How Has Post-9/11 Legislation Affected You? 1212
goldspider asks: "I hope this is received in the spirit it was intended in. In a recent Reuters article, the Internet as a whole has been referred to as 'collateral damage' of the U.S.-led War on Terrorism, because of the perceived loss in privacy and online rights as a result of post-9/11 legislation. I am curious to hear about some specific examples of how this legislation has personally or professionally affected the everyday lives of Slashdot readers."
I don't fly anymore (Score:1, Insightful)
The cost and hassle and privacy violations required to fly make me glad I have a car that will go 300k+ miles in its lifetime.
Mixed emotions (Score:5, Insightful)
The biggest thing is that the government appears to be milking the 9/11 event for all it's worth in steps, releasing little tidbits of the story and new footage or new suspects found every time it wants to pass something through the houses without causing too much trouble with the public. Whip the public into a patriotic fervor of such levels that they willingly give up their freedoms in the name of staying safe and 'free of terrorists'.
Examples would be the Citizen Corps program that Bush started, it's effectively eastern european 'secret police' all over again, call in your neighbor for suspicious activity and get them put on surveilance and possibly carted away. Also the 'Patriot Act' and a few other bills that are aimed at increasing the governments power over individuals, all in the name of 'freedom'.
So have I felt any solid effects of anything since then? No. Can I see a picture start to form the way they've been manipulating (or attempting to) the public to push forward an agenda? Yes.
Nice timing (Score:1, Insightful)
Spam has tenfold (Score:1, Insightful)
ms
Re:Well, for starters... (Score:2, Insightful)
FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION::
What the hell do they think "criminal activity" is? They don't have to suspect criminal activity just terrorist activity - hrmm, that makes sense?
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION::
Where are the facts on this? If they've secretly detained hundreds of people without charges how does Newsweek know about it?
FREEDOM OF SPEECH::
Yes, and? When was it legal to leak information regarding national security? Not saying this is necessarily a good thing, but its nothing new...
RIGHT TO LEGAL REPRESENTATION::
Yes, but information obtained by listening to these conversations cannot be used to further criminal investigations.
FREEDOM FROM UNREASONABLE SEARCHES::
Yes, it sucks. A note, this again cannot be used to further criminal investigations.
LIBERTY + SPEEDY AND PUBLIC TRIAL:
This only applies to non-US citizens.
I'm certainly not saying that the current situation regarding civil liberties is a good thing, but some stories really just blow it up for some headlines.
Re:Nice timing (Score:1, Insightful)
2) if we lose our freedoms because of the attack, all those people died in vain.
Re:My biggest problem is airports (Score:5, Insightful)
>
>But, unlike most people, I use an insulin pump. Most security people aren't keen on seeing someone with a small mechanical device and tubes attached to their body. Also, the insulin, needles, lancet, etc all get a good look through. I get stopped and have my bags inspected pretty much every time I go through. It's made me use air travel as a last resort.
(Be thankful they don't make you drink the insulin the way they did with those women and their breast milk :)
How has the legislation affected me? Will, since those drooling $5/hour morons are now drooling $10/hour federal employees, and as a result of my poor ability to take shit from dumb fucks who think that Congressional Medals of Honor, 2-inch GI Joe guns, and bottles of breast milk somehow constitute security threats, but who, as federal employees, can now throw me in jail for saying "WTF?" and can also no longer be fired when they exercise poor judgement, I call on everyone who's had it with the bullshit to...
Take the car.
No security goons. No having to remain silent while Guido dildoes your girlfriend's crotch or copping a feel off your mom's bra. (Why yes, it was women in underwire bras who hijacked four aircraft and destroyed the WTC and damaged the Pentagon, how could I have thought otherwise?)
Plug that laptop with 20G of MP3z into the stereo system and hear your favorite music over the engine noise. (Delayed by a traffic jam? No matter, the music sounds better when you're not doing 80 MPH just to keep up with traffic!)
Every six hours, pop into a small town and eat a nice hot meal. Screw McDonald's - find a random greasy spoon and eat with the locals. Or surrender to your lusts and have a dozen fresh Krispy Kremes.
The roadways are still free. You can get there in the same amount of time, with a lot less hassle, and you can see all the things you can't see stuck in a metal tube through a six-inch perspex square.
See the American countryside in air-conditioned comfort or lower that ragtop and let the breeze blow your hair as you take that twisty 2-lane blacktop through the national park instead of the boring interstate.
Finally, remind yourself as you stop by each "scenic viewpoint" and snap a few pics with your digicam that there are things about America that are too big for 19 Islamic terrorists - or even a Hill full of idiotic Congressmen and a TSA full of unaccountable bureaucrats and their $10/hour lackeys - to destroy.
First of all (Score:5, Insightful)
This means less of MY money is available to spend on what I want to spend it on. Government steals from me to give to their friends (whether its defense contractors, or just the typical pork barrel recipients).
I read EVERY bill which passes through my Congressional Rep's hands (they're all visible on the web) and I have yet to see any bill yet that really "protects" us.
Now, my tax dollars are going to be used to help out Dubya's oil buddies when we go to war against Iraq, a country which has shown no provocation against me personally, neither through threats nor transgressions.
This is the biggest loss I think we all face. The loss of the right to use our hard earned dollars in ways WE INDIVIDUALLY want to. I could care less what my fellow Americans want to do with their money, but when they steal from me for their assinine programs, that's when I start getting angry.
Maybe soon I'll be saying "Costa Rica, here I come!"
Re:Well, for starters... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Nice timing (Score:5, Insightful)
Every newscast seems to have a nightly "War On Terrorism" segment -- complete with a waving flag, Shrub's face, and dramatic music -- when nothing of any real import has happened that day. Pure sensationalism. Even bloody NPR (which I still enjoy, in spite of their narrow-minded stance on low-power radio) gets on my nerves these days with worthless coverage.
