REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Bill of Rights Under Bush: A Timeline (or What have the Dems Done for Me Lately?)

POSTED BY: 6IXSTRINGJACK
UPDATED: Friday, December 14, 2007 11:45
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 2529
PAGE 1 of 2

Tuesday, December 4, 2007 7:49 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


I did not write this. I am not looking for credit for it. I don't believe the author would mind my posting it here either. I have provided below the link to the original article as well. I realize that this is still a "crime" but I don't care. This is an important message and I believe the author would love to have as many peoople reading it as possible.

(BTW: If you want to read the links from many of the different parts of this timeline, you will have to go to the original site in the first place, so you should probably just go there. I just prefer looking at Firefly's dark background to the bright Red on the other site.)

http://mondoglobo.ning.com/group/questionauthority/forum/topic/show?id
=1509099%3ATopic%3A2937


By Phil Leggiere, writing for QuestionAuthority

Vote for this on Digg | Reddit

2001

January

Presidential directive delays indefinitely the scheduled release of presidential documents (authorized by the Presidential Records Act of 1978) pertaining to the Reagan-Bush administration. Link

Bush and Cheney begin process of radically broadening scope of documents and information which can be deemed classified. Link

February

The National Security Agency (NSA) sets up Project Groundbreaker, a domestic call monitoring program infrastructure. Link

Spring

Bush administration order authorizes NSA monitoring of domestic phone and internet traffic. Link

May

US Supreme Court rules that medical necessity is not a permissible defense against federal marijuana statutes. Link

September

In immediate aftermath of 9-11 terror attacks, Department of Justice authorizes detention without charge for any terror suspects. Over one thousand suspects are brought into detention over the next several months. Link (pdf)

October

Attorney General John Ashcroft announces change in Department of Justice (DOJ) policy. According to the new policy DOJ will impose far more stringent criteria for the granting of Freedom of Information Act requests. Link

September-October

NSA launches massive new database of information on US phone calls. Link

October

The USA Patriot Act becomes law. Among other things the law: makes it a crime for anyone to contribute money or material support for any group on the State Department’s Terror Watch List, allows the FBI to monitor and tape conversations between attorneys and clients, allows the FBI to order librarians to turn over information about patron’s reading habits, allows the government to conduct surveillance on internet and email use of US citizens without notice. The act also calls for expanded use of National Security Letters (NSLs), which allow the FBI to search telephone, email and financial records of US citizens without a court order, exempts the government from needing to reveal how evidence against suspected terrorists was obtained and authorizes indefinite detention of immigrants at the discretion of law enforcement and immigration authorities.

NJ Superior court judge and civil liberties scholar Anthony Napolitano, author of A Nation of Sheep, has described the law’s assault on first and fourth amendment principles as follows, “The Patriot Act’s two most principle constitutional errors are an assault on the Fourth Amendment, and on the First. It permits federal agents to write their own search warrants [under the name “national security letters”] with no judge having examined evidence and agreed that it’s likely that the person or thing the government wants to search will reveal evidence of a crime… Not only that, but the Patriot Act makes it a felony for the recipient of a self-written search warrant to reveal it to anyone. The Patriot Act allows [agents] to serve self-written search warrants on financial institutions, and the Intelligence Authorization Act of 2004 in Orwellian language defines that to include in addition to banks, also delis, bodegas, restaurants, hotels, doctors' offices, lawyers’ offices, telecoms, HMOs, hospitals, casinos, jewelry dealers, automobile dealers, boat dealers, and that great financial institution to which we all would repose our fortunes, the post office. Link 1 | Link 2

November

Executive order limits release of presidential documents. The order gives incumbent presidents the right to veto requests to open any past presidential records and supercedes the congressionally passed law of 1978 mandating release of all presidential records not explicitly deemed classified. Link

2002

Winter

FBI and Department of Defense (DOD), forbidden by law from compiling databases on US citizens, begin contracting with private database firm ChoicePoint to collect, store, search and maintain data. Link

Spring

Secret executive order issued authorizing NSA to wiretap the phones and read emails of US citizens. Link

Spring

Transportation Security Adminstration (TSA) acknowledges it has created both a “No Fly” and a separate “Watch” list of US travelers. Link

May

Department of Justice authorizes the FBI to monitor political and religious groups. The new rules permit the FBI to broadly search or monitor the internet for evidence of criminal activity without having any tips or leads that a specific criminal act has been committed. Link

June

Supreme Court upholds the right of school administrators to conduct mandatory drug testing of students without probable cause. Link

November

Homeland Security Act of 2002 establishes separate Department of Homeland Security. Among other things the department will federally coordinate for the first time all local and state law enforcement nationwide and run a Directorate of Information and Analysis with authority to compile comprehensive data on US citizens using public and commercial records including credit card, phone, bank, and travel. The department also will be exempt form Freedom of Information Act disclosure requirements. The Homeland Security department’s jurisdiction has been widely criticized for being nebulously defined and has extended beyond terrorism into areas including immigration, pornography and drug enforcement. Link 1 | Link 2

2003

February

Draft of Domestic Security Enhancement Act (aka Patriot Act 2), a secret document prepared by the Department of Justice is leaked by the Center for Public Integrity. Provisions of the February 7th draft version included:

Removal of court-ordered prohibitions against police agencies spying on domestic groups.

The FBI would be granted powers to conduct searches and surveillance based on intelligence gathered in foreign countries without first obtaining a court order.

Creation of a DNA database of suspected terrorists.

Prohibition of any public disclosure of the names of alleged terrorists including those who have been arrested.

Exemptions from civil liability for people and businesses who voluntarily turn private information over to the government.

