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."
Well, I'm Canadian... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Well, I'm Canadian... (Score:2, Informative)
Reece,
Well if your at college ... (Score:2, Informative)
So I guess that you could say that what used to just piss people off is now considered domestic terrorism. Some people OBVIOUSLY overreact to situations and play on the emotions. I would really like to seem some legislation against PROFITING on 9/11.
Re:Well if your at college ... (Score:3, Funny)
I agree completely.. Has anyone else seen the Anti-Drug commercials saying that by buying drugs we help terrorists. This angers me since every sack I ever bought has been straight from Mexico. I believe they are just doing this to make drug users feel responsible for 9/11 . There is no need to rehash these memories to make a point especially when they in no way relate to what happened.
Re:Well if your at college ... (Score:4, Interesting)
Yup. And do you know what the worst thing is?
Even discussing this sort of stuff can get one branded as "unpatriotic" or "insensitive". Having worked in the media , it was clear that a HUGE chilling effect came over it, even over here in australia.
Whereas we SHOULD ask questions like "Hey , is this interference in the mid east part of the cause of S/11. Why where we funding the taliban?", we havent been asking that, because any given question can be answered with "SHH! WHERE FIGHTING TERRORISTS! BOW YOUR HEAD IN SHAME!"
And the cycle goes on... And get's nuttier too. Questioning govt anti-hacker legislation can get one branded as "un-patriotic". ditto for fcking phone tapping legislation, drug legislation, camp X-ray legislation..... Any questioning is..... "unpatriotic"
So maybe we should give up , hey guys?... Freedom of speech is dead in the water. MIA.
Those founding fathers would not be impressed with a president who claims "There should be limits to freedom". (Rant ends here)
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:Well if your at college ... (Score:4, Informative)
Check it out:
http://www.lp.org/action/files/!drugwar.pdf
Re:Well if your at college ... (Score:3, Interesting)
Dude. Wake up.
The CIA is one of the major players in the drug trade.
Crazy conspiracy theory? No. Just a very short memory on the part of most Americans. Recall The Iran Contra Hearings?
It was testified on TV before congress that our government sells drugs to support terrorist countries. This is a demonstrated fact.
And the Taliban, for fucks sake ?!? They instituted the death penalty for Opium cultivation , or don't you remember that either.
Also, the war on some drugs causes massive amounts of money to go to police and prisons to incarcerate Americans who choose to cultivate a freaking plant.
It's *very* profitable to have drugs illegal since the government gets paid twice.
Buying an SUV does far more to support terrorism than buying drugs does. Where do the terrorists get most of their money? Oil.
Please make at least a token effort to do your patriotic duty and inform yourself rather than spewing lies that any bit of common sense reveals for what they are.
Well... (Score:2)
Re:Well... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Well... (Score:2)
Re:Well... (Score:2)
Canadian border (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm sick of people saying "Oh, it doesn't bother me because it makes me feel safer." It DOES bother me, and NO, it DOESN'T make me feel safer. If someone wanted to get across the border with explosives or something, they're gonna do it and these stupid spot checks aren't prevent it.
Re:Canadian border (Score:2)
http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2002
Re:Canadian border (Score:5, Interesting)
It is so annoying at the borders. Going to the US with my father driving can be trying because he has one of those huge islamic-reminiscent beards (although he's not islamic) and the US border people always root through the car, look in all your containers, make a mess of everything, and don't put anything back where it was. Rude asholes. Do unto others as you would have done unto you. (If you're not white or with white people, you generally experience great discrimination at the US border crossing over from Canada. Sad but true. It's happenned to my family on numerous occasions, before and after 9/11.)
On a similar note, a friend of a friend was driving from (Alberta) Canada to the Utah early this year to attend the Salt Lake City Olympics (as a spectator) and one of the guys he was going with was Islamic and wore a turban. They got across the border without too much trouble but on the interstate, there was a period of about 15 minutes where there was a state trooper car front of them, another behind them, and one on the side, totally boxing them in. The troopers backed off eventually, but still, it is unnerving and (both this the first story are) proof that just the way you look can bring about great discrimination from fearful people.