Look, shit happens all over the world. It just finally happened to us. Sure we may get a 15-second blurb when a crowd full of people are mamed in a bombing in Ireland, but someone dared to bloody the nose of the world's "greatest nation" and suddenly George Bush scratching his ass gets a 5-minute segment on ABC News! I sometimes wish Mr. bin Laden would humble this country again because most people still don't get it.
What has had far less conspicuous coverage is the fact that that Shrub Jr. and John Aschcroft have siezed far too much power than is comfortable than most people. The popular media doesn't want to appear anti-patriotic. Just look at what happened during the entire Bill Mahr (sp?) incident!
It's sad, really. If bin Laden's goal was to attack the heart of the USA (it's freedoms), then he succeeded extremely well. The ironic part is that he coerced us (that is, the US itself) to destroy some of those freedoms on his behalf.
Re:Well, for starters... (Score:5, Insightful)
This only applies to non-US citizens."
I'm sure that's very reassuring to Jose Padilla, the American Citizen who was born and raised in the US, who was arrested in Chicago in May and is now sitting in a US Military brig without any charges against him, and with no access to a lawyer or to his family. Oh wait, he probably can't read this. Hmm....
You don't have anything to worry about... (Score:5, Insightful)
How many people have heard this statement made? How many examples to the contrary to we need in this world before people stop saying that?
We used to have due process and the ideal that we're innocent until proven guilty. Starting long before the 9/11 attacks, we've had "anti-drug" law that allowed for the confiscation of money and property without the holder or owner ever being charged with a crime. There are many things wrong with what has been going on and it's not just recently. The problem is that it's only happening to "other people" and when it does happen to you, everyone else assumes you're guilty of something because you're "the other people" this sort of thing happens to.
All of this is made possible because of the "looking out for number one" anti-community, anti-civil-responsibility attitudes we adopted that led to all sorts of things including our parents spending or inheritance and our government spending [stealing] our social security retirement funding.
And still people say "So?"
Re:Canadian border (Score:5, Insightful)
lots of Geeks have known this their whole lives....
Re:It hasn't affected people (Score:3, Insightful)
Give me a fucking break buncha whiners. (Score:2, Insightful)
We in the US had some fucking terrible shit go down and some procedures were put into place to try and safeguard the country against further attacks. And while there is no fool proof method of eliminating terrorists at least they are trying.
I am the first to bad mouth the pigs, the man, the establishment, but at least they have rallied and are trying to make our country safe.
You don't like. Stay in Canada, get a job there. Want to cross over, abide by the rules. Remember you are the stranger in the strange land.
North American(you canadians are in this pile too) always think that by the supreme grace of God that our personal freedom extends to other countries. It doesnt, I go to Colombia, I abide by their laws, I stay in the US, I abide by my laws. So shut up or stay out.
Does Canada need a little terrorist action to make them realize what the US is going through? And the fears we have? Last time I checked is when someone sucker punches you you get out the defense and watch your back.
I have lived in a country with a 40 year old civil war with three guerilla groups. Travel was limited, there were bombs, people die all the time. And you know what, no one whines that someone stopped them and looked in their glove compartment. They would love it.
As for the Arabic guys, sorry dude, I know its your religeon and turbans might be your thing, but we are all a little on edge here. So it might not be the wisest thing to wear that in public.
I hate to shave but I do because I get less static. I showed up in Radio Shack with some schematics and a week old beard and was buying some bread boards. I scared the piss outta everyone.
So look, it is an inconvenience, but you know what, these are strange times we are living in. Darwin Days my friend. I am about survival not convenience.
Puto
A rant (Score:1, Insightful)
"Our rights are being stepped on" Like how? Specifically, not "They Government has the option to hold you indefinitely without a lawyer"..those are hypotheticals that come into play very goddamn rarely in the real world. Has any Slashdotter been held because of some tripe they posted, or a shirt they've worn or an organization they've supported? I doubt that.
This country will do whatever it takes to ensure that another September 11th doesn't happen, and as someone who has a profound love for his country, I see nothing wrong with that. It's so easy to forget that THREE THOUSAND AMERICANS died last year...that's several times the amount of dead at Pearl Harbor..and unlike December 7th 1941, these were civilians. People who had sinned no worse than to go to work paid with their lives...and I see nothing wrong with our Government trying to protect us from that ever happening again.
But on the other hand, this kind of thing is expected from the Slashdot audience. Most of us are young adults (less than 35's young, kids), myself included. So of course there's going to be the liberal touchy-feely element at hand, it's something that has to be worked out..and will be, once most of us get older (me? I'm special
Just keep in mind that these precautions, while an inconvenience, is part of what's keeping LA, Chicago, NYC, Miami, Atlanta, etc from being turned into vapor by a suitcase nuke (or some other horrible, horrible possibility). And if you complain about your bags getting checked or some little kid being searched or whatever..bear in mind that if an American city is wiped from the face of the Earth....it'll be a lot worse than it is now...for us (a little), but way more so for the rest of the world.
So yeah...to sum up all this ranting...anything that'll help prevent another September 11th/save American lives I'm all for. And I'm suprised most of you arn't, but not really.
Re:Nice timing (Score:1, Insightful)
If we as American citizens have but a SINGLE less right or freedom than we did on September 10, 2001 then the terrorists won not by blowing up planes and buildings but by forcing us to destroy our OWN way of life.