Criminalization of the use of encryption to conceal incriminating communications.

Automatic denial of bail for persons accused of terrorism-related crimes, reversing the ordinary common law burden of proof principle. All alleged terrorists would be required to demonstrate why they should be released on bail rather than the government being required to demonstrate why they should be held.

Expansion of the list of crimes eligible for the death penalty.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency would be prevented from releasing "worst case scenario" information to the public about chemical plants.

United States citizens whom the government finds to be either members of, or providing material support to, terrorist groups could have their US citizenship revoked and be deported to foreign countries.

Although the bill itself has never (yet) been advanced in congress due to public exposure, some of its provisions have become law as parts of other bills. For example The Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 grants the FBI unprecedented power to obtain records from financial institutions without requiring permission from a judge. Under the law, the FBI does not need to seek a court order to access such records, nor does it need to prove just cause. Link 1 | Link 2

March

Executive order issued which radically tightens the declassification process of classified government documents, as well as making it far easier for government agencies to make and keep information classified. The order delayed by three years the release of declassified government documents dating from 1978 or earlier. It also allowed the government to treat all material sent to American officials from foreign governments -- no matter how routine -- as subject to classification, and expanded the ability of Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to shield documents from declassification. Finally it gave the vice president the power to classify information. Link 1 | Link 2

March

In a ruling seen as a victory for the concentration of ownership of intellectual property and an erosion of the public domain, the Supreme Court in Eldred v. Ashcroft held that a 20-year extension of the copyright period (from 50 years after the death of the author to 70 years) called for by the Sonny Bono copyright Extension not violate either the Copyright Clause or the First Amendment. Link

April

In Demore v. Kim, the Supreme Court ruled that even permanent residents could be subject to mandatory detention when facing deportation based on a prior criminal conviction, without any right to an individualized hearing to determine whether they were dangerous or a flight risk. Link

Fall

The FBI changes its traditional policy of destroying all data and documents collected on innocent citizens in the course of criminal investigations. This information would, according to the bureau, now be permanently stored. Two years later in late 2005 Executive Order 13388, expanded access to those files for "state, local and tribal" governments and for "appropriate private sector entities," which are not defined. Link 1 | Link 2

Fall

As authorized by the Patriot Act, the FBI expands the practice of national security letters. NSLs, originally introduced in the 1970s for espionage and terrorism investigations, enabled the FBI to review in secret the customer records of suspected foreign agents. This was extended by the Patriot Act to include permitting clandestine scrutiny of all U.S. residents and visitors whether suspected of terrorism or not. Link

2004

January

The FBI begins keeping a database of US citizens based on information obtained via NSLs. Link

Spring

John Ashcroft invokes State Secrets privilege to forbid former FBI translator Sibel Edmunds from testifying in a case brought by families of victims of the 9-11 attacks. Litigation by 9-11 families is subsequently halted. Link 1 | Link 2

June

Supreme Court upholds Nevada state law allowing police to arrest suspects who refuse to provide identification based on police discretion of “reasonable suspicion.” Link

2005

January

Supreme court rules that police do not need to have probable cause to have drug sniffing dogs examine cars stopped for routine traffic violations. Link 1 | Link 2

June

Supreme Court rules that the federal government can prosecute medical marijuana users even in states which have laws permitting medical marijuana. Link

Summer

The Patriot Act, due to expire at the end of 2005, is reauthorized by Congress. Link

Winter 2005

Senate blocks reauthorization of certain clauses in Patriot Act. Link

2006

March

Senate passes amended version of Patriot Act, reauthorization, with three basic changes from the original including: recipients of secret court orders to turn over sensitive information on individuals linked to terrorism investigations are not allowed to disclose those orders but can challenge the gag order after a year, libraries would not be required to turn over information without the approval of a judge, recipients of an FBI "national security letter" -- an investigator's demand for access to personal or business information -- would not have to tell the FBI if they consult a lawyer. New bill also said to extend Congressional oversight over executive department usage guidelines. Shortly after bill is signed George Bush declares oversight rules are not binding. Link 1 | Link 2

June

Supreme court rules that evidence obtained in violation of the “knock and announce” rules can still be permitted in court. Link

September

US Congress and Senate approve the Military Commissions Act, which authorizes torture and strips non- US citizen detainees suspected of terrorist ties of the right of habeas corpus (which includes formal charges, counsel and hearings). It also empowers US presidents at their discretion to declare US citizens as enemy combatants and subject to detention without charge or due process. Link 1 | Link 2 | Link 3

October

John Warner Defense Authorization Act is passed. The act allows a president to declare a public emergency and station US military troops anywhere in America as well as take control of state based national guard units without consent of the governor or other local authorities. The law authorizes presidential deployment of US troops to round-up and detain “potential terrorists”, “illegal aliens” and “disorderly” citizenry. Link 1 | Link 2

2007

May

National Security Presidential Directive 51 (NSPD-51) establishes a new post-disaster plan (with disaster defined as any incident, natural or man-made, resulting in extraordinary mass casualties, damage or disruption) which places the president in charge of all three branches of government. The directive overrides the National Emergencies Act which gives Congress power to determine the duration of a national emergency. Link 1 | Link 2

June

In “Bong Hits for Jesus” case Supreme court rules that student free speech rights do not extend to promotion of drug use. Link

July

Executive Order 13438: "Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq, issued. The order asserts the government’s power to confiscate the property “of persons determined to have committed, or to pose a significant risk of committing, an act or acts of violence that have the purpose or effect of threatening the peace or stability of Iraq or the Government of Iraq or undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq or to provide humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people."

