Viet Dinh Defends The Patriot Act 817
Grrr writes "Wired News has posted an interview with Viet Dinh, who worked on the PATRIOT Act for the Justice Department. In the past he said, "Security without liberty - it's not an America I would want to live in." And also, in this interview, "I think right now at this time and this place the greatest threat to American liberty comes from al-Qaida and their sympathizers rather than from the men and women of law enforcement and national security who seek to defend America and her people against that threat." Several of his replies are (predictably / necessarily / discouragingly) less than direct."
This is an OUTRAGE (Score:0, Insightful)
It DESTROYS our privacy rights.
Read the Patriot Act (Score:1, Insightful)
If your watchdog barks at every breeze that rustles the trees, you aren't getting any good information from it. Maybe it's time to start looking for a new watchdog or to take security into your own hands.
already lost (Score:5, Insightful)
now not only people are terrorized by terrorists for physical dangers, they're also terrorized by their own government for privacy invasion.
Re:This is an OUTRAGE (Score:2, Insightful)
I usually see posts like yours. Rarely do I see reasoned posts which elaborate.
In the interest of fair debate and converstation, list your reasons and if possible, point to the particular pieces of legislation.
The greatest threat to my liberty... (Score:5, Insightful)
Planes aren't being hijacked because we stop the dreaded nail clipper from coming on board.
Listen to your elders... (Score:4, Insightful)
Ha! (Score:1, Insightful)
It was part of the whole post-9/11 deal (Score:3, Insightful)
There was actually not much debate in Congress. The Patriot Act passed through very easily. The only problem was that it takes away our checks and balances system of government, which is part of what makes American such a great country.
Don't trust me, though. Read what one website said: "The FBI can now access your most private medical records, your library records, and your student records... and can prevent anyone from telling you it was done.
The Department of Justice is expected to introduce a sequel, dubbed PATRIOT II, that would further erode key freedoms and liberties of every America.
Re:I doubt it (Score:5, Insightful)
Same way hitler managed to convince his people that 'jews' were the enemy.
Its called scare tatics.
I highly doubt the DESTROY part where you say we lose our rights. This thing had to be voted for by hundreds of senate/congress men.
Well, you can doubt all you want. Doesn't change the fact that america has made a mistake by following those who have already failed in history. And no, millions, like yourself, were duped into this law by sensless fear.
Untill america gets a clue, things wont improve.
Hypocrisy (Score:3, Insightful)
Woah he is taking a stand against unfounded fear, isn't that what he is in the business of selling?
Frightening person, this Dinh. (Score:5, Insightful)
Anybody who would be drawn to a political ideology purely based on what they oppose is, in my opinion, a dangerous person. Especially when mixed with the power, money and support that an organization like the Republican party has.
The Author (Score:2, Insightful)
Disinterested third parties are the analysts we should be interviewing.
The problems with the Patriot Act.... (Score:5, Insightful)
In both of the above examples, the very existence of the country was at stake, in one of the two, half the US had broken off. The other, millions of people decided to declare war on the US (Germany, Italy, Japan, etc). Despite the tragedy that was 9-11, the entire attack was planned by dozens of people and executed by about 20.
My second problem is the open-endedness. The suspensions of due process in the above cases were understood as temperary and were lifted as soon as the war was over. These days, presidents don't seem to declare war on things that can possibly be ended by a peace treat (drugs, poverty, terror, etc). Tell me, Mr Bush, is the war on terror going to be over before or after the war on drugs?
The suspension of due process indefinitely is an abomination to liberty, which I could've sworn was what we were fighting for in the first place.
I said it before... (Score:2, Insightful)
Novel idea here... (Score:1, Insightful)
Then, make some less restrictive immigration requirements so people can come over here LEGALLY. (I know of many who wish to, but can't... a problem I attribute to all the illegal immigrants)
Then, and only then, should we be worrying about allowing unconstitutional wire taps, searches, seizures, imprisonment, etc... Those things should only be thought of as a last resort.
And it's not the last resort. It's just what the government wants - not what's best for the people.
Well, in my opinion anyway.
As for the threat of Al-Queida... Well, one simply wonders why Osama Bin-Laden was 'allowed' to escape anyway. US Occupation of Afghanistan should have swallowed the middle-east until we captured him. Instead, we went to Iraq for an easier - more exposed target.
If Osama was cought/dead - we wouldn't even be hearing about this wonderfull work of constitution-warping legislation.
You walk around with blinders on, then (Score:4, Insightful)
Hammer and Nail (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I doubt it (Score:0, Insightful)
Re:Name one civil liberty that has been violated (Score:2, Insightful)
Civil liberty is a gut feeling, not a simple enumeration.
Being locked up for no listed crime, with no represnetative, for being of a certain faith and descent, is what i would term a violated civil liberty.
Good Intentions Today (Score:5, Insightful)
Just look at the history of law enforcement. They begged for the ability to seize the property of drug dealers, and were granted that power by short sighted politicians. Now that power is used to steal cars from people never even charged with a crime - in complete violation of the Constitution, but what's the shredding of that moldy old paper when stopping evil drug dealers?
Well.. (Score:5, Insightful)
I support Viet Dinh's use of his 5th Amendment rights in this article.