Do you really think they intended to strike a horrible physical blow against the United States with those planes? Of course not. That was just a by-product of the real intent: to show the American public that we are not safe. To strike fear into the hearts of every "middle-class" American everywhere who walks into an office building at 8am every morning. For the first time in their lives, those people had to consider: "What if it was THIS building?" And that fear is an insidious thing, like a tumor growing in America's collective subconscious.
We had become complacent. Most Americans simply aren't concerned with American foreign policy simply because it has no immediate domestic effects. We watch our troops fighting on other continents, shake our heads sadly at the "necessity" of it, and then go back to watching sitcoms and football games. For the first time, we were shown that we are no less vulnerable than anyone else on the planet -- that, maybe, our giant cities, seats of government and commerce that could not be easily replaced, might make us even MORE vulnerable than some.
Two buildings in New York were destroyed and the American economy was rocked to its foundation. TWO BUILDINGS. It was just a bloody nose, horrible as it sounds to say so. It could have been much, much worse. And that is what scares the average American into blindly accepting whatever "safety regulations" the Powers That Be deem appropriate to protect us from the ubiquitous "them" that we've all feared from childhood, be it the monster in the closet or the terrorist in the desert.
Government is, at its heart, simply the sum of its human parts. Humans are, at their hearts, ambitious, maybe even greedy. As such, the general tendency of any government is toward expansion. Some governments do this all at once: that's called a revolution, and its often bloody and leaves the "winners" in a weakened, untenable position, leaving them easily toppled in yet another "revolution". This cycle can go on for generations. But the smart governments treat us all like lobster.
They don't simply throw us into the boiling water, they gradually increase the temperature, allow us to acclimate, turn it up another notch
Not too long ago, a devastating earthquake in India killed TENS OF THOUSANDS. Why aren't you and people like you screaming about that? TENS OF THOUSANDS. Dead. Wiped out. Gone. Whether it was a terrorist act or simply the whim of nature, they are just as dead. But that's a natural disaster, yes? We can't FIGHT that, can we? So it warrants a few minutes on CNN, a spot on the "World" page of the local paper, and maybe a few prayers here and there.
Except, in many places around the world, under-funded research is being done to be able to predict earthquakes. Where is your support? Where is your rage that the governments of the world haven't united to fund this crucial research? If a way was found to reliably (or even NOT so reliably, any at all is better than none!) predict earthquakes, how many dozens of thousands of future lives might be saved? If it had happened 20 years ago, how many of those Indians, men, women, and children crushed like so much garbage in their own homes, might have been saved by early evacuation?
This is just one example. There are doubtless many more. No offense, but people like you are exactly the kinds of people who will gleefully allow the Internet to become nothing more than a corporate/government (and THAT distinction is ever-blurring) playground. People like you will applaud while our rights wither away, because it's happening at a pace that doesn't seem immediately or obviously threatening. Instead of revolution, it almost seems to be a natural evolution. But take the long view and think -- really think and ask yourself -- is what we are evolving toward really the legacy you wish to leave your children? Your grandchildren? America is in a delicate situation. What we do now, the amount of ground we give in the name of "safety" will have real and powerful consequences in the not-too-distant future.
How long before Americans who don't fit the WASP profile, and sometimes even those who do, can be stopped in the streets by any government authority and asked those fateful words:
"Papers please?"
Re:Canadian border (Score:3, Insightful)
The border guards going into Detroit (from Canada) are the meanest anywhere - it's just a well known fact. A friend of mine had his lunch confiscated because it had an orange in it (supposedly no fruit allowed, though a single orange for personal consumption, it's normally overlooked). Another friend (who's Arabic) was flat out asked, "Have you ever attended a terrorist training camp?" He has a legitimate Visa to work in the U.S. and has gone there every day for years, and now he gets a question like that. It's sad. It's certainly not a legitimate question to ask, and it's only effect is to hurt the innocent.
I was thinking about the added security at the bridge (before you get on it) to try and keep someone from blowing it up (supposedly to kill Americans?) and it's not very efficient. I figure if someone wants to kill a lot of Americans without actually getting past the border guards, the best place to do it would be the Windsor strip clubs and Bingo halls. In a strip club, you're sure to take out around 5 American bachelor parties, and even the strippers around here are nearly all American.
I'll just keep praying for dumb terrorists.
Re:Canadian border (Score:3, Insightful)
You don't have to leave the country to find "security checks" of questionable value. I traveled from Las Vegas to Phoenix and back this weekend. Checkpoints have been set up on each side of Hoover Dam, supposedly to verify that nobody tries to park a car full of explosives on the dam. Each way, I was waved through without stopping...I slowed down to about 5 mph, the rent-a-cop gave my pickup a perfunctory glance, and waved me through. I could've stuck a bunch of C4 underneath, and they would never have caught it. The checkpoints seem to be as useful as getting asked at the ticket counter if you packed your own bags (which they'll stop doing because they finally realized the pointlessness of those questions).
(OTOH, banning large trucks and buses from crossing the dam is definitely a Good Thing...you can get across much more rapidly. That's something they should've done long ago to alleviate traffic problems; if it took 9/11 to make it happen, so be it.)
How is that not a legitimate question? What really frosts me is the belief that profiling is automatically a Bad Thing. It's OK if grandmas are strip-searched, teenage girls are wand-raped, and war heroes have their medals confiscated [arizonarepublic.com], but we can't even think about questioning individuals who fit the terrorist profile because they might get their feelings hurt? Fsck that.
Re:nothing really changed (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the lack of change goes deeper than this. Nothing changed on 9/11, nothing. Those who are about to flame, or call me un-american please at least read the rest of the post and I will explain.