October

The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Act passes the House of Representatives 400 to 6 (to be voted on in the Senate in 2008). The act proposes the establishment of a commission composed of members of the House and Senate, Homeland Security and others, to "examine and report upon the facts and causes of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence in the United States” and specifically the role of the internet in fostering and disseminating extremism. According to the bill the term `violent radicalization' means the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change, while the term 'ideologically-based violence' means the use, planned use, or threatened use of force or violence by a group or individual to promote the group or individual's political, religious, or social beliefs.” Link 1 | Link 2 | Link 3

Vote for this on Digg | Reddit

If you value your civil liberties, consider joining MondoGlobo now...

Other research sources

James Bovard, Attention Deficit Democracy, 2007 Palgrave Macmillan

Elaine Cassel,The War on Civil Liberties: How Bush and Ashcroft Have Dismantled t..., 2004 Lawrence Hill Books

Anthony Napolitano, A Nation of Sheep, 2007 Thomas Nelson

-----------------------------------------


Now.... all that being said. WTF is the Bush nightmare still doing in office all you liberal swine? What the hell are your prescious Democrat jack-boot licking cowards doing? They're sucking Bush's cock now so they can get more votes in the presidential election.....

My real question to you is, how much more can Bush take away in the next year? Perhaps I will go to prison for having written stuff like this a year from now....

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 4, 2007 8:00 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Hello,

What is your own political identification?

Thanks,

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 4, 2007 8:14 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Why do I need to have one?

Why do you, for that matter?

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 5, 2007 2:19 AM

RALLEM


Why did you publish the link and then paste it here? You could have and probably should have simply posted the link and then your opinions regarding this article.

Personally I think it is crap. Just a bunch of dooom and gloom with no mention of any supreme court or any lower court orders.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 5, 2007 3:12 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Personally I think it is crap. Just a bunch of dooom and gloom with no mention of any supreme court or any lower court orders.
You're a load of crap. The article mentions the Supreme Court and other courts at least a dozen times. You should be bitch-slapped for being egregiously stupid.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 5, 2007 3:24 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


6ix: Many, many more Dems than Repugs voted against various restrictions. Unfortunately these are individually motivated people who don't reflect Party leadership. The Congresspeople with a conscience really belong in a third Party bc they get stabbed in the back over and over again.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 5, 2007 3:46 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Quote:

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
Why do I need to have one?

Why do you, for that matter?

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack





Hello,

'What have the Dems done for me lately?' suggested to me that you feel the Democrats are responsible for protecting you from Bush's stomping of your rights and liberties.

That inspired me to ask your own affiliation, because it seemed like an odd sort of supposition. I thought, 'perhaps he is a Democrat and feels that the Democratic party owes him some protection from this wrongdoing.'

A better question might be, 'What have the Republicans done for me lately?' and the answer is, 'Work in unison to shrink my rights and misspend my dollars to the tune of a trillion or more.'

A best question might be, 'What have I done for me lately?' and the answer is, 'Not a hell of a lot. I mostly talk about how I don't like this stuff, and complain to my friends and associates.'

In my own case, the sins are worse. I helped to vote that bastard in. I suppose that means I have only myself to blame for the aftermath.

Incidentally, I'm registered Independent.

That makes my coat a kind of brownish color.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 5, 2007 4:33 AM

FREMDFIRMA


If I had to give it a name, I'd say Jack was a proto-anarchist Libertarian of the "Get the fuck outta my business!" stripe.

I myself am an outright Anarchist.

And what he's bitchin about, is the Dems getting the votes, majorities, and offices on the promise and premise that they were gonna STOP this shit, and then dropping to their knees and unzipping the administrations fly voluntarily.

And the bitchin comes of knockin your head against the futile brick wall of the idocy that is incumbency, helped along by morons who blindly allow Gerrymandering, and vote in blocs not necessarily supporting their interests, thus removing any threat value whatsoever of the individual constituent.

By all means, feel WELCOME to get all up in Conyers ass for practically hiding under the judiciary committee table hoping we don't notice him tryin not to rock the boat, heaven knows his wife, cindy sheehan, and his whole damn district is so far up his ass about it he's been practically hiding out like a fugitive - and still not doin a damn thing... look at the so-called "justice" dept - they laughed off those subpeanos, more or less spat in his face and dared him to DO anything about it, and we haven't heard shit since, have we now ?

Was that me, I woulda deputized some returning troops into the capitol police and showed those fuckers the business end of a dynamic entry warrant service, which is what they'd do to us mere peons if WE laughed off a subpeano like that.

More than anything, Jack strikes me as a pissed that damn fools are pinning their hopes on a bunch of chickenshit bastards who not only won't put a stop to it, but are likely to commit the same abuses if the political reins shift into their hands - they never wanted to stop that shit, they just wanted to be the ones holding the leash, is all....

And I TOLD folks that, back when they voted these pissants into office in the first damn place.

It's like handing the One Ring to Boromir and telling him to whup Saurons ass - sure, he might do it, but all you've done in the end is simply change who's sittin in the throne pissing on you.

And folks pinning their hopes on Ron Paul, great guy that he is, facing a system that will isolate, stonewall and politically nullify or ignore him, or just downright give him the Bulworth treatment - it's a great idea, but in practice not a hope in hell even IF the rigged game would allow the election of a candidate who actually represented the peons instead of their corporate masters.

Once again, it's takin cough syrup for tuberculosis, treating the symptoms instead of the problem.

You got any decent ideas, I'd like to hear em, cause I sure as hell don't.


-Frem
It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 5, 2007 4:50 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
Why do I need to have one?

Why do you, for that matter?


Jack, you and I have butted heads briefly in the past, but I like your style, boy.