Re:Canadian border (Score:5, Insightful)
lots of Geeks have known this their whole lives....
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: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.
Eyeball to Eyeball with the Feds (Score:5, Funny)
Definitely the 9/11 style attack. I constantly live in fear that terrorists will smuggle a Boeing 757 (fully loaded with jet fuel) into the US from Canada in their car trunk. They'll then go to a public library, and after checking out books like "How to Blow Up Big Buildings with Commercial Airliners", they'll rent out a fleet of crop-sprayers over the Internet, using PGP. They'll tow the 757 to an airstrip using this fleet of crop-sprayers (conserving the 757's fuel for a really big explosion). They'll then suspiciously mill around the plane for a while in plain view of the neighbors with signs up saying "Die America" and "Kablooie Empire State Building". After a while, they'll take off and ram into the Empire State building.
Fortunately, the federal government has forseen this chain of events, and taken prompt action to stop the terrorists at any point.
(My apologies: I couldn't manage to somehow work in a number of federal stupidities like the uncomfortably KGB-like and extremely expensive Office of Homeland Security and the stupid regs that made an aircraft attendant make my father break the apparently deadly file off his nail clippers in his toiletries kit.)
Re:Eyeball to Eyeball with the Feds (Score:2)
There are more people willing to kill you just for being born where you born than you can imagine. Even spoiled brats like you.
Re:Eyeball to Eyeball with the Feds (Score:3, Funny)
Show me how to kill a man with nail clippers, and I'll try it on you just to see if you're right.
- A.P.
Please Explain... (Score:3)
Personally, I'd like to go back to the old way where you could bring nail clippers and plastic rifles for GI Joe figurines, but that would be asking the Americans to embrace logic and hell will freeze sooner than that!
Terrorism only works on victims like you (Score:3)
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: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: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: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
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
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
nothing really changed (Score:2, Interesting)
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.
Well, for starters... (Score:5, Informative)
It's even worse when they say "So?"
Re:Well, for starters... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Well, for starters... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Well, for starters... (Score:4, Informative)
You can hardly attribute the UN and the fall of the USSR entirely to the USA. Hell, the USA didn't even support the League of Nations after Woodrow Wilson left the scene. Look also at the impact the IMF have had. Look also at the fact that the amount of aid the US has given as a percentage of its GNP has fallen consistently in the last 50 years.
The only way to explain every person in the world who dislikes or disagrees with various American policies by your argument is that they are insane. Surely that should make you reasses your argument?
Re:Well, for starters... (Score:3, Funny)
Now available in an easy-to-digest comic form!
http://archive.salon.com/comics/boll/2001/12/20/bo ll/index.html [salon.com]
Thanks to Ruben Bolling's Tom the Dancing Bug, of course.
Re:Well, for starters... (Score:2)
Almost all >95% of the people held in immigration charges have been deported at this point. The remaining 5% are people that we really might not want Al-Qeda to know we have (the downside of a cell structure is that while your enemy can not easily get to your membership, neither can you, esp if they are "sleeper cells" like say, the 9/11 crowd was.).
Re:Well, for starters... (Score:2)
One more:
The Right of Habaes Corpus: Those declared "enemy combatants" are never arraigned, nor have to be told why they are being held.
You covered this with RIGHT TO TRIAL, but its even worse they you describe.
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: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....
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?
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?"
Amtrak, etc. (Score:5, Interesting)
Case in point.
I was on an Amtrak train to Washington, DC. I walked down the corridor, down the steps, onto the train. I hung out in my chair, and when I was asked for my ticket, I said, 'I'd like to buy one please.' We were already well on our way, and I'd bought tickets before on the train, not a big deal, there's like a three dollar surcharge or something.
Nope.