To begin with, terrorists have been attacking the US and its territories for years. Anyone remember the World Trade Center bombing back in '93? The consulate in Tanzinia? The airliner over Lockebe? There's nothing new here, 9/11/01 was simply one hell of a stoke of luck. Whoever coordinated the attack had no way of knowing that the burning fuel dripping down along the structue of the building would cause it to melt and weaken. At most they probably hopped for the two planes to make a couple of big explosions and destroy large sections of the buildings, I doubt that even in their wildest wet dreams did they think that those buildings would collapse as they did.
We've known for years that there are extremist militants working to cause mass destruction inside the US. I wish I had some statisticts on it, but I would expect, that there are hundreds of terrorist attacks averted every year, we just didn't hear about them until now. When you have people like this spending every waking hour of every day trying to cause mass destruction inside the US, all it takes is 1 stroke of luck and we have a WTC bombing, a Lockerbe, or a 9/11.
This type of thing will happen again. Like any security hole, its usually found when someone walks through it. It may not be planes into buildings, but it will be something we've not seen before and didn't expect. It will kill hundreds or thousands. All the new laws and secuirty measures, that have been enacted, will do is deter the terrorists from using this same method again and generally make life a little harder for the rest of us. You will never be safe from terrorism, if the dice come up against you in this game, you're dead.
I just can't wait until this damned anniversary is over with so I can get some news other than "looking back at 9/11". Moreover, I expect to see, once again, a short outporing of patriotism here in America. Its pathetic. People will put thier flags up, stick the bumper stickers on, and by the end of the year it will be life as normal once again. It will be a passing fad, nothing more.
Yes, there are people that hate everything to do with America. There are those that view our Republic/Democracy/Capitalistic system as the source of all evil. And the quest to push it upon others is making a lot of enemies. Terrorism has been happening and will continue to happen. Nothing changed on 9/11, it was just a hell of a stroke of luck. You can either live in fear, or get over it and get back to living your life.
Re:Canadian border (Score:3, Insightful)
Please do. We are too stupid to understand without you.
If they don't check people crossing the border, then that check point can be used to traffic unwanted items into the country.
Nobody "traffics" unwanted items. Every item "trafficed" into the US from Canada is wanted by somebody. Did you mean to say they can use that checkpoint to traffic ILLEGAL items? Well, yes, if they don't check people, people can traffic illegal items through that checkpoint. Even if they do check people, people can traffic illegal items through that checkpoint. Is there some point to your statement?
Here's an old story. Every day, a young boy rode his bicycle across the US-Mexican border into the US. Every day, the border patrol agent checked the boy for drugs or other illegal contraband. Every day, the boy had none of these things on him. The border agent was SURE that something was amiss, but he just couldn't find any smuggled goods on the boy. So, one day, he asks the boy, "What are you smuggling?" The boy tells him. "Bicycles."
If they do check people crossing the border, then noone will attempt to traffic unwanted items into the country.
Isn't it interesting how much contraband the customs people still manage to confiscate even though the mere fact they are looking for it, according to you, proves that nobody will try to bring it in?
Now, which is more difficult to bare? The inconvenience of the search, or another 9/11 style attack?
Both are difficult to bare [sic]. Since the 9/11 attack had absofuckinglutely nothing with people trafficing contraband into the US, checking people crossing the border for contraband will do absofuckinglutely nothing to prevent another 9/11 style attack. The excuse for searches in violation of the 4th Amendment is specious and an insult to anyone who values the freedom that our parents and sons and brothers and sisters and etc fought and died for.
In fact, the "searches" now being conducted at airline checkpoints are doing nothing to prevent another 9/11 style attack. People brandishing fingernail clippers are not a threat. Gramma and her knitting needles are not a threat. Achmed getting one of his buddies that works at the airport to smuggle in a big knife IS a threat, but guess who isn't going to be passing through the long lines at the security checkpoint? Right, Achmed's friend. And Beanbrain wearing C4 shoes is a threat, if he was smart enough to know that you don't use a lighter to trigger electric detonators, but guess who was told to "come back tomorrow please" by foreign "security" agents, instead of being arrested?
No, the solution to another 9/11 style attack has already been put in place, and it doesn't involve searching anyone. It is simply that anyone who tries it is going to get the shit beat out of him by other passengers and his death will NOT get him into Heaven and his family will NOT be honored for his sacrifice. He will be a laughing stock and his family will be disgraced.
The assumption that hijackers value their own lives is what cost the four airplanes on 9/11. The assumption that above all else, the hijacker will not kill everyone on board because he would die, too, is gone. Isn't it a shame that our mad dash for the feeling of safety will have actually hampered any passenger response to the next hijacker. Completely disarming the only people who will be able to act to save lives is stupid and counterproductive.
Re:And laugh? (Score:3, Insightful)
I believe the quote I'm looking for is "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions."
While Sen. McCarthy had good intentions -- protecting America from the Communists -- stomping on the Constitutional Rights of Citizens in the process is not an acceptable method.
One does not toss aside the Constitution simply because it gets in your way.
Yes, Communism was a real and dangerous threat. So, in his way, was Sen. McCarthy and the House UnAmericans Activities Committee. They both violated the rights that they fought so hard to protect.
Saddened... (Score:3, Insightful)
Saddened because we blatantly refuse to accept any responsibility for the attacks...
Saddened because we were not nearly as 'patriotic' after the Oklahoma City bombing - one of own did that, right??Saddened because our civil rights are being thrown away for a thin veil of 'security' when anyone can tell you that you are not any safer today that you were a year ago.... It is just as easy today to buy weapons of mass destruction, hijack a plane, buy forged documents, illegally enter the country... nothing has changed except for your lack of freedom..