You GO girl Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 5, 2007 5:33 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by rallem:
Why did you publish the link and then paste it here? You could have and probably should have simply posted the link and then your opinions regarding this article.

Personally I think it is crap. Just a bunch of dooom and gloom with no mention of any supreme court or any lower court orders.



Hello Rallem.

I published the link because

a) I don't imagine that the original poster of this article would mind this message being disseminated in any way shape or form.

b) People are more prone to read what is in front of them, rather than click links to read it.

c) I piss on copyright laws whenever I get a chance at any other given moment because they do absolutely nothing to protect the brains and talent behind what is copyrighted in the first place, while suits make a mint off their backs.

d) Having said that, I would not hesitate to take a post from somebody else down if they requested and I would apologize to them profusely for having angered the original writer, and hope that they view me as an individual who doesn't have bad intentions. This is why I posted their link in the first place. I'm not trying to steal anything from anyone.

d) It pisses people off who disagree with me on any of these points.

e) I don't know how long you've been in the real world, but it's not as if this is the first post which has been printed here from another site, and I'm hardly the only one who does it.

...

As for the second portion of your post, though I don't agree with any word of it, you are of course more than entitled to your own opinions. Perhaps you might change your stance if you were to re-read it and retain it without skimming and you did it on the other site where you can click the links available after most, if not every single point made.

Quote:

Signym: Many, many more Dems than Repugs voted against various restrictions. Unfortunately these are individually motivated people who don't reflect Party leadership. The Congresspeople with a conscience really belong in a third Party bc they get stabbed in the back over and over again.


Yes Signy. I have no doubts that many many more Dems voted against various restrictions. There is absolutely no denying that. But the point is, this is a totally fixed game where the American people can never win. Dems dropping the ball now and not ending the nightmare is just the most blatant example of this in the history of my life.

Besides, if I were to vote Hillary or Obama into office next term, smoking would be absolutely forbidden in every private establishment in the country by the time the second term was up. Any Dem run state, such as Illinois with their complete ban of smoking in any business or building whether public or private is a stellar example of that.

I don't want to choose the lesser of two evils. Meddling is meddling no matter if you're the big dumb dufus who right now is whipping it out and pissing on everybody in broad daylight or you're the next Democratic man/woman behind the curtain pulling at the liberal heartstrings until we find ourselves so smothered and restricted in what activities we choose to partake in ourselves that we may as well be an automaton singing for the upcoming generation of MTV's brainwashed "Choose or Loose" genration at Chuck E Cheeses. (When it does come to that, remember that I've already claimed dibbs on being the huge gorilla with the keyboard in back. That guy ruled!)

That, my friend, is not a win situation for me.

And now they lied to all of you. All of you who wanted to end this war and knock the office of the President back down a few notches, safe within the system of checks and ballances. You've all been fooled. You all know it too. The silver tounge of the Harpy Democrats who pull at those heartstrings with their Lifetime movies fooled you all.

Sorry Signy. I've never doubted that your heart was in the right place on any of your threads, but to not see that the Dems brainwash and use their followers just as much as the Rethugs do the same with FOX News.... well, that's letting that big heart get in the way of what I'm sure is also a really big brain.


Quote:

Anthony T:
Hello,

'What have the Dems done for me lately?' suggested to me that you feel the Democrats are responsible for protecting you from Bush's stomping of your rights and liberties.

That inspired me to ask your own affiliation, because it seemed like an odd sort of supposition. I thought, 'perhaps he is a Democrat and feels that the Democratic party owes him some protection from this wrongdoing.'

A better question might be, 'What have the Republicans done for me lately?' and the answer is, 'Work in unison to shrink my rights and misspend my dollars to the tune of a trillion or more.'

A best question might be, 'What have I done for me lately?' and the answer is, 'Not a hell of a lot. I mostly talk about how I don't like this stuff, and complain to my friends and associates.'

In my own case, the sins are worse. I helped to vote that bastard in. I suppose that means I have only myself to blame for the aftermath.

Incidentally, I'm registered Independent.

That makes my coat a kind of brownish color.

--Anthony



LOL... thanks for the laugh Anthony. I'm not laughing at you by any means. I'm laughing at the preposterous idea that the Dems were ever looking out for me or you or anyone on this board or in this verse. I assure you, that my spite for either side has no rival greater than that of the other and this post was just oozing the sarcasm and "I told you so" attitude that I'm probably infamous here for.

As for what have I done for myself, I wish I could come back with a reply worthy of that response, or worthy of what I believe I could do, but as you suppose here the answer is "not very much". I somehow find a way to sleep at night just by posting online and talking in real life to other people and pointing out things they wouldn't know had they only experienced the conventional forms of media. Even the internet is one of those, and for the most part, I believe the Dems are locking that one up. I am very proud to say that I believe I've personally secured at least 5 Ron Paul votes this upcoming election. 5 is such a small number, but it really only takes one vote to win, and people would do good not to be so cynical about that little truism and remember it well.

The sins of voting he who shall not be named into power twice weigh heavily upon many of us who regret what we have done... the evil we have unleashed upon not only our country, but the entire world. This is not your burden alone to feel bad about and that you realize it was a mistake not to be repeated is the most important thing of all.

Browncoats.... that's what you and I are all about.


Quote:

Frem:

If I had to give it a name, I'd say Jack was a proto-anarchist Libertarian of the "Get the fuck outta my business!" stripe.

I myself am an outright Anarchist.

And what he's bitchin about, is the Dems getting the votes, majorities, and offices on the promise and premise that they were gonna STOP this shit, and then dropping to their knees and unzipping the administrations fly voluntarily.