I was informed that I needed to get off of the train in Wilmington, purchase a ticket, and wait for the NEXT train to come by. This made me kinda late, and extremely irritated.
I asked why I had to get off of the train.
I was told that company policy had changed in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, I had to present photo ID, buy a ticket, and get on the train, I'm not allowed on the train without a ticket.
I was already on the train. It was already moving. It was already about 30 miles out of Philadelphia. Let me make this point very clear. I WAS ALREADY ON THE TRAIN.
I said to the guy, 'I'm already on the train. It's already moving.' He said I still needed to get off the train at the next stop, buy a ticket, and wait for the next train.
I looked him square in the face and said, "Let's say I was a suicidal bomber or a terrorist, and I wanted to kill people or blow up the train. I could do it if I wanted to, because I am ALREADY ON THE TRAIN."
"We don't like to hear things like that, sir."
Sigh.
I was already on the train. It was already moving. I sure hope everyone on that train felt safe.
Emmett
security? (Score:5, Funny)
My biggest problem is airports (Score:3, Informative)
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.
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.
Re:My biggest problem is airports (Score:2)
Direct influence (Score:2)
Thus 9/11 directly influenced my bank account, and likely many many other people's, albeit not in the same direction.
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.
well, to be honest.... (Score:2)
Here's the deal for me:
I don't download music, movies, or software that isn't free, nor do I download porn. (Shocked silence should ensue here I guess. Why look at porn when you have a beautiful woman at home?)
I don't (moral obligation, lack of caring, whatever you want to call it) do activities that could bring me under suspicion of any government agency. (unles
Anyhow, to use a phrase from the late, great DA:
I'm mostly harmless.
So, my access has stayed the same. I guess I am just a boring person.
Yeah, I read the article too....*shrugs* the only thing that has caused me concern has been my apparent need for penis enlargement and breast reduction surgery..at least there are people in the world that think I need both, and want me to make lots of money out of the kindness of their hearts.
General increase in Hate... (Score:3, Informative)
Though this is a small percentage, it does hurt the people in the recieving end. The economy has made things worse when few people who lose jobs blame it on the H-1Bs.
There was a restructuring in my company and now the message boards are full of hate.
I guess the general hate level of the people has increased and also the economy is not helping.
God Bless America...
The effects on me (Score:2, Interesting)
The only upside to 9/11 for me has been that people now respect me for the job I try to do much more, previously people griped when being security checked but now very rarely does this occur.
But there are a minority who judge me as though I am poor at my job, especially in light of the current security breaches (check UK news sites) of people managing to smuggle the same weapons as used to hijack the planes on 9/11 on to aircrafts now.
This despite the fact I do the job as I always have done, believing I am protecting the people - working as hard as I possibly can to make sure the tragic events never occur again.
I'm Portuguese (Score:2, Funny)
Worst, there's a great possibility that none terrorist knows where Portugal is, so we're pretty safe, I think.
Invisibility kicks ass, Portugal is a stealth country!
Cirruz
Re:I'm Portuguese (Score:2)
mmm I love portugese sausage.
9/11 effects (Score:2)
Too much 9/11 (Score:5, Funny)
I'm sorry, but we've done too much to "commemorate" September 11. What's done is done, and let the dead bury the dead. We should not brand Arabs as guilty and evil. Bush did a poor job handling 9/11. He has killed too many innocent lives in Afghanistan. Iraq should not be an American target. Why don't we just...
*** Knock *** Knock *** Knock ***
"Hello? Yes, how can I help you? Yes, I am loyal to my country. What? Hey! Where are you taking me?!?"
---
How has it affected me? I'm worried about what I say in public; that's how it's affected me.
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)
No Changes... (Score:2)
GASP! What is that? How can it be?
Outside of one alarmist Retuers article, the reality is that for 99.999% of people out there (which leaves approxamitly 2500 people left in america) there has been absolutly zilch change, with the exception of the fact that our airports are not the second most secure (we have a long way to go before we hit the level that is El-Al) and border crossings take longer.
