Everything will be used against you if they need someone to blame. Just pick the one with the most "X"s.
I have several books that might raise an eyebrow. One is "Blueprint for Black Power" Amazon inserted a small paper saying it was below their standards when I ordered it from them. But I couldn't find any visible damage...
This book is primarily about cultural phychology and has nothing to do with any radical movements or any such violence or the like. But I could easily be marked by one of the various government "plans" if they feelt the need over books like this.
This is garbage and we shouldn't allow this in a 'free as in beer' society.
What do they really expect to find? They already have shown they have enough information, but their problem is a lack of digestion and comprehention. Perhaps some of the Arabs and muslims they so actively alienate could be of assistance...Only if they really cared about security would that happen!
by Anonymous Coward writes:
on Tuesday November 05, 2002 @04:22PM (#4601524)
> What do they really expect to find? They already > have shown they have enough information, but > their problem is a lack of digestion and comprehention.
I'd expect that they run your reading list against the following algorithm: * If you read at least two "radical" books like "Blueprint for Black Power" * And you read the Koran * Then you are likely are guilty of the thought crime of "Thought Terrorist" so you need to be watched. * If you are found to consort with others who have committed "Thought Terrorism" * Then you and your consorts must be brought in for "questioning" until you confess your guilt or "prove" your innocense. It's not "innocent 'till proven guilty" since they already have "proof" that you and your consorts have engaged in "Thought Terrorism".
It's quite an effective strategy to deal with "underable elements". The "beauty" of it is that much of it can be automated and using Bayesian Filtering it can be made more accurate over time. There may be some false positives, but who cares? It's "for the greater good" and "we all have to make sacrifices to stop 'Terrorism'".
Considering I live in Detroit and have many friends from that side of the world I suppose I get another "X".
Does my christianity vindicate me?
Its just that people are not legallay prosecuted so much anymore as they are prosecuted in a marketing fashion.
For instance, so may people still think OJ was "obviously" guilty, but fail to point out any legitimate evidence to support that claim. He is basically culturally guilty at this point. Regardless to his guilt or not I like to make sensical arguements. This is not the way of the times.
I have not been to DPL lately (for all you non-`troiters, dpl=Detroit Public Library") and the last time that I was there they used a non-computer system for check in and check out. Wouldn't that type of "non-automated" system totally foil and piss off the FBI?
every society on earth has had to deal with terrorists at some time or another. There is no easy way to stop the threat that someone could unleash some plague, detonate some bomb or shoot unarmed people. The solution that the US has decided on seems to be surveilance of its own citizens and of anyone new comming into the country. For right or wrong this seems to be a decision that was reached by the people that were elected in the US by the people. The American people have become used to having alot of freedoms that most other nations on earth don't give to the ir citizens, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, the right to keep and bear arms, the right to due process of law, the right to have privacy in your home. These rights are granted to all in the US, unfortunatly this also means that they get granted to people who would attack the US from within.
Saying that your not a terrorist and that the FBI should not be monitering you doesn't work, how are the authorities supposed to know what you are thinking? What you are planning to do? Investigation seems to be a way that this can be accomplished but it means throwing away all the rights that the American people have lived so long with and have fought so hard to preserve, 2 wars and innumerable conflicts have been fought by the US to "preserve and maintain our way of life", you can't get rid of that and still call yourself an American.
Its a dicey issue to be certian, balancing rights with the need for the authorities to protect Americans from their enemies.
They achieved that sucess without internal surveillance. This has nothing to do with concrete, nationwide threat and everything to do with a goverment grow too large, powerful and militaristic after 50 years of cold war suddenly loosing the main enemy justifying the buildup.
They're not 'granted', we took them in several massive and very costly wars starting in the late 1700's. This is one of the problems with how people view our current government, and any government for that matter. The US government derives its power solely from the will of the goverened. Every so often, we put certain people in positions of power with the understanding that they will carry our out will. We are granted nothing by our government, our government is granted privileges and powers by us.
"this also means that they get granted to people who would attack the US from within."
Each person is granted certain unalienable rights by their creator. The extra rights we enjoy in the US are granted to all law-abiding citizens. Those who abuse those rights and use them in ways which infringe upon the rights of others lose some of them (ie. persons in jail). You cannot bar rights from those "who would do harm" until they've done harm or show imminent intent and ability to do so. To try to do otherwise is both futile and undermines the very principles upon which our judicial system founded. Those who do it in the name of "protecting Americans" are cowards who lack the courage and conviction to stand up for what is just.