What I don't support is the many parts of this act, and its enforcement, that are illegal, unconstitutional, immoral, and so far beyond the scope of Federal powers as to shock the imagination. I'm about ready to start looking into how we can find a strong libertarian presidential candidate who has a good chance of being elected. Along with a willing Congress, I'd like nothing more than to see the Federal government stripped down better than an unattended Corvette in south-central LA on a Friday night.
I want to see the Federal government up on cinder blocks, with the states standing around checking out their new goodies. Things are getting out of hand. We're spending more than $400 Billion a year on our military, just so we can stretch it to the breaking point by playing parent to the world. We're spending... well, we don't know how much we're spending on the very intelligence agencies that watch our every move. Why don't we know how much we're spending? Sorry, that's classified. Well, what are you doing with my money? Sorry, that's classified. Why is it classified?! It's my money! Sorry, that's classified. Well what am I getting in return for my unknown investment? Safety. Could you be more specific? Sorry, that's classified.
It's about time for a change. I wonder how much longer it will be before Americans can get together enough courage to dismantle the bulk of the Federal government. Are we ready for 10 - 20 years of readjustment, the end result of which is far more freedom and a return to the Constitutional Republic we once had? Or shall we sit on our collective asses for a bit longer while Uncle Sam's goons start doing random cavity searchs to see what we might be hiding?
Re:The greatest threat to my liberty... (Score:5, Insightful)
Republicans have control of the Executive, Legislative and if we examine the 2000 elections, the Judicial branches of the government.
The Red states far outnumber the Blue states, so popular vote becomes a moot point in future elections as the electoral advantage is seded to the Republicans.
You have to ask yourself. Is it really the government in the wrong here or is this an expression of the People's Will ?
You might be scared to learn the answer.
The greatest threat (Score:5, Insightful)
I think right now at this time and this place the greatest threat to American liberty comes from Bush and their sympathizers rather than from Al-Qaida.
This works this way: An unjustifiable attack to other countries (like Iraq) leads to more anger from its citizens and even other countries. Now we have not just one group of loons who hate the US (Al Qaida), but many.
Hey, dumbass (Score:1, Insightful)
Fuck Godwin. I reserve the right to learn from history, even if you don't. If you're not scared half out of your mind, you're not paying attention.
Re:The greatest threat (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Read the Patriot Act (Score:5, Insightful)
Your statement encapsulates precisely many people's arguments against the Patriot Act. Namely, I'd rather retain my liberty/privacy and take my security into my own hands than allow Big Brother Ashcroft, et al, do whatever he likes, Constitution be damned, in the name of ferreting out communists, oops, I mean terrorists in our midst.
Re:Read the Patriot Act (Score:5, Insightful)
You are basically saying "You made us take all these vitamins, but we never got ill"....
Well, if you ask me... (Score:5, Insightful)
I think that somebody who doesn't understand the distinction between correlation and causation has no business whatsoever rewriting the Constitution.
Re:I doubt it (Score:5, Insightful)
But that's how it starts. As a relatively minor problem. Holocaust magnitude tragedies are only the consequence. I quote from my own website "quotes" page:
Hermann Goering
"Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people don't want war neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."
(at Nurnberg trials)
Typical media script (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd be very interested in someone asking Viet Dinh substantive questions about specific concerns raised in the Patriot Act, but I'm unable to draw much of any conclusion from reading this article, especially not the same alarmist conclusion that the story submitter has drawn.
Another interpretation I could make, especially based on the story submitter's comments, is that the critics of the Patriot Act are equally incapable of discussing the ramifications of the Act as are its supporters. Unfortunately, it's the job of the critics to do a good job criticizing and they get far too hung up in rhetoric and name-calling to take most of them very seriously and given that the law is now on the books, I think they're going to need to change their tactics if they want to have any substantive effect.
Oh crap, I seem to be falling prey to the standard media script of analyzing process rather than issues.
Re:Frightening person, this Dinh. (Score:5, Insightful)
Anybody who would be drawn to a political ideology purely based on what they oppose is, in my opinion, a dangerous person.
Well, I've got news for you: most people vote for whoever they hate the least. Think about it: how many politicans really generate genuine excitement? Very few. The main reason most people go to the polls and vote is because they are afraid of what might happen if "the other guy" gets elected. Hell, why do you think so many political ads are negative? Because they work! They instill fear in the public of the rival candidate.
You and I may wish for a world where people vote for the candidate they like or join a political party based on affinity with their ideals. But if you factor out the people who put bumper stickers on their car and wave those stupid banners around at political rallies, I think you'll find that most people are drawn to a political party because it's the lesser of two evils.
GMD
Re:The greatest threat to my liberty... (Score:4, Insightful)
The bottom line is, even if the terrorists get WMD and deploy them --- lets say 3 nukes and a couple of industrial sabotages a nuclear power plant meltdown and an airborne killer virus --- even that would not be the end of America. America will survive, simple as that. However, America will NOT survive if it becomes a facist state.
China, with 25 million men without potential wives, is MUCH more of a risk than some desert nomad religious fanatics raging against modernity.