(And don't give me the argument that Europe's are better. No they are not. I was there, I was scared at how easy it was, and this was a week after Reid decided to prove how lax security was).
Reality Check... 99.99% of slashdot probably constists of white males/females who are athiest/christian/jewish/hindu/moderate islam, which are viewed to be infidels by certain people. Reminder. THESE GUYS WANT TO KILL US. Plain and Simple. Ignoring the rhetoric, it comes down to that. Frankly, if they catch a guy who has been spending time in Afganistan in the company of the Taliban or Al-Qeda Lock him up for a VLT (Very Long Time).
If you find someone who is of obvious leanings, has home videos of other peoples kids and Disneyland and plans of the local radation generation, make friggen sure that said individual is not going to cry "Allahu Ackbar" and take a plan into either a) the sea, b) A building, c) a nuclear reactor...
Re:No Changes... (Score:2)
Which is still no excuse to give up the freedoms that many Americans _ALREADY DIED TO PRESERVE_.
LEXX
Re:No Changes... (Score:5, Interesting)
Am I afraid of police throwing me in jail without access to a lawyer or a trial? A little bit. In any repressive society, you learn to adapt, and you hope you aren't the one singled out for special treatment. You have to be realistic about risks, though. I'm more likely to be killed in a car accident than tortured by police, and I'm more likely to be tortured by police than killed by a terrorist. If you are an active supporter of Bush's perpetual war and are a white christian, then you're probably more likely to die at the hands of a terrorist than the police, but more likely to drown in your bathtub than either.
But the effects of repression go much further than the direct victims. As long as repression against voting-rights activists in the South was successful, all blacks in the South had suffer the daily minor humilations of being second class citizens, as well as make less money for more work due to discrimination and greater power inbalance at work. The most visible effects of the racist violence during the civil rights movement were the bloody bodies and smouldering buildings, but you can bet that millions of blacks had to suffer inferior schools, longer work hours, less access to health care, etc.
Currently, the repression we are seeing benefits anyone with power. For example, even if there isn't a strike on the west-coast docks, the dock workers will be forced to accept less at the bargaining table due to Bush's threat to replace dock workers with soldiers during a strike. This sort of thing will also have a chilling effect for anyone group of workers daring to stand up for themselves. And if some workers must accept less pay and benefits, it has a way of filtering out to the rest of society, making us all work longer for less.
Think back to the days of the Soviet Union after Stalin. There were some high-profile cases of political prisoners, but it wasn't necessary to imprison millions to keep everyone in check. Or China after the massacre at Tiananmen square -- a few thousand were killed and probably a few thousand imprisoned, and that was enough to seriously impact a social movement that could have improved the lives of over a billion people. Sure, 99.999% weren't affected directly by the Chinese repression, but that's more an explanation of why the Chinese repression was successful than a justification for why it was acceptable.
Yes.... (Score:2)
Try being a private pilot these days (Score:5, Informative)
Remember when they announced they were restricting general aviation flights over nuclear power plants? You know what the official notice from the FAA said? The notice said we were forbidden from flying within 5 miles of a power plant, but then gave us nothing better than a vague description of where those plants were located! So we were told we had to remain clear (and if we didn't we would be intercepted by fighters and possibly shot down) but not told the locations we had to remain clear OF: just city names and vague directions, like "15 miles northwest of Anytown, IL". Even the pilot briefers we called on the phone--the very FAA representatives whose purpose in life is to tell pilots about notams--didn't understand the notices. Depending on who and when you would call you would get a different story about what was legal and what wasn't. And the ATC folks were just as confused. The tower at your departing airport would say your flight is okay, but the one at your destination would declare you in violation of some temporary flight restriction.
Many aviation related business went bankrupt and many more are teetering on the edge as a result of this. The airlines are bad off as we all know, but the small airports are in worse shape. And we are constantly under a cloud of threatened onerous increases in security for our airports: in most cases they are security measures that make no sense at all. Imagine owning property but being subject to a security check before you were allowed to go out to it.