"how are the authorities supposed to know what you are thinking?"
They're not, and that's why I have a problem with them monitoring what you and I are reading; it gets very close to what you're thinking. Policing thoughts is something so detestible to the senses of human freedom that it has no place beyond the depths of the Orwellian hell which we find ourselves so perilously close to experiencing first-hand.
"2 wars and innumerable conflicts have been fought by the US to "preserve and maintain our way of life", you can't get rid of that and still call yourself an American."
Our way of life? Are you joking? Our way of life shouldn't be even close to what we're worried about. How about our principles? How about beliefs (secular)? How about our childrens' future? How about our ideals? Our way of life can always be improved, but our ideals are just that; ideals. As for our way of life, if we stand firmly grounded in our ideals and beliefs, our way of life is intrinsically preserved. Our freedom is our strength; our courage is our protection; our ideals are the life through which we live eternally.
I agree we need to protect ourselves from our enemy, but restricting the rights and liberties of Americans is NOT the way to do it. Nor is ubiquitous surveillence. Not only that, but none of these things will help us in the end. Most of the people who are involved in terrorist (and I use that word sparingly) plots and such against America grew up in countries that have more restrictions on freedom and more surveillance than you or I can possibly imagine. They've lived their lives bypassing security, surveillance, and other measures. Israel has security tighter that most Americans dream of, yet they must endure regular suicide bombings. Ask someone from Israel who's lost a loved one to a suicide bomber what super-tight security is good for; you'll have no shortage of people to talk to. You really think checking reading habits is going to help? Certainly checking mine doesn't help you; merely gives you more irrelevant data to sort through. Aside from that, just what the hell gives you the right to monitor what I read and judge whether the books I'm reading are ok?
Most of the changes being made will do nothing to deter those who are determined to do us harm, and many of the new policies do nothing more than overwhelm authorities with data completely irrelevant to terrorism; only relevant to societal control. If you want to control what I think or control what I say, you're in for a big surprise. Myself and many like me will MUCH sooner die resisting you than let you destroy the freedoms and ideals preserved by the blood of the thousands who've defended that in which they believed and held dear. If you'd like to kill those willing and ready to defend their rights, you can start with me. To destroy the freedoms of Americans in the name of America is to disgrace our forefathers, our flag, our Constitution, and everything those things represent. To those like Ashcroft who commit these heinous acts, you are dishonoring the American government, your position, and yourself as an American. And you should know that the American people will not tolerate but so much of your totalitarianistic edicts before they rise up against you.
Protect us from those who would do harm to America; do not "protect us" from ourselves, and do not believe for a moment that we will happily trade our freedom like candy for your bitter and distastful tyranical "protection".
every society on earth has had to deal with terrorists at some time or another.
Probably not every society and certainly to different extents
There is no easy way to stop the threat that someone could unleash some plague, detonate some bomb or shoot unarmed people.
Avoiding deliberatly making enemies tends to help though.
The solution that the US has decided on seems to be surveilance of its own citizens and of anyone new comming into the country.
Combined with bombing people all over the world, most recently in Yemen, and continuing to persue the foreign policies which make the US so disliked in the first place.
Saying that your not a terrorist and that the FBI should not be monitering you doesn't work, how are the authorities supposed to know what you are thinking?
Why should they have to know in the first place?
What you are planning to do? Investigation seems to be a way that this can be accomplished but it means throwing away all the rights that the American people have lived so long with and have fought so hard to preserve,
Investigation is not the same thing as mass surveillance (with the risk of creating a class of people not subject to surveillance.)
Its a dicey issue to be certian, balancing rights with the need for the authorities to protect Americans from their enemies.
How do you know that the "authorities" are not your "ememies"? The US Constitution is far more concerned with limiting the power of government than anything else.
They already have shown they have enough information, but their problem is a lack of digestion and comprehention.
Which just adding more information won't help one little bit. The problem with mass surveilance is that the signal to noise ratio is awful.
Perhaps some of the Arabs and muslims they so actively alienate could be of assistance...