And the bitchin comes of knockin your head against the futile brick wall of the idocy that is incumbency, helped along by morons who blindly allow Gerrymandering, and vote in blocs not necessarily supporting their interests, thus removing any threat value whatsoever of the individual constituent.

By all means, feel WELCOME to get all up in Conyers ass for practically hiding under the judiciary committee table hoping we don't notice him tryin not to rock the boat, heaven knows his wife, cindy sheehan, and his whole damn district is so far up his ass about it he's been practically hiding out like a fugitive - and still not doin a damn thing... look at the so-called "justice" dept - they laughed off those subpeanos, more or less spat in his face and dared him to DO anything about it, and we haven't heard shit since, have we now ?

Was that me, I woulda deputized some returning troops into the capitol police and showed those fuckers the business end of a dynamic entry warrant service, which is what they'd do to us mere peons if WE laughed off a subpeano like that.

More than anything, Jack strikes me as a pissed that damn fools are pinning their hopes on a bunch of chickenshit bastards who not only won't put a stop to it, but are likely to commit the same abuses if the political reins shift into their hands - they never wanted to stop that shit, they just wanted to be the ones holding the leash, is all....

And I TOLD folks that, back when they voted these pissants into office in the first damn place.

It's like handing the One Ring to Boromir and telling him to whup Saurons ass - sure, he might do it, but all you've done in the end is simply change who's sittin in the throne pissing on you.

And folks pinning their hopes on Ron Paul, great guy that he is, facing a system that will isolate, stonewall and politically nullify or ignore him, or just downright give him the Bulworth treatment - it's a great idea, but in practice not a hope in hell even IF the rigged game would allow the election of a candidate who actually represented the peons instead of their corporate masters.

Once again, it's takin cough syrup for tuberculosis, treating the symptoms instead of the problem.

You got any decent ideas, I'd like to hear em, cause I sure as hell don't.



Once again Frem, it strikes me just how much you get me. It's as if we're brothers separated at a young age and just now meeting again for the first time and realizing that though we've never even seen what each other look like, we're hardly unlike at all.

Oh how I hope you don't one day turn out to be the O'Brien to my Winston Smith.

I don't even need to go over any of your points here, because you've said them so well and anything I said about them would be sheer redundancies.

My only hope though is that you're wrong about Paul. I'm not foolish enough to believe that there is no way that by supporting Paul, I'm not just setting myself up to get the pie in the face, but I really just need this one thing to have hope in. I know he probably will be stymied in office to the point of complete ineffectiveness, even if somehow he manages to survive one or two terms with his head still intact, but at the very least wouldn't you imagine that if he could survive two full terms that he would at least be able to put the bastards in such a stalemate that it just doesn't get any worse for that amount of time?

Quote:

Jack, you and I have butted heads briefly in the past, but I like your style, boy.

You GO girl Chrisisall



Heh... thanks Chris. I'm sure we've disagreed on things in here before but I really can't imagine it ever getting to butting heads with you. You're one of the coolest characters in the RWED and your ability to not fly off the handle as I've been known to do is a very admirable trait. Don't reckon I have a clue how you manage to do it.


-6SJ

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 5, 2007 9:47 AM

RALLEM


If you are so fed up with the system why not move to a Country which better suits your needs?


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 5, 2007 9:57 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by rallem:
If you are so fed up with the system why not move to a Country which better suits your needs?



Chuckles.....

Read my previous posts and you'll know why. What a childish retort.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 5, 2007 10:07 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


"If you are so fed up with the system why not move to a Country which better suits your needs?"

In the 70's it was put more succinctly as "America - love it or leave it." And it makes about as much sense now as it did then - which is - none.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 5, 2007 10:12 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by rallem:
If you are so fed up with the system why not move to a Country which better suits your needs?



Yep, that's the kind of priciples this country was founded under. If you don't like it, roll over and take in the rear, or just go away.

Thank God people like you didn't run the revolution. We'd still be Brits.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 5, 2007 10:20 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
In the 70's it was put more succinctly as "America - love it or leave it." And it makes about as much sense now as it did then - which is - none.



Yeah... that's pretty much what I was thinking when I posted, but though it was on the tip of my tounge, I couldn't have put it so eloquently.



And storymark... that would have me falling out of my chair in laughter if it weren't so true.


Don't mean I'm not smiling now though.

EDITED TO ADD: I'm still waiting for Dems to come in here and try to tell me I'm wrong though. Any opposition I've had was to the obvious bash at Rethugs, but this post was meant to be even harder on the somehow celebrated Demons.


"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 5, 2007 11:48 AM

KIRKULES


I don't see how anyone could read 6SJ's list and not be made a little uncomfortable. The one thing that is encouraging to me is that Anarchists, Libertarians, Republicans, Independents and Democrats seem to agree on that for the most part. The only reason more Republicans voted for these is because they have the White House. If a Democrat was in oval office you could just reverse the numbers.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 5, 2007 12:30 PM

RALLEM


Quote:

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
Quote:

Originally posted by rallem:
If you are so fed up with the system why not move to a Country which better suits your needs?



Chuckles.....

Read my previous posts and you'll know why. What a childish retort.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack]

Which of your previous posts? I am sorry, but I am at work and do not have the luxery of reading every single post, and if you answered the question earlier thus making my question "childish," then I appologize, but it was not intended as a retort. It was a simple question.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 5, 2007 12:52 PM

RALLEM


Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:
Quote:

Originally posted by rallem:
If you are so fed up with the system why not move to a Country which better suits your needs?



Yep, that's the kind of priciples this country was founded under. If you don't like it, roll over and take in the rear, or just go away.

Thank God people like you didn't run the revolution. We'd still be Brits.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."