Lots of folks just gave up flying, some temporarily and some permanently. I'm happy to sacrifice for my country, but the sacrifice should have some value. Most of what I've seen in the way of GA restrictions has been meaningless and senseless. And it's not really the restrictions themselves that bother me, but way in which they have been handled.
My pilots licence is collecting dust (Score:4, Interesting)
I havent flown as Pilot in Command since.
I did however cross the country with my brother who is a commercial pilot, and we both got lots of flak by airport security for just being around the planes (our own plane!) by the FAA security guards. It is quite unpleasant to have to explain to every block-headed idiot in a uniform that yes, that is my plane, yes, I am a pilot yada yada yada.
In order to get a pre-flight briefing, you are required to listen to a statement about suspicious people and terrorism. Its is stupid and inane and a real grind to listen to day in and day out.
When planning our flights, we have to pay special attention to TFRs (temporary flight restrictions) or we can lose our licenses. There are several in the Seattle area which have never been lifted since Sept 11; visual flight rules cannot fly into these areas. This is a total joke since the terrorists planes were jumbo jets flying instrument rules, and those are still allowed everywhere.
Re:Try being a private pilot these days (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm not a pilot myself--far from it--but one of my most thrilling experiences in an airplane was when I rode [airline censored to protect the innocent] once; I expressed interest in "how the thing works" (kids, don't try this at home) and the pilots actually let me into the cockpit! I got to look out the front window, look at the instrument panels, chat with the pilots . . . it was great. I actually thought about taking flying lessons for a while.
Sigh.
Re:Try being a private pilot these days (Score:3, Interesting)
Try landing at one of the four airports in the DC area.
It is true that IFR was not as adversely affected, but there was still a significant impact. It was about a week before they even allowed IFR flight for part 91, as I recall. IFR flight without the option of VFR is much more restrictive, especially if you frequent uncontrolled airports and even moreso airports without approaches. Maintaining or, even worse, regaining instrument currency was difficult, too.
Even when departing IFR there was a period of time when I could not drive my car on to the ramp. I had to go to the FBO, prove to them who I was, then have them take me out to my plane in one of their vehicles. Then after landing I had to call them to reverse the process. And owner maintenance during that time? Forget it! Even as recently as two months ago when my partner and I were working on the engine late at night we got questioned by the local authorities. I'm actually glad to see that, but it is another indicator that things have really changed.
Things are mostly okay these days, but we do still live under the constant threat of increased restrictions (witness all the hoopla over the part 91 restrictions for 9/11/02) and increased security with little to no warning. Not to mention the press regularly publishing reports about how "dangerous" we are, and senators saying that GA is a gaping security risk.
if you can't spot the cooling tower of a nuclear power plant from 5 miles away, I don't want you in the same airpace with me.
Ha ha! Fortunately I can (for the most part). But we still had to pad the distance to about 10 miles, in case some official somewhere decided that the center of the circle was somewhere other than the cooling tower.
I would submit that general aviation has boomed since 911.
Parts of it have, yes. Especially chartered jet operations. But the part of the industry that deals with our small planes is still suffering greatly, IME. Ive talked with maintenance shops, paint shops, and interior shops. All report that business is still down but slowly improving.
It hasn't affected people (Score:2)
This is almost a flame, but I'd say that from the comments I've seen so far, NO ONE has been really affected. The liberal/civil liberties/privacy types say they've been affected, but if you read further down their comments, they'll all say the same thing: "I worry about our government more than I did before". Not "I got jailed for being a member of an Al-Qaida spin-off cell", and not even "my phone is tapped 24/7 because I read Slashdot and use Linux". In short, those American citizens who are saying they are affected by the laws are "comfortably concerned citizens". Although I'm sure some unscrupulous government droid will use these laws to an evil end, no one seems to have been seriously affected yet.
Of course, a paranoid way of looking at things might be that the reason no one has said anything is that the people affected are either trying to keep a low profile or already are in a top-secret federal prison somewhere....
