posted 01-21-2002 20:47            

It's a difficult line to draw. The definition of terrorism is a little vague these days. Does hacking a website really make you evil? Will it cause events like sept 11th? Who's to decide?

Do I think that national IDs are a good idea? No I don't. I think the harder you buckle down the harder people will resist and find ways around authority and control.

I'd rather live my life with consequences and risk than be completely safe from harm and enjoy very little of life.

this post had more merit when I decided to write. Now it seems it's lost most of it.

posted 01-21-2002 21:09            

I think that intellectual property should be free to everyone, and if you can market it thats even better. However things like the Digital Millenium Copyright Act and the like that are constantly abused by the people with lots of money really piss me off.

posted 01-21-2002 21:11            

quote:

---

Originally posted by upload:

...p.s. if you need lessons on goat fucking you know who to contact =)

---

STOP EMAILING ME!!!

You really want to email mightymon, he has the complete 12 step guide to goatfucking archived somewhere. My copy was eaten in an unfortunate accident (dont leave them laying around the goat you love).

For the last time, I cant help you learn how to seduce your favorite Goat, not even if it is a pygme and you know you're ready.

posted 01-21-2002 22:15            

hmm sleeps with the fishes eh?

posted 01-21-2002 23:02            

quote:

---

Originally posted by upload:
Would you have given up civil liberties to prevent Sept. 11th?

---

Which ones, the liberties to hijack and crash airplanes? Can anyone cite a past act of terrorism that would have been prevented by any of the passed or proposed legislation?

posted 01-21-2002 23:33            

One of the reasons why I do'nt have a cell phone or pager is because I do'nt want to be reached at all times. I don't want someone being able to get in contact with me or have any ability to include themselves in my life.

I also agree with jumper though, that many things after sept 11th have changed for the better. I think tightening on current laws, like immigration, is a good thing.

but again, things like the DMCA get out of hand.

as to when is enough enough? It's so very difficult to tell. I don't like the gov't interfering with my life. I don't want to go to jail for pirating software, but at the same time I'm glad that a person that tries to break into my house to steal my stuff gets arrested.

the line between what's too far? We all have our standard for right and wrong and different extremes. for the most part laws and regulations/guidlines are decided by the majority. But that still leaves a vast minority who disagrees and wishes to life a different style of life according to different rules.

no one person is pefect enough decide completely all encompassing just laws. Noone can decide anything for everyone and have everyone be happy.

events like sept 11th provide times when the majority are willing to bend a little bit more to ensure the safety of the majority. Because everyone is caught up in the moment. I like the idea of being more secure as a nation, and I was momentarily willing to give up freedoms to ensure that safty. But now I'm realizing that granted we may be safer, but there's a lot less than we can do without horrendous repercussions.

many things like propaganda say things like "if you let us pass this law you'll be much safer from things like sept 11th" and I think "hell yeah, but at what cost?" and there are so many different interpritations about what safty is. How much damage could be caused by pirating software? Would a perfectly enforced DMCA have prevented sept 11th? probably not, but it's a possibility which is what's being sold by law makers.

that's what bothers me. People are diverting attention away from reality and focussing on remote possibities.
but then again, they'll be laughing last when that remote possibility comes to fruition

posted 01-22-2002 01:49            

Besides... they'll only watch the people who aren't white or the ones who act strangely right? That has to leave a few dozen people somewhere that they wont have to suspect of terrorism.

*edited due to a misunderstanding between me and the keyboard.

posted 01-22-2002 05:09         

quote:

---

Originally posted by fenomas:
Can anyone cite a past act of terrorism that would have been prevented by any of the passed or proposed legislation?

---

Can anyone cite which passed or proposed terririst legislation vioalate their civil liberties?

posted 01-22-2002 05:32         

Although I think it's an exploitation of people, I agree with Fenomas, the cheap labor provided by illegal immigrants is a necessary fact of life. Illegals are taking jobs, yes, but they're taking the shitty dangerous, soul-destroying jobs no one wants. If you're angry about not finding a job, complain to your congressional rep about the visa situation. I don't know a single good job that doesn't require proof of citizenship (unless you consider picking produce in a field in 90 degree weather or meat packing in fucking factory a good job).