Re:Ha! (Score:2, Insightful)
Can you name me any totalitarian country where your remark would have been tolerated?
Todays Quote... (Score:2, Insightful)
It's all about attitude (Score:3, Insightful)
From the article:
If indeed that is your fear or that is your perception then engage in the democratic process. Back up your argument, back up your belief with facts, marshal evidence in order to convince those who are engaged in the process of governance.
Vinh's attitude is that he is "governing" and that we have to come to him with information to change his mind. He does not view himself as a public servant obviously. It is his job to convince the citizens of the United States (not the "governed of the United States") that he needs the tools he has asked for. It is his job to convince the citizens that hsi approach is correct. We do not need to "convince" those who are currently tasked with governing the country. We need to vote their political masters out and get some people in with better attitudes.
Re:Read the Patriot Act (Score:5, Insightful)
Do not kid yourself, the Patriot Act is permanent. Legislation like this which is originally intended to address a current problem (Al Quida) has a way of lingering around long after the problem is no longer around to justify its existince.
The patriot act may look like a drop in the bucket, but do some research into how the founding fathers viewed strong centralized government versus what we actually have today and you can see how each of these minute changes has managed to turn this country upside down.
DinhSounds like an Extremist (Score:2, Insightful)
Couldn't these statements be turned into the following?
Now he sounds more like a Palestinian suicide bomber.
I *DO NOT* write this in opposition to Israelis or in support of Palestinians, or vice versa. That is merely the example I chose. Substitute the name of whatever nation and suicide bombers you want.
My point is that this person cites the fact that, as a young child, he saw bad things done to has parents, and the resulting hatred, as major influences in his life. This hardly seems to be the person to make objective assessments then write an act such as PATRIOT. By my reading of the article, he is a fanatic and an extremist, the very disease he claims to be fighting.
Re:Ha! (Score:3, Insightful)
Hello? He FLED AWAY FROM a communist country.
From the article:
Dinh's mother escaped with him and five of his siblings to the United States.
Re:Listen to your elders... (Score:5, Insightful)
"The fetters imposed on liberty at home have ever been forged out of the weapons provided for defence against real, pretended, or imaginary dangers from abroad." -- James Madison, 4th US president (1751-1836)
Re:This is an OUTRAGE (Score:3, Insightful)
Threat to liberty? (Score:5, Insightful)
A threat to American liberty? Sure they're a threat, but how on earth can a small, loosely knit band only really capable of random destruction threaten liberty? They may threaten building, airplanes, and (heaven forbid) a city, but the exact same destruction is wreaked on a larger scale around the world by natural disasters.
You need a large army, militia or police force to threaten liberty.
Re:Asking a Vietnam refugee... (Score:2, Insightful)
Believe it or not, there are some of us who are here by choice, and not birth. And we treasure the amazing liberties that we have here, and not in our countries of birth. What a Vietnamese refugee knows about the hunger to live free of worry from his government and free of worry from the enemies of his government could speak volumes about the U.S., but you're to busy making bad analogies to listen.
Hey America: (Score:5, Insightful)
These people MUST realize that the "War on Terrorism" is a necessarily perpetual one. Is Viet therefore proposing that we give up our civil liberties indefinitely? Whether he knows it or not, that's what he seems to be proposing.
As long as Americans are willing to believe that politics is over their heads and that they shouldn't worry about what goes on in Washington, the way is wide open for some dynastic madman to install himself in the White House without even being elected, and start waging unprovoked wars in countries most Americans can't recognize on continents most Americans can't name.
As THE most powerful nation on Earth that claims to be, (of/by/for) the people, its citizens have a great responsibility to keep their civil servants accountable. If you ask me, most are allowing themselves to be distracted from that responsibility.
Fascism is Socialism (Score:1, Insightful)
I'd say those are more "left" than conservative.
What do you have against the Democrats? (Score:4, Insightful)
Frankly, this appears to be the entire Democratic Platform for 2004. I have heard nothing but "Hate Bush" from Democratic Party since 2000.
pot.kettle.black.
Re:Read the Patriot Act (Score:2, Insightful)
Oh, it has to be arrests based in the US. Cuban cites won't surprise anybody, except, ummm, maybe you and yours.
Re:already lost (Score:2, Insightful)
What's your point?
Christ (Score:1, Insightful)
To think fascist policies are the result of our most ignoble war.
Who'da thunk? Who indeed...
!!!!!!!! Mod Parent Up !!!!!!!!!! (Score:5, Insightful)
The best way to have both security and liberty (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, this does reduce safty in some areas, but that is the price you pay to avoid the real risk involved in allowing desaparacidos.
On the whole it's a pretty good bargain.
If we do not remove liberties than the people who died on 9/11 (I'm a New Yorker, so that list includes acquaintences and directly affected family members) did so as patriots protecting liberty.
If we use 9/11 as an excuse to remove liberties then they died so that we might all be less free and subvert the constitution.
If I've gotta die I'd rather do so for liberty, not a police state.
KFG
Re:Frightening person, this Dinh. (Score:3, Insightful)
Newsflash - The Democrats have the SAME faults as the Republicans. If you don't see that, you're deluding yourself. They're still politicians. It's one of the few things I can agree with Nader about. And your first proposition would classify most of Dean's followers as dangerous. The only message that I ever heard Dean deliver was "Hate Bush". No answers, just hate the other guy.