Actually there were several people with the attitude that if you are sick and tired of the system then go somewhere else, back in the days of the Colonies before the Revolutionary War, and I believe they were called Tories. The primary differences here are that nobody back then was pining away about foreign lands that had it better than us, and the people who were not satisfied with the Government had other ideas for change. I cannot go back to see if Jack is one of those people who is saying that other countries have it better than we do, but I am certain that I have read more than once of people here pining away about how these certain European Countries are happier than us, and to those people I ask why not move to those countries then? I honestly don’t think anyone would be willing to move, because I think we all know how good we actually have it here in the United States, and I think these blubbering idiots like Jack who try to sound intelligent by slamming the Government, know that real happiness can only be found at home, and it has nothing to do with our Government.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 5, 2007 1:08 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Because we love the ideal, the dream, that is America - even tho through all this time it's been mostly bullshit, sure, the IDEA remains - we seek it, strive for it, in spite of a long history of Government that actively spites it, your average american damn well wants the ideals that this country was founded on.

Maybe a lotta folks have forgotten it, to swipe a paraphrase from Citizen "Better than a tinpot dictatorship isn't much of a yardstick to measure your freedom by..", but not all of us have.

As long as there is any hope at all, and I am doubtful enough in this respect to actually have a full-blown exit plan that I don't intend to share - many of us have decided to hold out, hope, and try to kick our country back onto the rails of the freedom train, until it becomes clearly impossible to do that, not out of some psychotic rabid flag waving nationalism, or because we think we're better than anyone else, but because we were born here, lived here, the communities and people who have touched and influanced our lives... they're all HERE...

It's an act of love, and we don't leave this country for the same reason Mal didn't just dump the wreck and get another ship at the end of Serenity, it's OUR ship, and we mean to keep her in the air, no matter what it takes.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 5, 2007 1:22 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Jack, I dunno, really.. what creates "People like us" - but I am learning, cause both of my Nieces are like that, and it seems that certain pre-dispositions combined with certain stresses and experiences virtually guarantee it to one degree or another - and while not identical, the thought processes are very similar, as are many of the personality aspects.

Delved into that a bit in a different threads, but dude, there's a LOT more of "us" than anyone ever realised, we are, socially, the newtownian equal and opposite reaction to the kool-aid chuggers, and as our society polarizes further, you WILL see an explosive growth of those who formerly covered it in social veneer and played along because they just can't stomach the game anymore.

Strangely, there seems to be an unusually wide range of such, politically, racially, of social and financial status - so apparently we're equal opportunity assholes

-Frem
It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 5, 2007 1:27 PM

RALLEM


I promise that I'll come back to this and answer these responses when I get home tonight.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 5, 2007 6:52 PM

RALLEM


Quote:

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Because we love the ideal, the dream, that is America - even tho through all this time it's been mostly bullshit, sure, the IDEA remains - we seek it, strive for it, in spite of a long history of Government that actively spites it, your average american damn well wants the ideals that this country was founded on.

Maybe a lotta folks have forgotten it, to swipe a paraphrase from Citizen "Better than a tinpot dictatorship isn't much of a yardstick to measure your freedom by..", but not all of us have.

As long as there is any hope at all, and I am doubtful enough in this respect to actually have a full-blown exit plan that I don't intend to share - many of us have decided to hold out, hope, and try to kick our country back onto the rails of the freedom train, until it becomes clearly impossible to do that, not out of some psychotic rabid flag waving nationalism, or because we think we're better than anyone else, but because we were born here, lived here, the communities and people who have touched and influanced our lives... they're all HERE...

It's an act of love, and we don't leave this country for the same reason Mal didn't just dump the wreck and get another ship at the end of Serenity, it's OUR ship, and we mean to keep her in the air, no matter what it takes.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it




Here is my reply.

To Jack, I will look at your earlier posts to see why it was childish of me to ask why you didn't leave, but not now because I am tired. It has been a very stressful day for me.

To Fremdfirma,
It is great that you wish to take this country back to its roots based on freedom, but to what avail? Are you willing to take up arms? That is what founded this Country, it is why our second amendment rights are to keep and bear arms, (my opinion only) and it is why I own firearms, but if people were to ask me to take up arms against our current Government I would not only not comply but I would probably do everything in my power against the rebels. I do not believe the Government is that far corrupt from the original intent of our Forefathers.

In the list which started this post it stated several incidents in which the Government had tried to trample on the rights of its citizens, but nowhere were any of the details of those incidents printed showing who was targeted by these incidents, why these incidents were instigated, or any other detail unless possibly the detail somehow supported the case of the author. Also the current checks and balances scheme of our Government where the Legislative branch makes the Laws, The Executive branch enforces the laws, and the Judicial Branch decides if the laws are Constitutional or not, and where each branch has certain abilities to check the others ever mentioned in that article. Actually in the article posted above it was implied that the actual checks and balances of our Government was between the Republican and Democratic parties, and that is not the case. It might be the valid form of checks and balances for other Governments, but it is not for ours. This is outside anything I have read here, but it is often joked that there isn’t any real difference between the Republican and Democratic parties anymore, but if we think about it that is logical because each party has been around for so long that they most certainly would have burrowed ideas which were appealing to voters about the other party and made them their own.

I have to be very careful about what I write and mean because in another post I claimed that the Soviet Block Nations were all Socialist when in fact they were all Communist, but that was a simple case of my fingers typing one thing while my mind was thinking another. Actually I sort of recall thinking about Hungary while typing that post and in my mind it was the closest thing to a Socialist Government in the Soviet Block. Actually I believe it was called the Goulash Communist Government. I also almost made a similar mistake again today when I said that there were Tories in the Colonies before the Revolutionary War, but I originally typed it as the Civil War. I was embarrassed yesterday when my post was so easily dissected and pushed aside because of a few typos, or Freudian slips which ever they were, so today for this post I decided to wait until I cam home and had the real time to write and read my post before sending it.

