I just wanted to take this opportunity to say that I will no longer be a Bushwacker and that will support the President and his adminstration in whatever they say. I now realize that they all know what is best for us all and will keep my snide remarks to myself. [img]smile.gif[/img]

Thanx for reading!

Mark

Judas...

[img]smile.gif[/img]

Read this:

http://www.cnn.com/2002/LAW/05/30/as...fbi/index.html

Mark

You have seen the light my brother! [img]smile.gif[/img]

*Sazerac sees the first post, and promptly falls out of his chair in a dead faint...

...picks himself up, looks at the link, and breathes a sigh of relief*

--for a minute there, I thought it was the end of the world! [img]graemlins/uhoh1.gif[/img] :D [img]graemlins/laugh2.gif[/img]

Cheers,
-Sazerac

Im not sure Saz but I did detect a faint whiff of sarcasm and cynicism there [img]smile.gif[/img]

@ Skywalker: Umm you do note that you are talking about Bush and using a column about Ashcroft...no?

[ 05-31-2002, 09:24 AM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

The point is that the FBI will be able to scan the Internet with wild abandon. This means all users may need to be very careful about what we post and what is chatted about. I have no desire to have a file created about me (if there isn't one already). Hence my turning over a new leaf.

This means I may or may not continue to think GWB is an idiot (nothing to see here FBI agents), but I will try to keep from posting anything anywhere that may incriminate me.

Gotta love that Bush! :D

Mark

Ummm they have always been able to scan the net with wild abandon..heck they had that big brouhaha over that project (cant remember the silly name) a couple of years ago...assured the populace they would only use it on foreign countries...and if you believed that I have some swamp land Id like to sell ya [img]smile.gif[/img] The point is..now they can actually use the info they already have to apprehend criminals with it...Im not saying Im for or against the new legislation...need to study it more, Im just not too worried about being persecuted because I say some decision of the presidents is whacky! (and yes I do disagree with him on some issues). Im pretty sure that we have not just witnessed the destruction of the first or 4th ammendments (is it the 4th?) shoot now I gotta look it up

Edit: And I have been a big Bush fan since early adolescense :D

[ 05-31-2002, 10:17 AM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

I don't know but that just seems wrong.

Of course, I'm being largely facetious, but nothing would surprise me lately.

I feel terrorism is used to push an agenda that may be less than desirable in the future. Once the Pandora's Box is opened, it is hard to close it again with all our freedoms intact.

It is true that we cannot be completely safe from terrorists and that is something we need to come to terms with. But I'm not sure if any of these measures will make us safe either.

If I want to say something against policies of my government, I should not have to fear that goverment if we indeed, do have Freedom Of Speech.

BTW, who here thinks the FBI operatives will frequent Christian Churches to gather terrorist info. No, they will lining up at Muslim Churches (Mosques). Now, in the current state of affairs, that sounds logical, but no matter how you slice it, it comes up as profiling via religious belief.

It is easy for me to rail about all the stuff the gov wants to do. I live in small town America - not much chance terrorism will touch me personally. Seeing what is going on now, with new laws and regulations, and people being detained and freedoms being trounced, I can't help but think the terrorists are winning.

Sorry, I just realized T was ranting. ;)

Mark

You are being monitored!!!

Here is a site that gives some more information [img]graemlins/wow.gif[/img]

well, aside from the fact that the only real challenge that President Bush has had to face is the war on terrorism, i dont get how all of you DONT like him. his first real test, and i feel he is carrying it out perfectly. i just dont get it. just because he is republican, and not some whinny, snot nosed, twerpy, sleep with your intern, lie about it (and various other things, including drugs), democrat, is not reason not to like him. i cant see ANY reason not to like mister bush. anywho, just wanted to say my two cents. i will continue to serve my country, and EARN my rights however.

Ha! [img]graemlins/laugh2.gif[/img] If you knew how Mark (Skywalker) feels about Bush, you'd have fallen and butted your head on the floor too! ;)

-Saz

That's my Bush !