Re:Well, for starters... (Score:5, Insightful)
I wish I were. If he moved next door to me, I would immediately walk over and give the man a hug and thank him. He is the test case that will (hopefully) stop future administrations from trying to annihilate the Bill of Rights. He might be guilty, he might not be; I don't know and I can't make a sound judgement, nor can anyone else. Our government has taken away our right to judge him, and taken away his right to be judged by us.
If I were a judge and the case were handed to me, I'd order him freed immediately and order an investigation into his treatment in this brig. At this point, I don't care if he stepped off the plane with the bomb in his hands - you've violated virtually ever rule of law regarding the treatment of a suspect. Not only that, you've violated the spirit of the Material Witness law. In which court case was he to be testifying? To what crimes was he a witness? The answer, much the same as most of the other answers from the DoJ lately, is "we don't know."
Feel free to cower behind despots like Aschcroft. If you're too afraid to live free and too cowardly to engage in the difficult task of securing democracy for ALL , then bow down to your masters. I don't think I'm alone when I say that I'm more terrified of my own government than I am of the "terrorists." This "heightened alert" that was put out today was lapped up by the media conglomerate lapdogs, who so dutifully played into Ashcroft's hands by terrifying the public into submission with fantastic stories of imminent death and destruction.
Your problem in particular is that you have continued to soak-in the ever-flowing river of hysterical cries of the Bush Administration. You've been trained for the last 12 months to believe that the price for security is less freedom. You've been told again and again that your benevolent government would never do anything not in your best interests, and that whatever laws are passed that may restrict freedom don't actually apply to you; only to those terrorists guys. You've been lulled by the soothing words of those in power who tell you that everything will be alright if you do as we say and don't ask questions. Well guess what, I'm asking questions, and I'm demanding answers.
I love my country. I love it enough to risk my own personal safety by speaking out against our despotic attorney general. It hurts me to think that everything our ancestors built for us could be destroyed; not by a foreign enemy, but by elected leaders. Folks, people make mistakes, and we made a big one putting these people in charge. I supported Bush all the way until the beginning of this year. Now I look at all that has happened and I say to myself, "my God, what have we done?"
The truth is that our best defence against any aggressor is now, and always has been our freedom. In the War of 1812, the White House and many other buildings in our capital city were burned to the ground. Our capital was nothing more than a smoldering ruin. Did we junk our Constitution? Did we enact sweeping changes in our laws? No. Our ancestors had the courage to stand by their convictions, and stood in the face of certain destruction proclaiming that they will either live as free men, or die. To those men whose faces we see carved into stone at Mount Rushmore, freedom was more important than life. Let history never judge us as the cowards who hid in fear, but as patriots and defenders of liberty who continued the proud tradition of staring death in the face and refusing to back down from our ideals. Sept 11 shocked us out of our complacency; don't let anyone use it as an excuse to destroy the very thing we puport to hold so dear.
So yes, I do wish I lived close to Jose Padilla's home. I would feel no less safe there than I do sitting right here. And at least then I'd have the chance to thank him for all he's done for our country, and to apologize for what we have done to him. If 200 million Americans raised their voices in chorus, calling for the freedom of Padilla, he would be home tomorrow. It is as much our fault that he sits in that brig as it is our government's. So what do you say we make sure it never happens again?
Re:Give me a fucking break buncha whiners. (Score:4, Insightful)
Seriously. I would accept most any inconvenience if it actually made a difference in my security. Profiling isn't good security, and furthermore it is racist. It's not about hurt feelings. It's about feeling as if you're worth less than everyone else simply because some people, with whom you have nothing in common aside from skin tone, are crazy enough to believe there is some righteousness in terrorism.
On the issue of security, I didn't mind getting flagged on every flight after 9/11 up until about November or so. Security is supposed to be proactive and providing a comprehensive system to secure our planes, our cities, and our lives. Profiling is purely reactionary. It's far easier to shut the barn door after the horses have bolted. What would impress me more would be a comprehensive upgrade of security across the board. Why not search everyone? (oh, right, it's not important enough to inconvenience the white business travellers).
The other problem is that there are non-Arabic terrorists out there!!! Newsflash!!! And, while they may not try to fly a plane into a building, a simple bomb will create terror as well. The U.S. Justice Department/military is actually holding an American citizen that is Hispanic (I think). Several white American's have been identified as sympathizers in al Qaeda.
Third, not all terrorists will obviously look like they are from the Middle East. One of the representatives of the American Arab Anti-Descrimination committee is very light skinned. I mean, come on. Profiling doesn't work because it's too simple and implemented by too many people who don't know enough to tell whether someone really fits "the profile" or not.
My parents are immigrants from India. My Indian friends complain that I'm not Indian enough, or that I'm too American. But that's not enough for simple-minded architects of our so-called security. I love my country, and I am just as angry and hurt and sad as many other Americans.
But, part of that love of country is the understanding that it is our duty to criticize our country when they do something wrong. That it isn't OK to take the easy way out when we're faced with a difficult circumstance. Profiling is the easy way out. It might have been OK for the first 3 or 4 months. But, now, a year later, it's not OK. No one who understands and loves the liberties that many other fine men and women have died to protect should accept a least effort solution where our liberties are concerned.
Sujal
Re:And laugh? (Score:4, Insightful)
Still, anyone labeled a "Communist" was blacklisted. Pressure was exerted on filmmakers, studios and others and those so labeled frequently never worked again. Careers were destroyed, not on proof of criminal activity, but on expression of political belief. Political speech was supressed and persecuted.
I'm not talking "the advocation of the violent overthrow of the Government and Constitution", but expressions of sympathy or even simple ambivalence.
"...when that expression presents a clear and present danger to the continued prosperity of the United States as both the body politic and the people, actions such as McCarthy's were totally justified."
