is likely to be painful and bloody.
Parent
Re:In every country ... (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, yeah, but are you for or against abortion???
Parent
Re:In Soviet-America... (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:In Soviet-America... (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, let's see. There was Andrew Johnson, who blocked reconstruction by supporting "black codes", vetoing the Civil Rights bill, and opposing the 14th Amendment. Ultimately, he was impeached for removing the Secretary of War from office without Senate approval.
There was Calvin Coolidge, who accomplished little and is most responsible for encouraging the economic irresponsibility that led to the Great Depression.
There was Herbert Hoover, who raised the top tax bracket to a confiscatory 63% during the Depression.
There was also FDR, who seized privately held gold and started numerous entitlement programs that treated symptoms instead of actually helping the economy. The depression that lasted nine years after he came into office, ending only after firing up the war machine.
Finally, there is LBJ, who is truly responsible for dragging the USA into the Vietnam War.
If you are able to objectively compare some of our dubious chief executives of the past, instead of focusing on the present with the attention span of a puppy, you might find yourself retracting your assertion. The fact that you acknowledge Lincoln made a grave error indicates that you may qualify as an amateur historian, but you know far less than you think you do.
Parent
Re:In Soviet-America... (Score:4, Insightful)
However, most of it is BS because it tries to attach modern day ideas and purposes to someone living in a vastly different time. Lincoln was no saint, but he surely did many great things for our country.
Parent
Re:About Lincoln (Score:5, Insightful)
You must not know very much about Lincoln if that's why you think so many people think he was a tyrant. I'd recommend picking up a history book on the Lincoln presidency to see what he did. Here's a hint: Not even Bush has jailed journalists critical of him.
Of course, people always make excuses for the great "Dear Leaders".
Oh yeah, and our "great" FDR also put a whole bunch of Japanese in concentration... er, I mean "internment", that sounds less worse, right, right... he put many Japanese in internment camps, ruining many lives. Such a swell, progressive man!
Parent
Re:About Lincoln (Score:5, Insightful)
The thing that makes Bush the worst president ever is because he's done bad things but is to mind boggling stupid to understand what he's done.
I can live with evil, it's stupidity I have a hard time with.
Parent
Re:In Soviet-America... (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes. I doubt any of them laughs when they get turned away from the check-in counter next time they which to take an flight to somewhere. "Sorry sir, you are on a terrorist watch list. You can't fly with us today. Next!..."
The real joke nowadays, is freedom.
Parent
Fascism (Score:5, Insightful)
If you disagree with the government you are an enemy of the state and it's the police that will deal with you. There's a name for this ideology: fascism.
Parent
Re:Fascism (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually I would rather beat Bush for pushing us farther down the iceberg. But he wasn't the only one, rebpulican democrat it doesn't matter, each president has taken more and m ore freedom away from the. individual
Parent
Re:Fascism (Score:5, Informative)
You really have no idea what socialism is do you,
You have a right wing candidate and an ultra right wing candidate. None of your politicians would be classed as socialist in any other country.
Insightful-you must be joking mods.
Parent
Check yourself, (Score:5, Interesting)
The thing which scares me more is the CLETS [calstate.edu].
CLETS is basically a law-enforcement database which compiles info on people regardless of charge or conviction. I found out about it after my buddy interviewed well for a prison job only to be called at the last minute -- he was denied employment(even after having passed the DOJ LiveScan [usafingerprinting.com]) because of a petty theft charge of which he was never convicted. Doing more research, we found that basically any cop can write anything about you that they want whether or not you were charged or convicted. It's a sneaky way to criminalize somebody without actually going through the legal motions.
It's been awhile since I checked it out, but from what I recall it had something to do with www.leo.gov [leo.gov] and its "public inquiry" phone number led to a place in West Virginia!
I wasn't able to find all the details(who may access the database etc.) but I suggest that you Californians follow the yellow brick road and hopefully discover what the good ol' boys think about you, before it bites you in the ass someday. Happy hunting.