<font color=orange>My understanding is that The US doesn't use Echelon to spy on US Citizens. They have an agreement with Britain and Canada to do it for them. Britain and Canada monitor all communications here in the US and then pass on sensitive information on to the NSA and vis versa. Of course the NSA monitors all incoming calls from overseas. I don't much like it either.</font>

The true irony here is that the government does not need these new surveillance powers. They had many pieces of the 9/11 puzzles well in advance of the event, but due to inept bureaucrats and poor coordination they missed it. The FBI was forbidden from domestic spying for good reason, since they badly abused that power in the 60's and 70's.

How to make freinds and influence people (from an article in The Times)


May 29, 2002

Bush fails to bridge gap with sarcastic asides
The President completed his tour of Europe last night. Anne E. Kornblut, of The Boston Globe, travelled with him



(snip)

In Paris, the President demonstrated again his distant relationship with Europe, although this time through his attitude. After his meeting with M Chirac, Mr Bush arrived at a press conference ready for a joust. When an American television reporter addressed M Chirac in French, Mr Bush snapped sarcastically: “Very good. The guy memorises four words, and he plays like he’s intercontinental.”

When the reporter, David Gregory, of NBC, good- naturedly offered to continue in French, Mr Bush retorted: “I’m impressed.” And then, in a remark that M Chirac is sure not to forget, Mr Bush added: “Que bueno. Now I’m literate in two languages.”

Well, if you leave off the entire 9-11 terrorism event and all the influences from that, and don't drag spurious and pointless comparisons into it, you're left with Bushs' foreign and domestic policy decisions. Many of which have been criticised from both sides of the aisle on Capitol Hill. He's not necessarily the worst this country has seen, but he's far from the best, and not above criticism.
And, like all Americans, I too will continue to EARN my rights, by simply being an American citizen. That's the beauty of this nation, that all citizens are equal, regardless of occupation, avocation, religion, sex, age, or shoe size, and NOT ONE SINGLE INDIVIDUAL OR GROUP is inherently worth more or less than any other.

and what exactly were these abuses in the 60's and 70's?was it the monitoring criminal organizations like the black panthers,a.i.m.,and a whole host of left wing groups?

and what exactly were these abuses in the 60's and 70's?was it the monitoring criminal organizations like the black panthers,a.i.m.,and a whole host of left wing groups?</font>[/QUOTE]The constitutionally challenging stuff was LBJ and Richard Nixons' use of it to monitor their political enemies. Of course there was that little dustup at thw Watergate hotel, also.

Mark,
I read your first post and thought I had died and gone to Hell!
Jorath Calar "Judas" LMAO!
When I read the link, I totally got it but do beware it is not limited to what you post on the internet (although it is more "written in stone" than what you actaully say out loud).
Stuff like this has been going on for decades, only now its legal.
How do I know?
I do have a file on me.
I attended a demonstration in the early 80's, I'll not say what against and I'll not say what the consequences have been but let's just say that my location is monitered as have been my "private" conversations within the confines of my own home.
If you ever thought you had to be careful before, now is the time to make that idea a reality. Not like it will help those who are already marks but it will help you to keep from becoming one.
[img]graemlins/ladyhearts.gif[/img]
Moni

[ 05-31-2002, 03:13 PM: Message edited by: Moni ]

Well, if you leave off the entire 9-11 terrorism event and all the influences from that, and don't drag spurious and pointless comparisons into it, you're left with Bushs' foreign and domestic policy decisions. Many of which have been criticised from both sides of the aisle on Capitol Hill. He's not necessarily the worst this country has seen, but he's far from the best, and not above criticism.
And, like all Americans, I too will continue to EARN my rights, by simply being an American citizen. That's the beauty of this nation, that all citizens are equal, regardless of occupation, avocation, religion, sex, age, or shoe size, and NOT ONE SINGLE INDIVIDUAL OR GROUP is inherently worth more or less than any other.</font>[/QUOTE]actually, that as a right that you are GIVEN, not a right in which you EARNED!!! people should contribute to the country, or society, and by contribute, i mean in a positive manner, in which HELPS the civilization. so unless you do good things for the country, then you are GIVEN those rights, you didnt EARN them. not to be an a**hole or anything, its just the plain and simple facts.