Re:Wonderful---more P.R. bullcrap from the Governm (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:The greatest threat to my liberty... (Score:5, Insightful)
The same as the number of elephants I've kept away with my elephant repellant.
Re:The greatest threat to my liberty... (Score:4, Insightful)
Joe McCarthy (Score:5, Insightful)
He falls into the same trap as Senator McCarthy, by destroying the very thing he seeks to protect in his zeal. I remember stories of the neighbourhood "stazi" agents in the former East Germany, and thought what a horrible sort of place to live. Of course I would fight to the death to avoid having to live in such a society. Then you read about initiatives such as TIA and the PATRIOT act initiatives, and wonder if we really won the cold war after all....
This danger exists on both the right and left of the political spectrum. Censorship and repression in the name of "political correctness" is the other side of the coin.
In one way at least, Al Queda has won the war on terror - they hate the idea of a free, tolerant, pluralistic society, and they have managed to make ours considerably less so.
Re:Name one civil liberty that has been violated (Score:2, Insightful)
Suspected terrorists are ENTITLED to these civil liberties. I don't care where we found them (Afghan sheep fields or Boston, MA), they are human and are entitled to human rights.
I think too many people think that Constitutional liberties apply only to American citizens. The Constitution enumerates restrictions on the US Government, enjoining it from infringing on liberties that were "endowed by our Creator".
I think Mr. Dinh totally fails to understand this.
Re:I doubt it (Score:5, Insightful)
Few societies willingly accept totalitarianism in one gulp, which means that citizens must be weaned onto it in small steps. Make no mistake: the Patriot Act (and many others like it) is a first step. In spite of the many rationalizations used to justify its continued existence, laws such as that really have no place in civilized society, much less the United States of America. Just don't get too complacent: I'm sure many Germans prior to the rise of the Third Reich felt that it "couldn't happen here" but they were wrong. Hey, I've seen Sliders
Your fellow Americans... (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, the threat is mostly from your fellow citizens, who just don't care enough. Many have forgotten that democracy and freedom have risks, and the only way to protect them is to recognize, and ignore, that risk. If I stand a .00005% chance instead of a .00001% chance of getting blown up on a plane- but I and my fellow citizens remain free(ie, i didn't have to take my shoes off, didn't have to hand over "papers") so be it. If you aren't, you are a -coward-, and you can damn well pack your bags and move somewhere else, because America was founded by a bunch of guys who got -really- tired of exactly this kind of crap. What gives -you- the right to take -my- freedom, for -your- illusion of security? Franklin said it best: "They that give up essential liberty to obtain temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Nevermind that the risk is infinitesimal; in one year, +10x more people died on our highways than did in all the planes+buildings involved in the terrorist attacks. Every three days more people die of heart disease than died in the terrorist attacks(700,000 people a year, roughly). Nope, I can't have universal healthcare, but I can have Johhny Ashcroft breathing down my neck.
Planes aren't being hijacked because we stop the dreaded nail clipper from coming on board.
Exactly. Further- if you want proof of just how ineffective these measures are, look at countries where "security" is tightest. Israel, for example, is indisputable proof that no matter what you do, you just can't stop someone determined enough; when they stopped Palestinian men, women started strapping bombs to themselves. Then there's England; no end of security procedures did little to stop the IRA. Those video cameras in London, which practically outnumber people, have yielded no drop in crime; same goes for their thousands of radar-speed cameras; in fact, speeding's gone -up-...
Stupid goddamn egotists. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Novel idea here... (Score:3, Insightful)
Have you considered the SIZE of the Middle East, let alone Afghanistan? That's a damn big area to "swallow". To say Bin-Laden was "allowed" to escape implies that he was ever captured to begin with.
een volk dat voor tirannen zwicht (Score:2, Insightful)
zal meer dan lijf en goed verliezen
dan dooft het licht....
H.M. van Randwijk
When the people give in to tirans
they will loose more than body and spirit
then the light will extinguish...
my translation to english.
Re:Fascism is Socialism (Score:3, Insightful)
Totalitarianism and Fascism are extreme right.
BTW, there has NEVER been a Marxist country.
Re:Novel idea here... (Score:3, Insightful)
How quickly we forget the Oklahoma City bombing...
It doesn't matter who you are or if you've got guns or nukes or what. It matters what you do with them.
My Rant.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Okay kids, here's the thing. We can all sit on
Can you even fathom what a political power the members of
Don't like what you see? Don't talk, do.
Wan't a coup? Fine. Let's have one in November.
S
Re:Asking a Vietnam refugee... (Score:5, Insightful)
Asking a Vietnam refugee... About civil liberties is like asking Jack Valenti about fair use.
Wrong. Asking a Vietnam refugee about civil liberties is more like asking DVD Jon about fair use. Jack Valenti knows nothing about fair use because he never lost the right; a Vietnamese refugee has losh his civil liberties.