Of course holding people without trial, kidnapping people from halfway around the world and making support of Zionism more important than people's welfare and even lives will really avoid alienating people. Not!
"The C Programming Language -- A language which combines the flexibility of
assembly language with the power of assembly language."
I don't trust them. (Score:5, Insightful)
I have several books that might raise an eyebrow. One is "Blueprint for Black Power" Amazon inserted a small paper saying it was below their standards when I ordered it from them. But I couldn't find any visible damage...
This book is primarily about cultural phychology and has nothing to do with any radical movements or any such violence or the like. But I could easily be marked by one of the various government "plans" if they feelt the need over books like this.
This is garbage and we shouldn't allow this in a 'free as in beer' society.
What do they really expect to find? They already have shown they have enough information, but their problem is a lack of digestion and comprehention. Perhaps some of the Arabs and muslims they so actively alienate could be of assistance...Only if they really cared about security would that happen!
Mass Monitoring for "Security" made simple. (Score:5, Interesting)
> have shown they have enough information, but
> their problem is a lack of digestion and comprehention.
I'd expect that they run your reading list against the following algorithm:
* If you read at least two "radical" books like "Blueprint for Black Power"
* And you read the Koran
* Then you are likely are guilty of the thought crime of "Thought Terrorist" so you need to be watched.
* If you are found to consort with others who have committed "Thought Terrorism"
* Then you and your consorts must be brought in for "questioning" until you confess your guilt or "prove" your innocense. It's not "innocent 'till proven guilty" since they already have "proof" that you and your consorts have engaged in "Thought Terrorism".
It's quite an effective strategy to deal with "underable elements". The "beauty" of it is that much of it can be automated and using Bayesian Filtering it can be made more accurate over time. There may be some false positives, but who cares? It's "for the greater good" and "we all have to make sacrifices to stop 'Terrorism'".
*shiver*
Re:Mass Monitoring for "Security" made simple. (Score:4, Insightful)
Does my christianity vindicate me?
Its just that people are not legallay prosecuted so much anymore as they are prosecuted in a marketing fashion.
For instance, so may people still think OJ was "obviously" guilty, but fail to point out any legitimate evidence to support that claim. He is basically culturally guilty at this point. Regardless to his guilt or not I like to make sensical arguements. This is not the way of the times.
I am concerned.
Re:Mass Monitoring for "Security" made simple. (Score:2)
Re:Mass Monitoring for "Security" made simple. (Score:1)
Whew!!! for a second there I thought my business model was under attack again!!
Signed,
Steve Ballmer
one solution (Score:3, Interesting)
Saying that your not a terrorist and that the FBI should not be monitering you doesn't work, how are the authorities supposed to know what you are thinking? What you are planning to do? Investigation seems to be a way that this can be accomplished but it means throwing away all the rights that the American people have lived so long with and have fought so hard to preserve, 2 wars and innumerable conflicts have been fought by the US to "preserve and maintain our way of life", you can't get rid of that and still call yourself an American.
Its a dicey issue to be certian, balancing rights with the need for the authorities to protect Americans from their enemies.
Think about it.
Re:one solution (Score:1)
I thought about it, and this came out:
Its a dicey issue to be certian, balancing rights with the need for the "enemies" to protect Americans from their authorities.
Re:one solution (Score:1)
Re:one solution (Score:2)
Re:one solution (Score:3, Insightful)
They're not 'granted', we took them in several massive and very costly wars starting in the late 1700's. This is one of the problems with how people view our current government, and any government for that matter. The US government derives its power solely from the will of the goverened. Every so often, we put certain people in positions of power with the understanding that they will carry our out will. We are granted nothing by our government, our government is granted privileges and powers by us.
"this also means that they get granted to people who would attack the US from within."
Each person is granted certain unalienable rights by their creator. The extra rights we enjoy in the US are granted to all law-abiding citizens. Those who abuse those rights and use them in ways which infringe upon the rights of others lose some of them (ie. persons in jail). You cannot bar rights from those "who would do harm" until they've done harm or show imminent intent and ability to do so. To try to do otherwise is both futile and undermines the very principles upon which our judicial system founded. Those who do it in the name of "protecting Americans" are cowards who lack the courage and conviction to stand up for what is just.
"how are the authorities supposed to know what you are thinking?"