Re:Check yourself, (Score:4, Insightful)
It's a sneaky way to criminalize somebody without actually going through the legal motions.
It's just a fact that getting into trouble with the police can screw you over without charge or conviction. If your family, neighbours and job see the police search your home and workplace or the media blast your name all over without ever reaching a conviction, that would probably do a lot of damage to you even if you're innocent. I've not heard of it being kept on record and used against you permanently like that, but it's not the first job anyone's lost...
Parent
Re:Check yourself, (Score:5, Informative)
Paranoid much?
CLETS is just another state law enforcement messaging system - not a single database. I'm pretty sure every state has one and they talk to each other via NLETS (National Law Enforcement Telecommunications System). Nothing new. NLETS itself has been around in various forms since the 60s and several of the state systems originated before that.
I've worked on these in several states. They let authorized agencies run queries to *specific* databases (DMV, Sex Offender lists, Wants/Warrants, Stolen Vehicles, Criminal History Records, etc.). Usually each one of these is run by a different agency which is connected to the state system. Most of the traffic I've seen over the years is Drivers License and Vehicle Registration inquiries (two completely separate inquiries) resulting from someone getting pulled over.
A cop being able to "write anything about you" means that whatever state/local agency is running the system that data gets put in isn't properly auditing their system. Something that actually pisses off the Feds.
In the states I've worked in, a person's access is limited based on their role and what they've been certified for. Your average cop wouldn't be able to enter or modify data, just query it, and even there they normally wouldn't be able to query all systems. A highway patrol officer, for example, would most likely only be able to query DMV, Wants/Warrants, and Stolen Vehicles - and that's assuming they have the ability to access it themselves instead of having to call it in to a dispatcher.
The West Virginia number is most likely at the FBI's NCIC.
Parent
Re:Check yourself, (Score:5, Interesting)
Paranoid much?
CLETS is just another state law enforcement messaging system - not a single database. I'm pretty sure every state has one and they talk to each other via NLETS (National Law Enforcement Telecommunications System). Nothing new. NLETS itself has been around in various forms since the 60s and several of the state systems originated before that.
Yeah, and law enforcement tracking and harassing peaceful activists is nothing new either. They've been doing it since well before the 60s. I guess I'm not supposed to worry, because they added computer databases to their toolbox for doing this a long time ago?
A cop being able to "write anything about you" means that whatever state/local agency is running the system that data gets put in isn't properly auditing their system. Something that actually pisses off the Feds.
I'm sure they do, in so far as the factual data (location, occupation etc) is inaccurate, or any information doesn't actually lead them to any person they are really interested in. Who likes that?
On the other hand, if it is someone they're interested in (for political not criminal reasons) but don't have any actual dirt on, and what is written in the database gives them an excuse to have a little fun RICO- or USAPATRIOT-style, then that lack of proper auditing is a boon, now isn't it?
And don't tell me I'm being paranoid, police and the feds have both been caught abusing their powers vis-a-vis those two laws to act against benign and harmless but anti-establishment activist groups repeatedly. Hell, the FBI has submitted reports to Congress stating their use of USAPATRIOT powers in such cases, that's how ballsy they are about it. So I'm bracketing that on one side with MLK Jr. on the other and saying that's not paranoia in between, it's business as usual.
In the states I've worked in, a person's access is limited based on their role and what they've been certified for. Your average cop wouldn't be able to enter or modify data, just query it, and even there they normally wouldn't be able to query all systems. A highway patrol officer, for example, would most likely only be able to query DMV, Wants/Warrants, and Stolen Vehicles - and that's assuming they have the ability to access it themselves instead of having to call it in to a dispatcher.
Well someone had write access and put these activists names on the list, and classified them as terrorists. Somebody had the write access to create the categories "terrorism-anti-government" and "terrorism-anti-war protesters". So your assurances, even coming as they do from personal experience, don't mean very much to me.