Re:It hasn't affected people (Score:3, Insightful)
I can't get drunk at Half Time anymore (Score:2, Interesting)
This isn't all that important to the quality of life, but it's a good example of an institution making a profit oriented rule and hiding it under the false label of increased security.
Answer: (Score:2)
Nothing has changed ... (Score:2, Troll)
As the anniversary of 9-11 approaches, Americans and ditto-heads alike are converging
to reflect upon the tragedy and its consequences. So let's review the state of the nation:
Bin Laden is still at large
The anthrax killer is also still at large
Halliburton and Carlyle are still making money from war
Saudi Arabia is still an evil influence
Ashcroft is still shredding the constitution
Bush the lesser is still an idiot
The Clintons are still being slandered
Gore is still being demonized
The economy is still going south
The religious right are still insane
Cancer and AIDS patients are still being criminalized
Corporate criminals are still getting off
Health insurance is still grossly expensive
Drug companies are still raping the elderly and disabled
Star Wars is still a Bad Idea
Mother Nature is still NOT HAPPY
Right wing shills still claim to be patriots
Mass media is still supine
Re:Nothing has changed ... (Score:2)
Now vote libertarian and lets see a lot of your list disappear...
Great article (Score:5, Interesting)
There was a letter to the editor in this quarter's issue of "2600."
In it, this guy was talking about how he was pulled off a plane just before it was about to leave the gate because a flight attendant saw him reading an article in 2600 about vulnerabilities in "Passport." She claimed he was reading a terrorist pamphlet.
The story of course ends with this guy being rescreened after talking to a few spooks and being let back on the plane. Of course, he said his flight was something like 2 hours late at this point.
Screw the new laws, I'm more worried about the new public attitudes that are letting this kind of shit go down without so much as a second thought.
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!"
Life unchanged (Score:2)
BRB, John Ashcroft is at my door with a one-way ticket to Camp X-Ray...
Not sure if this is due to legislation. (Score:3, Interesting)
Now, in order to get into the visitors area of EPA building where the "theatre" is, we have to fill out visitor cards with our name, address, phone number, etc. Then we have to fill out a check-in sheet with the guard (with our name, address, phone number, etc).. This isn't too bad, but a bit unusual for 50 people having to fill in to talk about their hobby.
The clincher is we've got a 3rd peice of paperwork to fill out now: Our laptop information. Brand, Model, Serial Number, Name, Address, Phone number, etc. Of course, no one has their serial numbers memorized, so it's time to bust out the laptop bags.
I can somewhat understand since it's in a "government" building - but this is a bit overboard for a hobbyist group meeting. It's worse than going to the airport - picture 50 geeks in line to fill out 3 peices of paperwork, and only 1 of them brought a pen!
Enough ranting now I guess.. I'm gonna have to recommend we meet in McDonalds next time or something.
USA Patriot Act (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm SO glad this law is being used for its intended purposes. People who have no problems giving up their civil liberties in the name of "homeland security" are sadly mistaken if they think law enforcement has either the ability or desire to restrain themselves from misusing/abusing their new powers.
It's affected me quite a bit, and I'm pissed. (Score:5, Funny)
- A.P.
In New Zealand (Score:4, Interesting)
In May, I travelled to Honolulu for a conference. I flew directly from Auckland to Honolulu. At Auckland, on the way out, I had to go through two sets of metal detectors and x-rays, as well as a search of my carry-on luggage (although that may have been because I was carrying a plastic poster roll). When I flew from Honolulu back to Auckland, there was just a single metal detector and a single x-ray, and no-one searched my poster roll, which I was still carrying. In short, the security for international flights in New Zealand was much better than in Hawaii.