Industry in this country relies on a lot of cheap labor. I'm still reading (about to finish, actually,) "Fast Food Nation" which is a fantastic book about (wait for it...) Fast Food in the US. There's a chapter devoted specifically to discussing the franchised fast food industries' reliance on cheap, easily renewable/expendable labor (i.e., teenagers.)There's another chapter devoted solely to the discussion of meat production for the fast food industry, with focus on immigrant labor. If you like thinking, I'd recommend picking this book up.

so in conclusion, jumper: fuck you, you're idea is stupid and unworkable and smacks of racism. Unless you're a fucking American Indian, you have no right to be a pompous ass and decide who stays and who goes.

...and straying back to the topic at hand, all these rights that john ashcroft is jumping up and down on have no real bearing on terrorism. We don't need to pass special laws prohibiting using planes as bombs, or securing the government's right to stick microphones in your ass whenever they feel like it because killing people was already illegal. (with or without planes.)

I haven't seen a single bit of "tightened security" yet. Fucking random searches? FUCK THAT: search every fucking bag or you might as well not do shit. I was talking with a pilot, who flies cargo shipments, who was flying as a passenger from WA to CO to FL, who got strip searched 3 times -- because his tickets were 1 way. This is a guy who flies so regularly he'll never be able to spend the frequent flier miles he's got, who has bought his ticket with a company credit card, who is wearing a pilot's uniform, with proper ID, and he's getting searched because it's a one way ticket? I'm no genius BUT i'm pretty sure that if I were a terrorist, I could work a way around this: by buying a roundtrip ticket and blowing the plane up on the first leg. Call the fucking FAA, I just found a flaw in their "random" search filtering method.

A national ID would be cool...if i wanted the government to track every fucking movement I made. Government leads to abuse of power, without fail. This is a great fucking country, and it's getting slowly ground into a machine for the good of corporations and government.

*right now, I know an Argentine couple who've been in the US since August, staying at the hotel where I work, because things in Argentina are ... tense, shall we say.

[edited because i just got off work and am unbelievably tired and this makes me more prone to spelling mistakes. sorry if this is a bit of a rant.]

------------------
"I steal teeth from kittens to make necklaces for Satan."

posted 01-22-2002 07:39         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clme:
I take it back. If you really need lessons on goat fucking forget Mightymon. Call Marcel.

---

Or, have some cake.

posted 01-22-2002 09:55            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dave:
so in conclusion, jumper: fuck you, you're idea is stupid and unworkable and smacks of racism. Unless you're a fucking American Indian, you have no right to be a pompous ass and decide who stays and who goes.

---

i can personally name 13 people who i know who are here illegally, and i also said if they come here legally then i am fine with it. maybe they should take a page from many other people over here LEGALLY and get a student visa. i have a friend who has been over here 6 years on a student visa and shortly is about to become a citizen. i also never said who could stay and go. illegal immagrants are a burdon on the national system. if you dont think so then check again, cheap labor or not. also i never said anything racist; i named only one country becuase it is by far the biggest offender.

also jobs require proof of citizenship are a joke. until what happened in the fall you could pretty much fake your info and still get a job with an employer checking your information. i have personally seen it. i also know of people who specialize in setting up people's citizenship. now not all illegal immigrants are skilless; many are well trained in one craft or another, and are willing to take less pay but taking a good job from a citizen who would require more pay.

posted 01-22-2002 10:31            

quote:

---

Originally posted by upload:
When is gov't monitoring of communicaton wrong? Would you have given up civil liberties to prevent Sept. 11th?

---

I read an interresting story in Analog Sci-Fi last month about an alternate universe where everyone had small computers embedded in their arm that tracked all of their bio stats, everything they said and did, and their location. This information was constantly relayed to a central storage facility, and could only be accessed with court clearance and in the presence of the accused.

This allowed people to cheerfully go about their lives, knowing that if they got lost, they could be found; if they got sick or injured, their computer would send for help; and if there was a crime, only the guilty would be punished.