My cousin worked for the NSA. He told me if I knew what they really did, I'd be very disappointed. I trust him so I bet from his perspective that's true. Which would mean they must not have invited him into the wiretapping-millions-of-Americans room and told him what they were up to.
Parent
Re:Check yourself, (Score:5, Informative)
This isn't new. The government's sneaky voyeurs have pulled this shit time and time again against nonviolent "subversives".
Speaking of sneaky, there's more than pork added to the bailout bill.
Browsing through it I happened to notice "Sec. 201 Permanent Authority For Undercover Operations" on page 296. Not quite sure what that is, but it's a fair guess there was very little time for discussion with it in that bill. Whatever it is may very well be needed, but I have to wonder if it would have been permanent if handled in separate legislation that was more-fully discussed and reviewed before passage.
Don't just go by the news summaries of what is in that bill, check out the 724 K PDF of HR1424, the full bill [senate.gov].
Parent
All these lists are insane (Score:5, Insightful)
If they've done something illegal, then arrest and prosecute them. If they haven't, then they should be free to go about their lives.
All innocent people should be equal in the eyes of the law.
Re:All these lists are insane (Score:5, Funny)
All innocent people should be equal in the eyes of the law.
But some are more equal than others.....
Sincerely,
Mr. G. Orwell
Parent
Re:All these lists are insane (Score:5, Informative)
--Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
Parent
Re:All these lists are insane (Score:5, Interesting)
If they've done something illegal, then arrest and prosecute them. If they haven't, then they should be free to go about their lives.
You're absolutely right. Hutchins and Sheridan should be arrested and prosecuted for slander, making defamatory statements, and abridging the civil rights of the 53 people they falsely accused of a truly heinous crime. And they should certainly be given a fair trial, and if found innocent their records should be cleaned and they should be free to go about their lives.
But saying stuff like "the activists' names were entered into the state police database as terrorists partly because the software offered limited options for classifying entries" should be very compelling evidence of making the false accusation in the first place. Trying to fix it later should be strong evidence that the suspects knew what they had done was wrong, and therefore had malice aforethought. There was no good faith here. This was an outright criminal act designed to deny 53 people their rights as citizens.
I'd say those 53 defendants have a pretty solid case on their hands.
Parent
Re:All these lists are insane (Score:5, Insightful)
There is a sickening amount of "cowboy" and "U.S. is #1" mentality out here. These same people think we still wear the "white hat" in all of this and that everyone else is just wrong.
There are a variety of reasons Republicans should lose by a wide margin... but those same reasons also apply to Democrats.
We need something better... more closely resembling the original plan of government for the U.S.
Parent
US Revolution (Score:5, Informative)
In today's terms, the founding fathers are nothing more than terrorist-loving war criminals.
Benjamin Franklin [uncyclopedia.org] was almost tortured. James Madison opposed judicially sanctioned impalements and being drawn and quartered in public squares. His "cruel and unusual punishment" is embodied in the Constitution's 8th amendment [usconstitution.net]: Cruel and Unusual Punishment. George Washington captured more than a thousand Hessian mercenaries at the battle of Trenton on Dec. 25, 1776 [typepad.com] and ordered his troops to treat them with "respect and dignity and they will suffer no abuse or torture". Chairman of the Board of War and Ordinance John Adams [familytales.org] wrote in a letter to Abigail Adams on 27 April 1777 of a "strong a light as the barbarity and impiety of Briton, in this persecuting war." The USA's Founding Fathers knew of torture and opposed it. It's such a shame the Bush admin has gone out of it's way to justify torture.
Parent
Re:All these lists are insane (Score:4, Insightful)
... and as a non-american, I wonder how come (esp after 8 years of Bush/Cheney) McCaine is still in the race. And I am not saying this as endorsement to the Democrats, but by default, any other major opposition to McCaine should have won the election by now. Just 8% lead? This probably will explain why such lists exist and abused.
First, you can't judge anything by the statistics put out so far. Looking at the trend graphs exactly who is in the lead at any given time depends on when you ask, and which source of data you use. Mostly it comes down to how the pick the people to poll.