As to the part about not leaving a nation when another can serve your purpose better, I am sort of a middle of the road person there, because my father left Hungary during that revolution, and while he had never told me any of the details of his struggles there, I do know from my mother that as a young boy he took up arms against the Soviet Union and when he saw that he had rocks and they had tanks he decided to move to America. That is a very simplified version of my father’s struggles, but if he did not leave Hungary for America I would never have existed. I did talk to my Dad sometime in the 1990s about his ever leaving America, and he said that he would never leave, because he did that once and would never do that again and that America is his new home, and it is the nation to which he pledges his allegiance. Would I ever leave this Country? Well I might, but I wouldn’t do it for any reason against this Country. I have some thoughts to moving to New Zealand to make myself a new life, but I don’t think that I would ever change my Citizenship unless of course I had a family there and that was where I wanted to keep them. I just don’t know. I hope that I addressed everything here, but if I didn’t I’m sure somebody will bring up the delinquent topics and I’ll try to address them tomorrow.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 5, 2007 7:06 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


rallem

That was an interesting post.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 5, 2007 8:05 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Hello,

I'm not prepared to take up arms against my government, either. I think we are years away from that. Possibly decades. I don't mind saying that the US is still the best fish in the sea.

Hopefully, peacable discourse and votes will steer the country in the direction of greater liberties, changing our course for the better long before we degenerate to the point of armed rebellion.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 6, 2007 12:43 AM

RALLEM


Is anybody here pushing for Ron Paul?


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 6, 2007 6:07 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


-dup-

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 6, 2007 6:07 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Quote:

Originally posted by rallem:
Is anybody here pushing for Ron Paul?

]



I am.

http://theunreachablestar.com/freedomdan.wmv

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 6, 2007 9:26 AM

RALLEM


Me too


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 6, 2007 10:28 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


How about criticizing ? Complaining ? Exposing ? Impeaching ? Convicting ?

The problem is, is that people who do this (or want to do this) are accused of being anti-American. Invited to move elsewhere. It's not so much the 'taking up arms' that many seem to have a problem with, it's exercise of democracy at all.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 6, 2007 10:33 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Rallem

The reason why I found yur post interesting is b/c I too am first generation (Polish) and know many immigrants, including those from Hungary. But we have a diferent take on the US and it's good and bad points than you do (which I have to say you seem to have adopted direclty from your father).

One thing I found puzzling is that you remember a conversation w/ your father from the 90's. It left me with the impression that either you don't talk with your father much at all, or you don't talk about anything serious. So that that kind of conversation sticks out in your memory from roughly a decade ago. That would be sad, if true.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 6, 2007 11:16 AM

RALLEM


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
Rallem

The reason why I found yur post interesting is b/c I too am first generation (Polish) and know many immigrants, including those from Hungary. But we have a diferent take on the US and it's good and bad points than you do (which I have to say you seem to have adopted direclty from your father).

One thing I found puzzling is that you remember a conversation w/ your father from the 90's. It left me with the impression that either you don't talk with your father much at all, or you don't talk about anything serious. So that that kind of conversation sticks out in your memory from roughly a decade ago. That would be sad, if true.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."



I remember conversations with my father from the 1990s, the 1980s, from before then, and after. I actually have a very good relationship with my parents. It is true that many of my beliefs and opinions do follow very closely to my father's because I guess it is true the apple doesn't fall far from its tree. With that said my opinions and beliefs do differ somewhat for instance My dad is pulling for either Giuliani or Romney, and I told my dad that I would rather vote for Clinton than Giuliani because he scares the crap out of me. I then told my dad that I am pulling for Paul, but would vote for Romney if he were the one to receive the Republican nomination.

To answer your earlier post, I think that the author of this post complained like he did in a totally non-relevant medium like this to draw out these types of remarks, as did many of the following posters, so they were getting in my opinion what they wanted. I am not going to appologize.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 6, 2007 11:58 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


"I am not going to appologize."

My opinion - All of these quotes here indicate to me you have little repect for the actual process of democracy - including the right to voice an opinion critical of the government.

If you are so fed up with the system why not move

nobody back then was pining away about foreign lands that had it better than us

people who were not satisfied with the Government

these blubbering idiots

try to sound intelligent by slamming the Government

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 6, 2007 12:09 PM

RALLEM


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
"I am not going to appologize."

My opinion - All of these quotes here indicate to me you have little repect for the actual process of democracy - including the right to voice an opinion critical of the government.

If you are so fed up with the system why not move

nobody back then was pining away about foreign lands that had it better than us

people who were not satisfied with the Government

these blubbering idiots

try to sound intelligent by slamming the Government

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."



Are you still looking for an apology?


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 6, 2007 12:36 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


No, just expressing my opinion. Which is that , consistently, over time, you've expressed an idea that no one should ever criticize the government. Which seems very out of place from someone who claims to love democracy.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 6, 2007 12:39 PM

RALLEM


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
No, just expressing my opinion. Which is that , consistently, over time, you've expressed an idea that no one should ever criticize the government. Which seems very out of place from someone who claims to love democracy.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."



I didn't say that nobody should ever criticize the Government.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 6, 2007 12:44 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Then what do these mean ?

If you are so fed up with the system why not move

nobody back then was pining away about foreign lands that had it better than us

people who were not satisfied with the Government

these blubbering idiots

try to sound intelligent by slamming the Government


***************************************************************
Please elucidate.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 6, 2007 1:06 PM

RALLEM


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
Then what do these mean ?