Of course, the story deals with some guys working underground where the computers can't transmit, so when one of them dissapears, the other has no alibi, and a vindictive legal representative presents the data they DO have in such a way as to make the accused look very guilty...

Anyhow, I have no faith in any governing body to wisely use my personal information, or to protect me from terrorists. I'd rather they stopped backing the Israelies and occupying arab nations in my name- which is what motivates these folks- and worry about airport security (I've cheerfully waited for hours and been singled-out for searches because I fit their profile). Smith, Wesson, and myself will handle any other threats to me an mine.

None of these new surveilance laws would have helped stopp 9/11, but they will help the local 5-0 nail me when I try to line up a dime bag with my buddy accross town.

------------------
What may sound to some like anger is really nothing more than sympathetic contempt.
- George Carlin

posted 01-22-2002 13:54         

quote:

---

Originally posted by jumper42:
dave, i think it is sad that you were born here and you did not know enough substantial english for a boy at that age. finally, dave, sorry to hear that 10 people of your extended family got the boot but tell them adios for me. i am sure they will be back before i know it.

---

• none of my family has been deported but rather people I know -- I don't know how sheltered a life you lead, jumper, but I know a lot of people outside of my family.
  
• this was not the case when I was an infant, since you know, it's hard to get out of the house when you can't walk. So the only language I heard often (to the point of mimicking so that I could learn to speak) was spanish, since that's what everyone I knew (family,) spoke; when I was 3 or 4, we moved to a spanish-speaking country and didn't move back to the U.S. until I was going into 2nd grade, from there, I went into ESOL and I don't know if you've noticed, but in general, my writing and grammar (and usually spelling,) are a lot fucking better than yours.
  
• Illegal immigrants do place an undue burden on the system, but (imo,) because the system wants to stick it's head in the sand and pretend they're not there. You can't reap the benefits of cheap labor and then pretend that the people doing that cheap labor don't exist. The corporate buyout of our government has helped exacerbate the situation, especially when corporate policy dictates government policy. When business says "ignore the illegals, we need them," and votes with their dollars, can you expect government to do anything but listen?
  
• Please pull it out, your voice is kind of muffled.
  

posted 01-22-2002 20:32            

quote:

---

Originally posted by jumper42:
yes your spelling and grammar is better than mine, but that is due to when i post i dont sit here and proof read or spell check. i just let the stream of thought come straight out without any thought for gammar or spelling.

---

A tip: no one takes people without thought for grammar or spelling seriously. That sort of attitude towards the basic rules of text-based communication basically says "I'm too stupid to figure out where to put my commas and too dumb to spell 'grammar' the right way on the first go-round.

In other words, your "excuse" only made you look dumber.

------------------
Reverend Rob

posted 01-22-2002 20:37            

quote:

---

Originally posted by jumper42:
illegal immagrants are a burdon on the national system. if you dont think so then check again,

---

quote:

---

...you could pretty much fake your info and still get a job with an employer checking your information.

---

But why doesn't the government do more? Perhaps its because, unlike sweatshop manufacturing, some shitty jobs can't be outsourced to the third world, so the only way to get cheap labor without pesky side-effects like union rights and equal protection under the law is by letting illegals do it.

Nothing happens in this world without reasons-- if you can't see the reasons why illegal immigration is rampant, that doesn't mean that no reasons exist. If you think illegal immigration should be stopped, you have to address those reasons.

posted 01-22-2002 21:01            

quote:

---

Originally posted by marcel:
Can anyone cite which passed or proposed terririst legislation vioalate their civil liberties?

---

Um.. what is that, wit? All of them, obviously. Or, so that we don't clash on terms, let's make it "pose a threat to their civil liberties", and the answer is National id cards, military courts, secret trials, face-recognition software, echelon, looser requirements for wiretaps, security cameras in public places, fbi-placed keyloggers, carnivore, and giving uncle sam a backdoor to encryption. I'm sure there are more.

What I'm asking is, is even the appearance of eroding civil rights necessary for the sake of security measures based on theoretical threats that have never occurred? And if none of the proposed measures would have prevented past acts of terrorism, then could that be a TEENSY sign that lawmakers are on the wrong track with their homeland defense policies?