I earn my rights...I pay my taxes. [img]smile.gif[/img]

Mark

And your point is what, exactly? That some people have more right than others? If we are all given our rights as American citizens, and we are, and we are all considered equal under the constitution, and we are, then nobody, anywhere, ever, EARNS their rights as Americans. Either you are a citizen or you are not.

And your point is what, exactly? That some people have more right than others? If we are all given our rights as American citizens, and we are, and we are all considered equal under the constitution, and we are, then nobody, anywhere, ever, EARNS their rights as Americans. Either you are a citizen or you are not.[/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]Hmmm. This sounds a lot like George Orwell's Animal Farm. Odd that his other popular book was 1984...Big Brother is watching. Brrr.

Mark

But that doesn't mean that the Government can't use the armed forces, local law enforcement, or even private citizens to get information they may think they might need on other people.

But that doesn't mean that the Government can't use the armed forces, local law enforcement, or even private citizens to get information they may think they might need on other people.</font>[/QUOTE]<font color="pink"> I think that there are actually legal restrictions keeping the government from using Active Duty military for internal affairs. Those restrictions do not apply to the National Guard though. </font>

Oh, and I did not mean to alarm any of my friends with that first post. (Sorry Moni and Saz!) I apologize! :D

And......I continue to be thankful for Jeffords' move to become an independent. He cleary saw what lay ahead. It was a year ago last week and he's had no regrets...Go Jim!

Mark

Ha! [img]graemlins/laugh2.gif[/img] If you knew how Mark (Skywalker) feels about Bush, you'd have fallen and butted your head on the floor too! ;)

-Saz</font>[/QUOTE]Hi Sazzy hehe I know exactly how Mark feels, he and I differ greatly on most issues political, but unlike my relationship with some, he and I were able to come to a mutual understanding and respect. I knew he was funnin us all along ;)

But that doesn't mean that the Government can't use the armed forces, local law enforcement, or even private citizens to get information they may think they might need on other people.</font>[/QUOTE]<font color="pink"> I think that there are actually legal restrictions keeping the government from using Active Duty military for internal affairs. Those restrictions do not apply to the National Guard though. </font></font>[/QUOTE]There are "legal" restrictions, yes but that doesn't mean they can't be bypassed to moniter people. Believe me, I know firsthand.
As far as using the information they get in order to prosecute said monitered person...I doubt that they could get away with it in a court of law if said monitered person has the cash to buy the "right" lawyer or pay off the "right" people but there's nothing said or written that can keep anyone from buying some judges or otherwise "influencing" their opinions behind closed doors.
More oft than not, local law enforcement and private citizens are used to obtain info but if there is a need for military equipment, it can be obtained if necessary...through the "right" people.

<font color="pink">Hi Moni, I don't know you well, only that I know we are usually on opposite sides of discussions [img]smile.gif[/img] But, (and Im not saying that I doubt your word or anything) Im curious, You were or someone you knew was the subject of Active duty military surveilance? If you would be willing to share I would be highly interested in your account, since I am a total military freak [img]smile.gif[/img] I would find the information pretty interesting....if you cant talk about it that is ok too.</font>

<font color = lightgreen>I wonder if they will be able to tell when someone is being sarcastic, or parodying something in fun?

What if I am writing a short story or novel about either terrorists or those engaged in criminal activity? Will they try to say that I am "formulating a plot"?

What if I wanted to convert to Islam?

What if I wrote a letter to the Dallas Morning News trying to point out how the city could be vulnerable to "traffic attack" from a small group--only 10--of people driving "18-wheeler" trucks?

*sigh* Too many questions. I was too young to really remember the "good old days" of Nixon and Hoover.

Interestingly enough, though, if you check out USSearch.com, they talk about "checking out your neighbors" through their service....