Where in the Constitution does it say that? Until Congress declares War -- which didn't happen then and hasn't now -- or you are a convicted felon, the rights of Citizens are not set aside for convenience.
The Government of the United States is stronger than that. Unlike China, the U.S.S.R. and others, we tolerate dissent and are not threatened by it.
FEEL SAFE? (Score:5, Insightful)
So, in case you were unclear on the concept of safety in America:
Tiny sewing scissors with a blade capable of possibly cutting paper in about three-four tries - DANGEROUS
Mysterious biohazard bag containing unidentified red goo - NO PROBLEM
Re:Canadian border (Score:2, Insightful)
If you're not white or with white people, you generally experience great discrimination at the US border crossing over from Canada.
um...The US was not attacked by white Canadians.
It was attacked by young radical Islamic fundamentalist men. Does it suprise you that greater attention is paid to people fit this description? Or would you prefer we waste every last resource frisking old ladies from Alberta just so it does not make you feel *uncomfortable*. Oh the discrimination!
Re:Give me a fucking break buncha whiners. (Score:4, Insightful)
All of your example focus on places, geography. Not race. Just because the last 4 drug dealers you caught were black, do you go after black people only? or do you hang out where drugs are sold and look for people actually selling drugs?
I don't think you get it. When your profile consists solely of skin color, it's too broad. It's not effective. If what you're saying is correct, we should've stopped and strip searched every young, white male who rents a truck after Oklahoma City.
More importantly, why is profiling more effective than searching everyone? I want proactive, comprehensive security, not reactionary, least effort crap. Do you only want to block the extremist Muslim terrorists, or all of them?
Sujal
Only in America... ? (Score:3, Insightful)
But here's the real question: Why? What incentives are there for the leaders in OUR government to take away personal liberties? Do they get more money? Do they feel safer? Do they feel as if they're "doing something" instead of standing around "ignoring" an issue? It really boggles my mind. If someone can answer any of these questions for me, you'd earn my utmost respect.
The thing that really blows my mind is how we have so many new laws as result of the attacks on 9/11. I don't feel any more secure due to them. So why were they enacted? I certainly don't feel any safer knowing that murder is a serious crime if I'm walking around alone at night in a seedy part of a town I've never visited before. And I don't feel any safer knowing airline passengers can't carry toe clippers onto 747s.
There are two things I have learned from these attacks. Not only have I firmly cemented my anti-racist core, but furthermore, I have found, for lack of better words, that I am a "Logic Elitist." What's this, you ask? I have a strong hatred for those who can't backup their reasoning with sound, logical conclusions and reasoning. I hate stupid people.
We shouldn't test people for drugs, we should test them for stupidity, ignorance, greed and love of power. -PJ O'Rourke
Re:Too much 9/11 (Score:3, Insightful)
and maybe they think that america is just a shelter for their terrorists (a.k.a. afluent businesspersons who don't give a shit about the effect american foreign policy and private action overseas has)
is it just a different perspective? (and no, most of the world doesn't support either of the two sides -- esp. before 9/11)
Re:The Effects on the Other Side (Score:3, Insightful)
In saying that the people of Iraq want to live in the conditions they do, and that you would do something differently if you were there, says to me that you are either an extraordinary activist/freedom fighter/Arnold Schwarzenegger/death wish type hero, or a fucking liar.
If you believe that FIVE THOUSAND CHILDREN UNDER THE AGE OF FIVE deserve to die EACH MONTH because of a couple of thicked headed assholes in Iraq AND America, then you are a thick headed asshole. Have some compasion. Nitwit.
LS
Re:Canadian border (Score:3, Insightful)
So. Did you support profiling young white men of Irish descent? I kinda doubt it.
Racial profiling -- which, as another poster said, is a two-word euphemism for racism -- is bullshit. The vast majority of people of any given racial, religious, or ethnic group here in America are here for perfectly legitimate reasons and don't plan to kill anybody. Humiliating people on the basis of their skin color or last name is going to do a lot more to increase anger and lead to future conflict than it is to catch the tiny fraction of a percent who are actually terrorists.
Re: Replying to Myself (Score:3, Insightful)
Pretty funny all the replies my devils adovocate quote turned up.
For the record I am a Hispanic Jew, family scattered during the inquisition, headed for parts a little more tolerant, well to be exact, where the could blend in a little easier.
So where does that leave me? Due to Sephardic heritage I look very Arabic, and have been the brunt of every joke for that particular ethnicity all of my life. And I could give two shits.
I cannot fly without the extra checks, they always grab me. And I have a southern accent and my last name is Taylor. But I look the part.
Yeah, I shook up some people here. But I am an American who has lived in several other countries for extended periods of time. And nothing that we are exposed to here as extra security measures are even close to what third countries experience every day.
Checkponts, state id checks, military id checks(many countries have a 2 years selective service, they select you! mandatory baby) if you do not register when you are 18 and get the little card or get caught with out it, off to the pokey until you can prove you do have one.
How many of you have been cornered by a guerilla group because you accent was decidely american and you might be a good kidnapping victim, and but for the grace of god and some fast talking, got the fuck outta there?
And I aint talking a six week trip in college to Mexico, or some 3 month European tour, or that weekend in Rio. I am talking living and being a part of another culture.
We all are priveleged but only a handful of us have experienced any of these things first hand. You can all say well my grandpaw or grandmaw back in the day had to to do this or that. But were you there? I had family that died in the holocaust? But was I there?
So in some small way these people are making it difficult for the terrorists, giving 1% more of a hard time fine.
It has been one year today, but the sands of time have clouded peoples minds. WE have to be on the look out, we have to be alert.
And for all the crap and bullshit and inconeniece our government puts us through. There really ain't too many places better.