My parents fled from Castro's regime in Cuba (which came to power in when they were teenagers). Consequently, they have a deeper appreciation for liberty than any natural born American I have ever met. Why? Because they had liberty and it was taken. They don't want to get it taken again. I imagine that Vietnamese refugees are similarly inclined.
Eisenhower (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:The greatest threat to my liberty... (Score:4, Insightful)
It doesn't and it hasn't.
But this is a good thing. It gives hope to those who refuse to wallow in an air of defeatism and understand that any current transgressions need only be temporary.
Remember, the Patriot Act is nothing more than legislation. It can be repealed or written out of the books very easily. But it's going ot take a lot of minds changing before we muster enough Political Will to start that ball rolling. It's not impossible. It's probably just a matter of time.
100 years prior to Suffrage most people thought it was ridiculous to give women the right to vote. As a people, we learned that liberty cannot exist when we disenfranchise half our population. I suspect a similar conciousness will develop and we'll look back at the Patriot Act as a curious by-product of this era.
Re:Read the Patriot Act (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:His name is Viet Dinh (Score:2, Insightful)
I was at a course outside DC and one of the students in the class was originally from South Viet Nam. His dad got the family out on a rickety boat, but didn't get himself out before the Communists put a quick bullet in his head. After learning English in an old Army barracks refuge camp, he got an education and became an American citizen. The guy is quite successful and pure capitalist.
But he was without a car at the class and begged me to take him for a tour of downtown DC at night so he could see out monuments to liberty and freedom. Hey, DC traffic is the pits, but how can you deny someone with his story the opportunity to see the monuments to the dream many in the world never get to realize -- freedom.
the PA has been abused already (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Read the Patriot Act (Score:3, Insightful)
Neither are they a matter of minority imposition.
They are a matter of personal reflection and commitment to what is right.
This is unsound for two reasons. First, it begs the definition of what is right. You've ruled out the majority; the minority is no better -- what do you have left? Second, it's no different than the ancient formula "everyone does that which is right in their own eyes". That way lies anarchy.
Re:I doubt it (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Well.. (Score:5, Insightful)
a) the income tax is not unconstitutional. In fact the Constitution explicitly grants the government the right to levy income tax. And even before that amendment it wasn't unconstitutional.
b) the income tax is not "a new animal". There was income tax over a hundred years ago.
c) most Americans wouldn't trade basic order for the anarchy of no federal government. They just wouldn't.
You're not from Texas, are you? (Score:2, Insightful)
Got a map handy? Maybe a globe? A copy of a RISK game board would do.
Look at our Northern border. Damn. Stretches thousands of miles, doesn't it? Did you know that since there are no natural obstacles, like say, a horrific uncrossable chasm, any schmuck with a pair of hiking boots can just walk right in?
Now look South. Yep, that big long blue line is the Rio Grande, one of our natural borders to the South. Guess what? You can wade across the bloody thing. The biggest natural obstacle to entering the US is the Southwestern desert of Arizona and New Mexico.
Why do I think that a bunch of Arab terrorists might be familiar with living in desert conditions?
By the way, the War on Drugs has been trying, with fairly serious military hardware, to "seal the border" for years, which of course is why no one could possibly buy anything illicit in a heartland city like St. Louis.
The US is not Japan, a nation with fairly stiff natural borders. Hell, we're not even Armenia.
Say it with me. We could have an army of sleepless "Squiddies" from "The Matrix" patrolling the North, and an army of Terminators and HKs patrolling the South (Yeah, I know, Reese thinks the HKs are easy to dust) ...
Re:The greatest threat to my liberty... (Score:5, Insightful)
I can't see how you can look at Bush and Gore and say there's no difference. For starters, I'm pretty sure we wouldn't be in Iraq if Gore were President.
I like the how Tom Tomorrow [thismodernworld.com] put it:
Re:Asking a Vietnam refugee... (Score:3, Insightful)
Just cause you came from a repressive government doesn't make you an authority on the US values of liberty. You certainly may love liberty here in the US, but don't tell me that you're qualified to speak authoritatively on the subject.
Our concept of liberty is a somewhat subtle and contradictary thing. It involves tolerance of low-level civil disobediance, basic distrust of all forms of government and law enforcement, and most of all, the understanding that the only true guarantee to liberty is in the Bill of Rights and it's fair interpretation by the courts.
Congress doesn't give us freedom, Viet Dinh's law doesn't give us freedom. The FBI surely doesn't give us freedom. The only thing that gives Americans freedom is the Bill of Rights. Until you understand that, don't lecture me on freedom and American values.
Re:His name is Viet Dinh (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh brother. It's a joke. Anybody without a strong, direct connection to the Vietnam War really has no grounds to be offended. Half the people here are probably either a) two young to get it or b) too ignorant of history to get it.
If you really are one of those people that's offended, that's fine. But rather than waste everyone else's time, just smile, shut up, and have a coke. You can't live your life running around pointing and shrieking like a schoolgirl all the time.
Great... now I probably offended some psycho feminist chick with the schoolgirl crack. And I probably offended a lesbian with the feminist crack. Oh shit.. now I really done did it...
Re:Your fellow Americans... (Score:3, Insightful)
My preferred analogy is to automobile accidents (roughly 30,000 people a year, which isn't nearly enough for us to resume Prohibition, lower speed limits, etc.), but the point is the same.