They're not, and that's why I have a problem with them monitoring what you and I are reading; it gets very close to what you're thinking. Policing thoughts is something so detestible to the senses of human freedom that it has no place beyond the depths of the Orwellian hell which we find ourselves so perilously close to experiencing first-hand.
"2 wars and innumerable conflicts have been fought by the US to "preserve and maintain our way of life", you can't get rid of that and still call yourself an American."
Our way of life? Are you joking? Our way of life shouldn't be even close to what we're worried about. How about our principles? How about beliefs (secular)? How about our childrens' future? How about our ideals? Our way of life can always be improved, but our ideals are just that; ideals. As for our way of life, if we stand firmly grounded in our ideals and beliefs, our way of life is intrinsically preserved. Our freedom is our strength; our courage is our protection; our ideals are the life through which we live eternally.
I agree we need to protect ourselves from our enemy, but restricting the rights and liberties of Americans is NOT the way to do it. Nor is ubiquitous surveillence. Not only that, but none of these things will help us in the end. Most of the people who are involved in terrorist (and I use that word sparingly) plots and such against America grew up in countries that have more restrictions on freedom and more surveillance than you or I can possibly imagine. They've lived their lives bypassing security, surveillance, and other measures. Israel has security tighter that most Americans dream of, yet they must endure regular suicide bombings. Ask someone from Israel who's lost a loved one to a suicide bomber what super-tight security is good for; you'll have no shortage of people to talk to. You really think checking reading habits is going to help? Certainly checking mine doesn't help you; merely gives you more irrelevant data to sort through. Aside from that, just what the hell gives you the right to monitor what I read and judge whether the books I'm reading are ok?
Most of the changes being made will do nothing to deter those who are determined to do us harm, and many of the new policies do nothing more than overwhelm authorities with data completely irrelevant to terrorism; only relevant to societal control. If you want to control what I think or control what I say, you're in for a big surprise. Myself and many like me will MUCH sooner die resisting you than let you destroy the freedoms and ideals preserved by the blood of the thousands who've defended that in which they believed and held dear. If you'd like to kill those willing and ready to defend their rights, you can start with me. To destroy the freedoms of Americans in the name of America is to disgrace our forefathers, our flag, our Constitution, and everything those things represent. To those like Ashcroft who commit these heinous acts, you are dishonoring the American government, your position, and yourself as an American. And you should know that the American people will not tolerate but so much of your totalitarianistic edicts before they rise up against you.
Protect us from those who would do harm to America; do not "protect us" from ourselves, and do not believe for a moment that we will happily trade our freedom like candy for your bitter and distastful tyranical "protection".
Re:one solution (Score:2)
Probably not every society and certainly to different extents
There is no easy way to stop the threat that someone could unleash some plague, detonate some bomb or shoot unarmed people.
Avoiding deliberatly making enemies tends to help though.
The solution that the US has decided on seems to be surveilance of its own citizens and of anyone new comming into the country.
Combined with bombing people all over the world, most recently in Yemen, and continuing to persue the foreign policies which make the US so disliked in the first place.
Saying that your not a terrorist and that the FBI should not be monitering you doesn't work, how are the authorities supposed to know what you are thinking?
Why should they have to know in the first place?
What you are planning to do? Investigation seems to be a way that this can be accomplished but it means throwing away all the rights that the American people have lived so long with and have fought so hard to preserve,
Investigation is not the same thing as mass surveillance (with the risk of creating a class of people not subject to surveillance.)
Its a dicey issue to be certian, balancing rights with the need for the authorities to protect Americans from their enemies.
How do you know that the "authorities" are not your "ememies"? The US Constitution is far more concerned with limiting the power of government than anything else.
Re:I don't trust them. (Score:2)
The popular misquote is to say "money" is the root of all evil, as opposed to "the love of money."
Re:I don't trust them. (Score:2)
Re:I don't trust them. (Score:2)
Actually love of power is probably the root of all kinds of evil. Money just makes it easily accessable.
Re:I don't trust them. (Score:2)
Which just adding more information won't help one little bit. The problem with mass surveilance is that the signal to noise ratio is awful.
Perhaps some of the Arabs and muslims they so actively alienate could be of assistance...
Of course holding people without trial, kidnapping people from halfway around the world and making support of Zionism more important than people's welfare and even lives will really avoid alienating people. Not!