Puto
Why should we care about 9/11 ?? (Score:2, Insightful)
Let me simply ask this question? What would make 80% of the general population give up their Civil Liberties, spend houndreds of thousand of millions of dollars, and start a National Holiday?
One would think that something that kills 340,000 to 450,000 people a year would justify such actions. What kills that many people a year? Tobacco does. Not an airplane. Or take Alcohol for example. Just drinking down some old' Budweisers and more kills 150,000 people a year. Listen folks, this is PER YEAR! Sorry, but we are the terrorists here. We condone such activities.
Isn't it a bit odd that all of a sudden the Police can stop anyone at anytime with or without reason to search them? What happens if you refuse? You get arrested, harrased and jailed! Why refuse? In the Constitution of the United States it cleary defines that the population not be searched for unreasonable reasons. I don't find walking down the street late at night a good reason to stop anyone.
Why does 80% of America find it to be reasonable? They have been brained washed by various sources, including television. Heck, most of the United States ACTUALLY BELIEVES what they hear and see on TV Newscasts.
Personally, I watch the TV News for pure entertainment. Most of the time the reality behind the situation is so far off that it makes me actually get sick to my stomach and vomit. You ask "How does he dare to say that?" That is pretty simply, "I get off my arse and check the stories out. I talk with people from both sides of the issues, get their versions. Sometimes it takes a little bit of leg work to get the truth." And that truth is what I need to make my decisions on, not some make-believe Newscast or falsified newspaper article from the Toledo Blade.
You see, the news usually takes all the facts they can find, twists them up to fit local and federal needs. They rarely actually talk about the REAL version of the truth. One hundered thousand people die each year from using the perscription drugs that the government gives to us. What? My facts are talking about what people willingly do to themselves? Might I not be mistaken, but didn't 3,000 some odd people willingly start working for the government and willing work in a gigantic building (duh! Easy terrorist target. Sometimes it's the little things like SIZE that kill us).
Common sense would tell them that this could result in their deaths. Terrorist minds would select a target that it could easily take out and cause the most damage. Heck, they teach you in school that at any moment you might die. It's a fact of life.
Just like the facts clearly show that Caffeine kills 1,000 to 10,000+ people each year. And this is something that we can forsee and prevent, but we don't. What I am saying here is that the Government is trying to take our rights away to give them more control over us, not for our personal safety, but for making money. It is a very sad thing that 3,000 people had to die, but what about the other 670,000 people I mentioned? Why don't we even THINK about them? I wonder
Don't let me even get started on Car Accidents. How the hell are you going to jump into a big peace of steal, go 60 MPH, and then when you crash, call it an accident??? It's a possibility that should be taken in account for before you drive. You'll probably die. One third of the USA population dies in car accidents each year. You will probably die in one before you die from natural causes, or from some terrorists from overseas. How can you even compare 9/11 to this? Why would you sanely support the 9/11 Holiday but let car crashes to continue to happen? I can tell you, you've been programmed since birth.
Fact. The USA has never been to WAR over something that didn't make us money. We have never went to WAR for a GOOD CAUSE. This whole 9/11 thing has just been a TOOL the government has used to scare us into submission.
And, we are scared! Long ago, if someone were to come into your house and try to murder your family, you could defend yourself with a gun and it would be over. Long ago if a terrorist came into your house with a gun trying to kill your family and you shot him everything would be fine.
Did you know that in the State of Ohio, killing someone in self defense will result in you serving jailtime. (hint: If you have to shoot someone, shoot them below the waste. This will make it less of a crime, and you will not go to jail as long for saving your family.)
Now a days our children aren't educated on guns. We hide them from them. They look at them as something like a toy they can't have and want because they can't have. Back in the old days parents were responsible and taught their children about guns and their dangers. And there were a lot less killings. Today we are afraid, so afraid that we let our own Government take away our right to bare arms. The same thing the last Country did before will split and created our own.
Get this, if you get caught smoking marijuana (which has never, ever in history killed someone) you can never own a gun again. So it's okay to carry a gun and smoke Tobacco, that remember, kills 340,000 to 450,000 people a year. What lunacy!
Now how to solve this problem? Speak out, spread the word. 3,000 people in a building dead isn't that bad compared to this other stuff. Instead of spending $5.00 on a flag that does no good, spend $5.00 into cancer research, or laywer fees for groups trying to outlaw Tobacco.
You are waisting your time and money and becoming a slave if you don't change and speak out.
9/11 is not a national holdiay in my book. And I will protest it until the day I die.
Re:australia doesn't matter. (Score:5, Insightful)
Ok, let's get one thing straight. (1)Like america , Australia treats it's aboriginals like shit. I'm not proud of it, and I hope the fuck you aren't proud of your country ppreceeding over the genocide of the 200 nations. Secondly, FOR FUCK SAKE THE USA IS NOT THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD. For instance many defence analysists have refered to the USA as , and I quote
If the USA's Middle East policies were the "cause" of 9-11, what is the cause of Islamic Terrorism in Kashmir, the former USSR, Malaysia, Indonesia, The Phillipines, Sudan, etc, etc, etc?
The problem is ISLAMIC TERRORISM, not the USA defending the Jews that have lived in the Middle East since before there was any such thing as Islam.
Whatever...... Just because theres overwhelming evidence that the US fucked up by installing Sadam Husain & the Taliban into power, it's OK, because USA #1 USA #1
Remember, if it weren't for the USA and the USSR most of the world would be speaking either German or Japanese today.
Oh yeah.. by the way I actually like americans, I just get wild when they put my country down and try to tell the world they are less then them. And I apologise to any americans out there, it's not really the best day for these sort of arguments, but a spades a spade, and I gotta call it.