Let the paranoia run rampant again! [img]graemlins/laugh3.gif[/img] </font>

Magik,
I can't talk about it...some of the people who were involved are still alive and I'll probably remain a mark until someone with enough clout can clear my name...I am totally harmless!
Like I said though, more often than not it is private citizens and local law enforcement who are involved. By private citizens, in my case at least, I do refer to ex-military personnel who were involved. It was probably just coincidence that those particular ex-military personnel had/have the right connections. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 05-31-2002, 04:20 PM: Message edited by: Moni ]

<font color="pink"> My guess is that it would be the same way anyone reads stuff...Context :D .</font>

<font color="pink"> Okie Doke Moni [img]smile.gif[/img] I know all about not being able to discss those kinds of things [img]smile.gif[/img] </font>

Whether or not you are being sarcastic, parodying in fun, or trying to give warning to what is possible, you'd be surprised at the number of totally radical people out there who would pick up on your ideas, remember them and even perfect them for use.
I know a lot of ways to innocently hurt mass numbers of people. I'm keeeping them to myself.

As far as converting to Islam, there is a freedom of religion in this country but don't expect it to be easy for you if all Islamic people become suspect as enemies of the government.

[ 05-31-2002, 04:25 PM: Message edited by: Moni ]

im not saying that any citizen is more of a citizen. where in my post did you get that?! all i said was i would continue to EARN my rights, i didnt flame or anything. i didnt say "absynthe, i earn my rights, thus im more of a citizen". i said rights are earned to given. that is all, the rights still apply to all, though some shouldnt be aloud to use them, simply on the basis that the freedom of speach, and freedom of expression are just taken WAY out of context. anyway, i didnt mean to imply that im more of a citizen because i earn my rights that most are given. i think you are blinded, and read my post wrong.

and what exactly were these abuses in the 60's and 70's?was it the monitoring criminal organizations like the black panthers,a.i.m.,and a whole host of left wing groups?</font>[/QUOTE]Well, the FBI carried out widespread domestic spying in the 1960s and ’70s as part of the notorious COINTELPRO (counter-intelligence program) operation. Under then-FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, COINTELPRO targeted black nationalists, civil rights activists and opponents of the Vietnam War. Those under surveillance included boxer Muhammad Ali, actress Jane Fonda, Dr. Benjamin Spock, John Lennon, Dr. Martin Luther King, among many others. Quite a list of criminal organizations... The campaign was targeted against people excursing their constitutional rights of free speech and dissent. The congressional investigation into COINTELPRO showed the FBI used all kinds of illegal methods to do this: illegal wiretaps, blackmail, forgery, and extortion among others.

edit:to actually add my reply, did not take for some reason.

[ 05-31-2002, 04:37 PM: Message edited by: Rokenn ]

Are you going to be the one to decided who gets to use their constitutional rights and who doesn't? Or maybe Mr Ashcroft can decide. That is a mighty slippery slope to tread on as suddenly you might find yourself on receiving end of that rights denial.

Also no one in the United States 'earns' their rights as a citizen. They are guarenteed to all by the Bill of Rights and the Constitution.

Morgan_Corbesant, Absynthe & Rokenn,

I'll step in and say that yes, born in this country makes us all Americans and we are given our rights by birth. It is what we do with them that allows us to keep them or not.

We do EARN our rights by contributing to our communities and believe it or not, like it or not...some people have more rights than others simply by the names of the people they know or are related to and the names of a$$es they kiss and support(not saying that any of you kiss anyone's a$$ so please don't misunderstand me OK?)...others are given less rights simply by not kissing a$$ and who they don't know personally.
It all a matter of who you know, how much they like you, and how much money you have when it comes down to matters of law where you happen to be not guilty where someone with "more rights than you" can get you canned regardless of your innocence. It happens.

As far as everyday life is concerned, we all have the same rights and should consider ourselves lucky for them. I think we all agree on this last statement so let's not argue OK?
[img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 05-31-2002, 04:52 PM: Message edited by: Moni ]