However, something just occurred to me. We're comparing death rates among the general United States population. Well, the general population isn't voting on anti-terror laws, the Congress and President are.
And, considering that IMHO the two most likely targets for the next terrorist attack are the White House and the Capitol building, is it possible that the risks which are negligable to you or me are great enough to them to scare them witless? It's not like we're going to put term limits into the Constitution or start voting out incumbents en masse any time soon, so most of our Senators and Representatives are planning to spend the rest of their careers going to well-publicized meetings in buildings which are prime targets for the next set of maniacs who can fly a plane or assemble an artillery piece. Perhaps their reaction to the terrorist threat seems greatly exaggerated because their vulnerability to that threat is also greatly exaggerated.
American Liberty... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The greatest threat (Score:5, Insightful)
- Seek a lasting and balanced peace between Israel and the Palastinians. This open wound has been there for so long we've almost become oblivious to the fact that it is at the root of the worst of the Arab animosity to the West. The Israeli's are engaged in acts against the Palastinians that would be called ethnic cleansing if they were happening in Yugoslavia. The U.S. has always backed Isreal at every turn, no matter how wrong they are or how brutally they treat the Palastinians. A key reason, the Friends of Isreal is one of the most poweful special interest lobbies in the U.S. A politician can't even suggest a balanced treatment of Isreal and the Palastinians without doing the equivalent of grabbing the third rail. Howard Dean said just that and he was crucified for it.
- Stop supporting despotic Arab dictatorships like Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. The administration spends a lot of time wailing about what a despot Saddam was, crowing about democracy in Iraq and conveniently ignoring the regimes that we call friends that are nearly as brutal as Iraq in suppressing dissent. Iraq under the Baathists offered vastly greater freedom to women then you will find in Saudi Arabi or any other Islamic state. The administration made great propaganda with public executions and dismemberment by the Taliban and Saddam but they are also routine in Saudi Arabia.
- Get American (Infidel) troops out of the Middle East. Arab culture simply can't cope with the decedence of American soldiers, liberated American women and an army that is overwhelmingly JudeoChristian in their midst. It just smacks of the Crusades. Its generally forgotten that Al Quaida's core issue was the fact there were American troops roaming all over Saudi Arabia, the Muslim holy land, for more than a decade between the two wars in Iraq. One of the few plusses of the Iraq invasion was it provided a mechanism for withdrawing American troops from Saudi Arabia.
Re:I doubt it (Score:4, Insightful)
Look, just fuse together Roy Moore, Che Guevera, Kevin Mitnick, L. Ron Hubbard, the guys from Queer Eye, Martin Sheen, and Fred Phelps [wikipedia.org], send them back to the Great Depression, and have them run for president on the platform of "Kill the Lawyers, Take Their Money". What do you think's going to happen?
That's the strength of fascism, it's not political, it's social and artistic. It's a near-foolproof method of gaining power in a free society, and it just so happens that it appeals to, and works best for, vapid power-fetishists who often happen to be prone to bouts of genocidal mania once they get to the top. The most stunning thing about the Holocaust is that they managed to pull it off before the whole mangled system collapsed in on itself.
Re:Listen to your elders... (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm so damn tired of this quote. What is essential liberty? Isn't that the crux of the matter? What you feel is essential may not be for another? Not only that, but that enough people fall into that category that they are the majority and help pass laws that you disagree with?
I'm not talking about the wisdom of the PATRIOT Act (I oppose it as well), but to continually tout this quote is beyond just tiring. It's just parroting something which sometimes becomes a slogan but lost may be perspective or reasoning.
And the part about not deserving liberty nor safety is just overboard in my opinion. Hell, I question the worth of most people and think they probably don't deserve to live since many are so selfish and willingly ignorant, but to say that disagreement on this one issue alone would warrant saying they don't deserve neither liberty nor safety is just ridiculous.
The quote has wisdom in it and it's important to learn from it. But this rallying cry is over used and has long since lost its insightfulness and is now redundant. I could've modded you differently, but I think discussion (and actual discussion versus just one liners) is what more needed.
Re:Read the Patriot Act (Score:4, Insightful)
"security without liberty," eh? (Score:2, Insightful)
We came real close to being attacked by lapdancers (Score:1, Insightful)
I wonder how many lives were saved when the DOJ used police powers implemented under the Patriot Act to go after the owners of a strip club:
http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2003/Nov
Thank God we were saved from those terrorists cleverly disquised as a topless dancers.
______________
-----Lick Bush in 2004, the Supreme Court says it's legal!
the most disturbing part of the interview... (Score:4, Insightful)
By not mentioning the specifics of the act, and instead talking about how people are afraid of the act, this report manages to, surprise surprise, actually stir up more fear (hence all the posts on slashdot.)
What I would like to see is a specific breakdown. here's what patriot act ACTUALLY SAYS and here's what the constitution says, and show me differences. then I can make an opinion. Here's why X is bad, here's why Y is bad.
Also, shame on you if you posted against the patriot act in this thread and have not actually read it yourself. you shouldn't trust the trolls around you to summarize it with their slant.