The Effects on the Other Side (Score:5, Interesting)
Last month, I tried e-mailing a friend who goes by the name of Jamal Bin-Laden (not related at all to the terrorists, he's not even Saudi Arabian). He replied not to MY e-mail but to a forwarded e-mail from my Bahraini ISP. Apparently they blocked the e-mail because of his name, read the contents, and when they saw I was only asking him to bring back some tiny M&M's from London (I'm addicted!) they forwarded it to him without even bothering to cover their tracks. There goes online privacy for you.
And on a related note, I had to cancel my post-grad plans to study in New York after all my Arab friends there came back. Let's just say people weren't very nice to them.
While this might have nothing to do with American legislation, it's somewhat ironic to see how 9/11 effected everyone negatively, Americans & Terr^H^H^H^HArabs alike.
May the victims of 9/11, the starved to death children of Iraq, and online rights all rest in peace.
Re:The Effects on the Other Side (Score:3, Troll)
Let's get this right. People who consent to live under tyrany deserve both the tyrany and their own distruction if that tyrany threatens the world. I know this one cuts both ways - we've got to get the tyranical tendencies of our Attorney General and Vice President under control. But so far we're still running a democracy, and forgive us if we get a bit pissed off when idiots like you side with the Iraqui propaganda machine. You do not deserve an American education or any other favors from us while you embrace that sort of - not just idiocy, but a moral stance as bad as Hitler's. You take care of Saddam and the foul swine promoting Wahabbi-ism out of Saudi Arabia, and we'll get back to our naturally angelic natures. Otherwise, Allah have mercy on you.
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: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].
Terrorists checks are just a placebo (Score:5, Interesting)
When I was bringing my bag on the airline, I was checked 3 times. Getting onto every flight and my connecting flights. Somehow I triggered a "possible terrorist" flag and had people hand check my luggage. Maybe it was my scruffy beard?
Anyways when they checked my carry on luggage they ran it through an Xray. They made me take my trekking poles out to see what they were (they are poles for hiking). They didn't care about the pot that showed up as a big grey cylinder in the middle of my pack.
For my carry on luggage I had a camera lens in a 1Liter drink cooler. It was in there because it's soft to keep it from getting damaged. They never opened it up. I can think of all kinds of stuff to put in there... They never once checked the carry on bag itself. Couldn't something be hidden in the liner of the bag?
Coming back I had to have my checkon bag checked again, but this airport didn't have any xray machines. They had to hand check everything. I gave the guy my bag, he opened it up and saw a backpack filled with stuff. He asked me "Is this all hiking gear?". I said yes and he just zipped it up and put it on the belt to go into the plane. Luckily that backpack has 75liters of gear in it and not explosives. I was thinking on the whole flight back:
"Sir is this all camping gear in this backpack?"
"No it's approximately 75Liters of C4."
"Hmmm let me check my manual here... explosives, dynamite, C4. Sorry sir but you can't bring C4 on the plane. You must be an Al Queda terrorist?"
"Why yes I am, I guess you caught me. Take me in."
If a terrorist wants to bring something on the plane, it's going to get on the plane. The people who setup these security checkpoints are either:
A. Ignorant.
B. Setting up a Placebo
C. Making a boost in their political career.
D. All of the above.
You choose.
Re:Terrorists checks are just a placebo (Score:3, Funny)
You're lucky you didn't get the full rubber glove treatment with a big cylinder of pot in your bag.
Don't live in a safe world... (Score:3, Interesting)
The biggest issues pre 9/11 were the condit mess, The fact that Europe was switching into a new currency, etc.
9/11 has caused changes both old and new.
American now has the best relations it ever has had with the Russians.
America and Europe have gone back to their more traditional antagonistic viewpoint that has dominated the 400 year history of this country (with a 60 year break over the last bit).
The problems of the Islamists have now become much more widly known. Remember all those girls dying in a fire in Saudi Arabaia because the Sadui's would not let the girls go out in public un-veiled.
Groups like Lashkar Jihadi, RIF, etc are now exposed as the demons they are.
No massive repatriation has occured of Muslims.
The government has stopped somewhere between 5 and 10 terrorist attacks on US citizines over the last year.