Second, McCaine is still in the running for a variety of reasons. To start with, he claims to represent a government reform and responsibility platform. Whether he'll follow through on it, or if it really is as he presents it (instead of say a way to make life difficult for politicians and organizations he doesn't like) is yet to be seen. He also, like it or not, has a better foreign relations policy (at least as of right now) at least from an economic standpoint, something many Americans are particularly worried about right now. There's also the (unfortunately) strong right wing Christian contingent that will vote for him because they perceive him (and his young earth creationist running mate) as strongly supporting the Christian church (whichever one that happens to be). Lastly there are a depressingly large number of people that are just plain racist and will vote for him for no other reason than the opposition is a black man.
Parent
New edition will also offer . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
. . . the "Thoughtcrime" classification.
Who made this software? Someone who watches their "24" DVD set over and over?
Re:New edition will also offer . . . (Score:4, Interesting)
. . . the "Thoughtcrime" classification.
Who made this software? Someone who watches their "24" DVD set over and over?
Why do you attack the people who wrote the software? The fact that "the software offered limited options for classifying entries" shows that those people put much more thought into who could be legitimately tracked with the software than the police.
Parent
terrorism-whatever (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:terrorism-whatever (Score:5, Insightful)
The fact that the "terrorism-anti-war protesters" category even exists should be a gigantic red flag that something is seriously wrong with whoever set up the system in the first place.
Parent
Terrorists? (Score:5, Insightful)
They sure don't seem to be terrorists from what anyone has presented. Everyone has the right to be a left-wing, right-wing, religious, gay, slashdot, anti-slashdot, or whatever other type of wingnut they want. So long as they are peaceful about it, that is.
Perhaps the "limited options" were there for a reason - those were the only valid reasons for entry in the first place. Anyone who didn't match probably shouldn't have been entered in the first place.
Being politically active is not terrorism. Terrorism is violence with the aim of influencing public behavior in such a way as to subvert either the popular will or to force a government to give concessions to the group in question.
These lists could be a really useful tool for stopping stupid asshats who are planning attacks, but that utility is lost if they are full of garbage data. From many descriptions, they are becoming about as good as randomly flipping through a phone book.
Purging the garbage is an excellent idea, both to protect innocent people's rights and to make the lists themselves a useful resource.
Needs a refresher 'civics' course. (Score:5, Insightful)
"I don't believe the First Amendment is any guarantee to those who wish to disrupt the government," [Hutchins] said.
I'm boggled.
That means, you get to watch them and make sure they're not storming the prison. That doesn't mean you get to disrupt their activities by putting them on terrorist watch lists because you're part of the grievances they're protesting about.
Re:Needs a refresher 'civics' course. (Score:5, Insightful)
He's right, it's the second amendment that guarantees that right to disrupt the government :-)
Parent
if $citizen law breaker then $crime == terror (Score:5, Insightful)
So what kind of terrorist did they hope to classify them as?
A slippery slope... (Score:5, Insightful)
So, if I decide to vote against the incumbents in political office I forfeit my first amendment rights? Or is it only if I discuss doing so? Maybe I have to put a sign in my yard first? Or is participation in or organization of a rally against those rascally incumbents a necessary precondition? How about a sit-in? Civil disobedience?
This sounds like the kind of thing where the bar will become lower and lower over time.
Best not to begin...
wow. (Score:5, Insightful)
I guess there really is no limits to the complete incompetence which permeates law enforcement. We all had an impression of law enforcement as not very intelligent, and this just sears it in. Labeling someone as a terrorist because they exercise their Constitutional right to protest. The first amendment is very clear. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise of the right of the people to peaceably assemble and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Crystal clear. Congress can make no laws prohibiting people to peaceably assemble.
And if congress can make no laws prohibiting it, law enforcement cannot enforce laws that do not exist. Therefore, law enforcement is violating the Constitutional rights of those citizens.
end of story.
no surprise (Score:5, Interesting)
The United States is a police state. Why is anyone surprised by news like this?