I for one thought Viet's response to the one accusation, section 215, was actually reasonable. The powers he mentioned exist and have existed on state level and make sense nationally.
and finally, to those who say that our greatest threat comes from our own government: Physical violence against citizens in the most blatant way, murder, is preventable. Each one of those twenty hijackers made a conscious effort. America did not deserve it. not one person who died deserved it. And it could have been prevented had a decent enough intelligence effort been put forth. If the government did NOT put forth efforts to protect us, it would be abdicating its duty.
Re:DinhSounds like an Extremist (Score:5, Insightful)
Now he sounds more like a Palestinian suicide bomber. "
Show me an outspoken member of the GOP that has blown himself up at a bus terminal and/or press releases where the Republican party has taken credit for such a bombing and I'll agree with your comparison between the two. Otherwise, you have +4 Fear Mongering.
Like the man said... (Score:3, Insightful)
The real problem with the "War on Terror" is... there is no end. When all the Muslims are dead, something else will be classified as terrorism. Unions [google.com], "file-sharers", hackers, cable television thieves...
The government of the United States should be concerned with INCREASING my liberty and privacy; not the opposite. If they want to pass a law regarding oversight of law enforcement activities... why don't they pass one INCREASING oversight?
Only one thing will save us and the world from our out-of-contol political system and wannabe emperors... eventually, we will be so far in debt that tyranny will bankrupt itself.
Bush is the most transparently corrupt and immoral president in modern United States history. He does not value our democratic traditions. The only thing more putrefied than Bush and his administration; is the heart of every citizen in the United States who voted for him. We get what we deserve.
Re:Al Qaida has won... ARGH!!! (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, I have read similar publications from them. A typical propoganda piece, full of historical distortions.
Bin Laden is a Saudi, not a Palestinian. None of the Sept 11th hijackers were. Very few Al Queda memebers are. The Palestinian Authority has gone to great lengths to distance themselves from, and denounce Al Queda. They use the existance of the state of Israel is a straw dog. I was able to speak with somebody before in the Egyptian government about the Yom Kippur war. It was quite revealing - the allies never trusted each other, and he admitted that even had the state of Israel been utterly destroyed, there would be no peace or stability in the region. Quite the reverse in fact.
American has lent much material aid to Israel, no doubt about it. They have also lent considerable aid to Islamic countries as well. Turkey enjoys very good relations with the US. They conveniently forget how the NATO, particularly the US and GB went to war to save Muslims in Bosnia.
Al Queda loves to beat their chest about the evils of the 800 year old crusades, (true enough) yet forget about the enslavement and mandatory conscription of Christan children to serve the Ottoman empire.
But you do have one point. Some of the things I see coming from the religious far right in the USA bear an uncomfortable resemblance to statements that might have come from the Taliban.
Although it is not mentioned in your statement, they DO hate a free society. Look at the model society they built in Afghanistan. It wasn't enough even to be a practicing Muslim, look what they did to the Sheite minorities, they considered heretic. You were forced to exactly follow the edicts of their particular (warped) interpretation of Islam.
Not to pick on Muslims by the way, there seems to be an equal distribution of intolerance distributed among all faiths.
Re:Good Intentions Today (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:His name is Viet Dinh (Score:5, Insightful)
That post is ignorant at best, but more likely just racist.
Offensive, possibly. But racist, no. Racist would be that joke applied to a someone of Korean descent, as Koreans have little to do with the Viet Cong but happen to be ethnically related (very broadly) to Vietnamese. Would it be racist to make a "Heil Hitler" joke about a German? And if so, how about a Swede? I realize it's a lost cause, but I just wish the word "racism" were used more accurately rather than as a blanket term for "based on stereotypes".
And to characterize the joke as "ignorant" is also an absurd misuse of the term. I can't imagine that anyone who knows the signifance of the term "Charlie" in relation to Vietnam (and thus understands the joke) would confuse a 35-year-old first-generation immigrant Vietnamese American with a communist guerilla.
It was a silly, offensive joke based on cultural stereotypes. Just leave it at that. And just for the record, I'm a bit of an aficionado of Vietnamese culture, I'm part Asian, and I thought it was funny. (Though I would never repeat it in front of a Vietnamese person.)
Sometimes, people who fled totalitarian countries are the most ardent supporters of American freedoms. I can't read into the heart and mind of Viet Dinh, but your post is contemptible.
Unfortunately, such people aren't immune to engaging in the same mindset they sought to flee: Little Saigon, 1999 [uci.edu] And the Cuban refuguee community in Florida isn't much better behaved, in my opinion.
Relative Threats (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually according to a pentagon report [democracynow.org] the greatest threat is from a changing environment and it's consequences on global societies.
The terrorist threat is arguable greater today then it was 3 years ago. Fighting "terrorist" militarily is like squeezing a pimple it only makes it worse and takes longer to heal. Terrorism is best countered by emphasizing ideas (such as liberty , equality, education) and centering a foriegn policy more on these ideals then self-interest.
Re:My Rant.... (Score:2, Insightful)
Just a thought.. (Score:2, Insightful)
overbearing/overwhelming gov control. Seems to be a very slim hope, at the moment.