Make no mistake. Al-Qeda has ensured that at least the next fifty years will be a throwback to the crusades.
That is what has changed in America. Compared to that, the Patriot act is nothing.
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..
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
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
interesting report (Score:3, Informative)
Flying (UK) (Score:3, Interesting)
To do this would cost money that they weren't prepared to cough up.
So they levied a 7 UKP "security charge" on all flights, this money would then be used to beef up security and not etch into their precious profits.
Unfortunately, despite everyone coughing up this extra money people still managed to get on planes with bombs in their shoes [bbc.co.uk] and cannisters full of petrol [bbc.co.uk].
Obviously they're using our money well.
Well, I'm afraid to return to America (Score:4, Interesting)
Why? Well back when I was 20 I was in the Marines, and I was against the gulf war. I was pretty vocal about it (freedom of speech) and that got me a lot of flack from the military (that's clear). I got in a discussion with some other guys during lunch and they were telling me "we gotta kill S.H. because he violated this and this international law, yadda yadda". I told them if we were going to kill violaters of international law, we would have to start with Bush for Panama. Clearly a rhetorical argument.
Still, the Secret service was called, and I spent the night in a holding cell until my lawer came. I had to be photographed, psychoanalyzed, get a handwriting analyses, and had my background and family checked. But they had to let me go, becuase I was able to talk to a lawyer and he said "c'mon guys, it's obvious these charges are a bunch of shit". That happened a lot in those days, me getting arrested for a day and released without trial because the charges were just meaningless. They did this to hassle me and to keep me from expressing my opinion to people who might listen and change theirs. Noboddy, and I emphasize, Nobody, really thought I had threatened the presidents life. It was just a charade.
What's changed? Now they don't have to let me speak with my lawyer, and they can keep me indefinately. That has terrorized me!
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.
Re:Flying (Score:2)
I am reminded of the Communist Trials, the stupidity of which we look back upon now and laugh at. In one airport run, I had to stand and watch both a girl who could barely see over the table on which her items were being rifled through get wanded, as well as my 80-year-old grandmother get "randomly searched" while sitting in her wheelchair. Upon seeing such unwarrented hysteria, I realized the terrorists had won.
Yes, but on the other hand, whenever anyone suggests that searching granny who was born in the US in 1932 might not reveal a terrorists, and instead suggests that it might be a good idea to make sure Sulyiman does not have a 10-pack of razors in his bag is immedatly called a racists.
The problem with Americans is that we assume that absolutly everyone is like us, there are people out there (Aidid, Hussain, et all) who have serious kill the big devil (the united states) and little devil (Isreal) reflexes, and don't mind turning WMD's on their own citizines to make the world a safer place for them.
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.
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.
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:I don't fly anymore (Score:2)
(What, you didn't feel like cattle before 9/11? What airline were you flying? :-)
Actually, I don't think they even make the airlines feel safer. I think it's marketing/PR. Something so the cattle can feel safer without actually having to do the work of making it safer.
Consider that we've got all the hassles and expense of idiots (oops, those "idiots" are now federal employees, and therefore immune from getting fired even Abdul gets on with a handgun because the federal employee was too busy fingerfucking your grandmother) in the name of security, but most of the measures that would really improve security, such as the installation of certain types of equipment at certain locations, and/or the use of certain technologies to better identify people who might present risks to aircraft, still haven't been taken.
All the hassle. None of the security. And since you can't guess whether it'll take you 15 minutes or two hours to get from airport entrance to your flight, there's a significant chance that if your trip is 500 miles or less, it'll be faster to drive it than fly it.
> 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.
Amen to that. My cutoff is 18-24 hours. I used to love flying, but now I'll gladly spend a day on the road to avoid it. Fsck the airlines. I'll drive.
Re:I'm afraid to speak out. (Score:2)
Odd. You support an organization that conscribes lawyers to conduct iconoclasm of religion, an institution or civil right expressly protected by the Constitution. What is your fax number?