Re:no surprise (Score:4, Funny)
Caller: Hi, is Tony there?
Answerer: Tony Cocaine?
Caller: No, Tony Jones.
Answerer: Heroin rifles blowing up New York!
Caller: Um...
Answerer: Bin Laden plastic explosive Tonka Trucks! Eat Presidential kidneys with Senate explosive snacks!
Caller: I've got the wrong number, don't I?
Parent
Palin/Regan quote (Score:4, Insightful)
Stories like this underscore my feeling about Palin's quote from the VP debate:
"we're going to find ourselves spending our sunset years telling our children and our children's children about a time in America, back in the day, when men and women were free."
I'm sure that the Republican's view of this is one of war/conquest and that America will lose to some foreign non-democratic state, but today the more urgent issue seems to be loss of civil liberties. Loss of freedom from expanding government power. It's the ultimate irony that the party that espouses this quote is most likely THE party that will remove all our civil liberties and turn freedom into just a memory.
These people should definitely charged. (Score:5, Insightful)
Putting people who aren't terrorists and who aren't likely to become terrorists on a terrorism watch list should either be a firing offense or a criminal offense.
I'm also in favor of criminalizing certain actions routinely carried out by law enforcement (police, prosecutors, etc.). Usually when excessive force is used by a police officer, the worst thing that happens is the officer is suspended or fired, even if the victim dies. Occasionally a police officer is fired. Even more rarely the police officer in question is charged with a crime. Also, if a prosecutor knowingly withholds exculpatory evidence, the most that happens is that the convicted person gets a new trial or is granted an appeal.
I'll give an example of how I think things should work, though I don't know that something like this has ever happened in the United States. Let's say a prosecutor withholds possibly exculpatory evidence in order to win a case where one of the possible penalties is death. Let's also say that the person charged is found guilty, and after exhausting all appeals is put to death. The original prosecutor should be charged with murder, first degree or second degree depending on the strength of the withheld evidence. If this happens in a death penalty state and the charge is first degree murder, then the death penalty should be on the table. If the prosecution can prove beyond a reasonable doubt* that the original prosecutor knowingly withheld the exculpatory evidence then the original prosecutor should be convicted by a jury and given an appropriate sentence.
People in law enforcement should be held to higher standards than the general public, not lower.**
*If such a case were to occur, an independent prosecutor should be appointed, since in most jurisdictions prosecutors all know each other and aren't likely to vigorously prosecute such a case.
**I know this isn't likely to ever happen. I simply think it would be more just than the current system.
Classifications? (Score:5, Interesting)
Food for thought: is there an entry for "terrorism-anti-abortion protester"?
Does the Maryland State Police throw everyone who protests into the terrorist list, or only those who protest against whatever groups or policies that certain members of the State Police like?
USA vs China (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:USA vs China (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
donttasemebro (Score:5, Insightful)
Can somebody please explain to me why a man trying to form some sort of human connection with a man who's torturing and about to kill him is funny?
I'm not saying it's *wrong* to make a joke of something like that or out of anything at all, I suppose. I guess I just don't see the irony in it. But go ahead, punish me for being Offtopic.
Peace Activists should join the police force (Score:4, Insightful)
Police I doubt have the training or experience to classify people as terrorists and therefore shouldn't be putting anybody on any lists, much less law abiding people interested in peace. The police should instead be focusing on arresting violent criminals and spammers. If the police would put as much effort into prosecuting spammers as they do towards persecuting people who want to live in a peaceful world then society would be a much better place to live. The sad thing is that peace activists are the type of people who would never be allowed to join a police force.
Re:Non-violent? (Score:4, Informative)
You mean the ones that were actually government agents, paid to disrupt lawful protest? We did it in the sixties and seventies with COINTELPRO, [wikipedia.org] why would anyone think we're not doing it now?
Parent