Re:His name is Viet Dinh (Score:5, Insightful)
Your definition of "race" must be different from mine. I don't consider German or American or German-American or Swedish or Vietnamese to be races. Racism would be making a Viet Cong joke about someone solely because he has black hair, thin eyes, a flat nose, and whatever physical attributes associated with people from East Asia. The connection between a Vietnamese and communist guerillas, or between a German and Hitler is historical, not ethnic. That's the point I'm trying to make. And the reason I'm doing so is that "racism" has become the politically-correct catch-all blanket condemnatory term for any sort of discrimination, and used inaccurately.
Yes, it would be both ignorant and racist to make a Hitler joke about a Swede. The Swedes have been non-aligned for a long time.
It would be ignorant certainly, because a Swede has no unique connection, ethnically or historically, with Hitler. For it to be racist, the teller would have to draw a link from blond hair and blue eyes, to Germany, to Hitler. That's beyond ignorant, it's simply stupid. And Sweden's policitical history is totally irrelevant to anything at ll.
I stated clearly in my previous post that the joke can indeed be characterized as offensive, in its use of stereotypes about Vietnamese. That's why I wouldn't tell it to a Vietnamese. As for "hatefulness", that's another glib assertion. I thought the joke was funny, yet I know I am not hateful towards Vietnamese.
Re:Listen to your elders... (Score:2, Insightful)
It is liberty and it is essential NOT something you can whittle away at. It is whole or none.
Re:Al Qaida has won... ARGH!!! (Score:3, Insightful)
Moreover, the muslims in Bosnia are of Turkish descent. Arabs and Turks have never got along well. Turkey also has economic and military ties with Israel. So I wouldn't be surprised to hear that Arabs don't really care what happens with Turks...
Re:Read the Patriot Act (Score:3, Insightful)
um. (Score:4, Insightful)
I'd say the Bill of Rights would count as "essential liberties", wouldn't you?
quote still works for me.
Re:The greatest threat to my liberty... (Score:3, Insightful)
That's a troll if I ever saw one. Jeez, do I have to go back to FDR and his insistence on unconditional surrender of Germany and Japan? Heck, we don't even have to go back further than Clinton and his stance on Serbia and Haiti (remember the grief the conservatives gave him about his aggressive stance on the military coup in Haiti?). All that crap about Dems being "weak" in the face of threats is just that, crap.
Clinton/Gore would have invaded Afghanistan to get to Al Qaida, no question. The might have even invaded Iraq too, the difference would have been though, that they wouldn't have so non-chalantly pissed off the entire world in doing so. Heck, Bush Jr.'s daddy would have been a little more patient and would have eventually gotten UN support, without stepping on everyone's toes or calling anyone "irrelevent". The problem isn't that Junior is a Republican or a conservative, the problem is that he's an idiot, IMO.
Re:Hammer and Nail (Score:2, Insightful)
Government's "tool" is force, and indeed, force is the only tool they have. (If government had the tool of voluntary association, it wouldn't be government. It would be private enterprise.)
Re:Here's a novel idea (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The problems with the Patriot Act.... (Score:1, Insightful)
For instance, what happens if a state drops out today, do they take their fraction of the national debt with them? In addition, what if it's North Dakota? Do they get all our nuclear weapons? If Kentucky seceeds do they get all our gold?
The problem with succession is that it forces the union to be prepared to cope with the loss of a state at very little notice, and thus it is almost impossible to defend against real threats. It's hard to place research centers, army bases, etc... when it must be remembered that if you place too nice of a prize within a given state then it will just run off with it.
That is the core of the problem, in my opinion.
-Tyler
tjw19@columbia.edu (posted anon, I forgot my pwd)
Re:Threat to liberty? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:My Rant.... (Score:1, Insightful)
That said, I simply don't believe voting will make a big difference. In future elections I plan on voting for a third party, but I don't expect anything to come from it. I do not see how a third-party candidate could ever become president in a system built to keep them out. The only options are Democrat and Republican, and that is not much of an option. I'll probably get modded down (or rather, being AC, not modded up) because I'm stepping on people's sacred beliefs, but I don't think voting in the system now can make any significant changes. You people who say "Get out and vote and you'll make a difference," please explain how it makes a difference. With the two major parties practically legislated into the government, how can a third-party candidate become president?
Explain to me how my cynicism is not justified.
Re:The greatest threat to my liberty... (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, since I count Iraq as "American Soil" (after all, we ARE in control there, aren't we? - in fact, Iraqis have LESS rights in Iraq under US military rule than Americans have here in the US) - we've had DAILY terrorist attacks, thousands dead. No clue on the Ricin. No clue on the Anthrax. No clue on the Ohio sniper. The Washington sniper was only caught by blind luck on our part and stupidity on his part. Had in no way, anything to do with the liberties removed by USA PATRIOT Act. Bin Laden roams free, and the guy who sold nuclear secrets to Libya, Iran, and North Korea was pardoned, and the US State Department says that's OK.
Bush has been a miserable failure at security. He's even a failure at spin. Because he's not fooling all of the people. Only the gullible ones. Less and less every day.
Re:Your fellow Americans... (Score:3, Insightful)