Re:Foolish Beyond Belief (Score:4, Insightful)
And if you are foolish enough to think that these so-called "security" measures are somehow "worth it," I've got a large bridge to sell you. Tell me, how many miles per year do you travel by automobile? Do you have any idea how much more likely you are to be killed by a car wreck than by a terrorist? The cold, hard fact of the matter is that majority of Americans are quite willing to make risk/convenience trade-offs on a daily basis which display far less risk aversion than would be needed to justify the massive inconvenience of current airport security measures. Alas, mention the "T-word," and all sanity flees the room on wings of silver. "If even one terrorist is stopped," we are told, "any price is worth it!" But this is folly, and should be identified as such. We don't think this way when purchasing insurance, and we surely should not do so when purchasing questionable security with our valuable time, freedom, and money.
I for one, will take chances for my freedom -- and, yes, for my convenience as well. Ironically, so will virtually everyone else, so long as the decision isn't framed in terms of a "terrorist threat."
-Carter
Re:The Effects on the Other Side (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't want to come off as bashing you, because clearly your heart is in the right place - but I believe you are incorrect on that point. Iraq's internal food production is not sufficient to meet the needs of the population (and I suspect sanctions on machine parts may have something to do with this). Hence the oil-for-food agreement - if there were no need for imports there would be no oil-for-food programme - you can bet your life on that.
And poor nutrition is - of course - by far not Iraq's only pressing problem. They have few working ambulances. They have a shortage of basic medical equipment and materials like aneasthetics, as I expect you know.
Why then do the US and Britain repeatedly state that the sanctions do not ban the import of food and medicines? In the strictest sense they are not lying - but they are employing one of the cruellest deceptions imaginable. Medicine is not banned under the sanctions de jure, but de facto - in other words, the United Nations has refused applications to import medicines and medical equipment - sometimes citing "dual use" considerations.
The point is that Saddam Hussein - evil though he undoubtedly is - could not legally meet these needs even if he wanted to. The United Nations committee on Iraq sanctions - dominated by the US - has consistently denied applications for exemptions to the trade sanctions, which must be individually applied for, and which, even if successful, may take weeks to be granted.
I would like to see how an American would feel if the US - an undoubtedly dangerous nuclear state - had basic medical items sanctioned by the United Nations under "dual use" considerations. A foundational moral principle - that if an action is right for the US to do it must be right for any other state to do in equivalent circumstances - seem to be disregarded by many US "hawks". And of course "hawks" is a very relative term, since even most "doves" in the US congress will slavishly toe the Washingtonian line in the big picture (The honorable Barbara Lee excepted.)
Much more information on the sanctions is available, for example, here [nonviolence.org].
Well known methods (Score:5, Insightful)
Remember, of all the emotions FEAR is the most difficult to get rid of.
Here is my own little experiance of this. Even a dosen years after the communism fell, I still get nervous when crossing a border to a neighbouring country. And now it only takes me showing about enough passports or IDs for all the passingers in my car to the border cop (they usually don't check them). This is a pure remnant from when I was a kid and had experienced border crossings in a tense atmosphere.
Guess who were the people in former communist counties made affraid of before being told to act patriotic and encouraged to spy on each other?
The press is giving my brain a different pounding (Score:4, Insightful)
In the 80's every press article about drugs rose straight to the front page to give me the impression that I'm surrounded by drug dealers. In the 90's every press article about school violence rose straight to the front page to give me the impression that I'm surrounded by homicidal teenagers. There was a brief break in there somewhere where I was scared OJ was going to kill me. Now we're in the naughts or whatever the hell you want to call it, and every press article about terrorism rises straight to the front page to give me the impression that I'm surrounded by terrorists.
It's all crap. One incredibly shocking event later (9/11, colombine... what was the news maker in the drug war? probably stars dying from drugs or the violence in Columbia) and the press does a Gilligans Island bit and they go from a three hour story to a multi-year obsession with the same topic. If you want to see flocking behavior, don't watch the birds, watch the press. Canada and the US had about the same levels of drug use in the 80's, but it was first on the American list of problems and somewhere in the twenties for Canada. Why? The press. Or maybe the Canadians have some good sense.
The ironic thing is that if you're reading for content, reading to try to figure out major trends in the world, the press was more informative about terrorism before 9/11 than after. Before 9/11, genuinely important terrorism-related news was the only news that would make the papers. If you saw terrorism in the news, it was a big deal - the government had thwarted something major or there had been an embassy bombing. World changing stuff. Now, if it has a terrorism angle it's front page material - even if the angle is something like "a man who might be a terrorist might have been caught at the airport. he might have had a nail file. there might be more news at 11." By and large each terrorism story is space filler in a space that has a proverbial "reserved for terrorism related news, regardless of if there's news or not" stamp on it.
It's like wheat and chaff. When it comes to terrorism, the press prints both these days.
Oh, well. At least the fact that our civil liberties are being used like an inflatable sex toy is coming to light. And, who knows? Five years down the road, something else Really Bad will happen and the press will be obsessed with something else. We should have a betting pool on the next big press fad. Personally, I'm predicting it'll be mega-storms caused by climate change. Some kind of giant hurricaine will level a nation to the dirt, and the press will drop terrorism like yesterday's news - which it already is.
Just a reminder (Score:1, Insightful)
Re: Replying to Myself (Score:3, Insightful)
My point is simply that I want airport security and border security to be real security, not band-aids to make everyone else feel good at my or others' expense.
It's clear that your faith isn't very important to you, or at least that you don't consider other peoples' faith important. To caim that a Muslim or Sikh should just take off his turban because he wants to fly without hassle is ignorant. They don't wear them because it's cool. They wear them because of their faith and because it signifies something important about their faith.
Sujal