If you are so fed up with the system why not move

nobody back then was pining away about foreign lands that had it better than us

people who were not satisfied with the Government

these blubbering idiots

try to sound intelligent by slamming the Government


***************************************************************
Please elucidate.



You are giving partial quotes, but I've been thinking about one thing I did say and will issue an apology for it. I said that this was not an appropriate venue for these types of comments and I was wrong. This is a perfect place for them, so I do apologize for that.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 6, 2007 1:11 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


I give partial quotes in the interest of saving space - that are still able to point to the particular quote and highlight the particular phrase or idea that caught my attention. I COULD simply copy/past all of your posts, but that would be stupid.

So I take it you'd rather dance defensively than discuss. S'OK. I get it.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 6, 2007 1:34 PM

RALLEM


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
I give partial quotes in the interest of saving space - that are still able to point to the particular quote and highlight the particular phrase or idea that caught my attention. I COULD simply copy/past all of your posts, but that would be stupid.

So I take it you'd rather dance defensively than discuss. S'OK. I get it.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."



You quoted me with
Quote:


If you are so fed up with the system why not move



which looks like a criticism, but if you had left the question mark attached it would have looked like an honest question. I did mention in a later post that my father did exactly that.

With the rest of the quotes you provided there is no context to what I originally wrote. I know what you are doing is ethically proper, but I believe you are supposed to mark these quotes which you alter so the readers will know they are not verbatim. I think that if there is something taken out of the quote before the text you provide, that you are supposed to give three periods before to show there was text before your quote, “…quote,” or three periods after for text afterwards, “Quote…” or if anything is different about the quote you should use a [sic] to show that.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 6, 2007 1:53 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


I just figure people will find (word ...) to get to the first instance. But either way you seem to think that people who say that other countries have it better should move, that people who aren't quite ready to take up arms should shut up, that people who criticize the government are blubbering idiots just trying to sound smart. In other words, you find no justification why people should be able to criticize the government. That's what I noticed.



***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 6, 2007 2:05 PM

RALLEM


How much space did you really save by omitting my question mark? Oh wait, that much. So why else would you omit it but to change the meaning of what I said? You lied when you said you only gave partial quotes to save space and the real reason was to change the context of my messages.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 6, 2007 2:45 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Rallem

Here I am trying to have a civilized discussion and you seem to be stuck on trying to derail it with cavils about one question mark in one quote.

So here are extended quotes and my impressions:

Just a bunch of doom and gloom with no mention of any supreme court or any lower court orders. Aside from being untrue as SignyM pointed out, the question to this is - so what ? If they were cheerful cockeyed optimists for whom nothing was ever wrong would you feel so compelled to minimize their opinions ? Probably not, for reasons given below.
If you are so fed up with the system why not move to a Country which better suits your needs? If people complain about and criticize 'the system' why would that be your first response ? B/c in the end it does come down to - American, love it or leave it. Which is not an expression of a democratic ideal.
The primary differences here are that nobody back then was pining away about foreign lands that had it better than us, and the people who were not satisfied with the Government had other ideas for change. There are several problems with this post. The first is that you're saying that people who are making comparisons (which even US News and World Report acknowledges are valid - google "How They Do It Better") are pining for foreign countries. Way to go mischaracterizing what people are saying ! And you complain about a question mark ... The other thing you seem to be saying is - if you're not ready for armed revolt, STFU. Again, certainly not in the spirit of democracy where people are supposed to be able to discuss their political opinions.
... I think we all know how good we actually have it here in the United States, and I think these blubbering idiots ... who try to sound intelligent by slamming the Government, know that real happiness can only be found at home, and it has nothing to do with our Government. There are multiple problems here as well. Do we all really know how good we have it here in the US ? And even if we did, does that mean there's no room for improvement ? Does just criticizing the government qualify people as 'blubbering idiots' ? That certainly doesn't seem very democratic. Do we all - like Dorothy in The Wizard of Oz - have to find happiness in our own back yards no matter what the government does ? That would have disqualified your father from leaving Hungary, b/c - according to you - his happiness should have been in his own back yard irrespective of the government.
It is great that you wish to take this country back to its roots based on freedom, but to what avail? Are you willing to take up arms? Here's that theme again ... if you aren't ready to violently overthrow the government you should STFU.
... I think that the author of this post complained like he did in a totally non-relevant medium like this to draw out these types of remarks, as did many of the following posters, so they were getting in my opinion what they wanted. Non-relevant medium - RWE in a discussion board where people discuss ??? If this is a non-relevant medium, what, in your opinion is the appropriate medium for political discussion in a democracy ?

Overall I get the impression you might like the country but you seem very unhappy with the democracy.


***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 6, 2007 4:09 PM

RALLEM


Thank you for your reply. I am spacing the text differently than in your original post for my ability to keep track of my responses. I hope you do not mind.
Quote:


Just a bunch of doom and gloom with no mention of any supreme court or any lower court orders.

Aside from being untrue as SignyM pointed out, the question to this is - so what ? If they were cheerful cockeyed optimists for whom which nothing was ever wrong would you feel so compelled to minimize their opinions ? Probably not, for reason given below.



I had written more about this saying that no checks and balances were mentioned in the original article posted, and that the article seemed to imply that the necessary checks and balances for the actions listed rested in the arms of the Democrats, and that is not the case. The question here in my opinion is whether the Executive Branch is wrong for making these requests which might affect the rights of America’s citizens, or is it alright for them to make these requests expecting the Judicial Branch to catch any un-Constitutional practices?
Quote:


If you are so fed up with the system why not move to a Country which better suits your needs?

If people complain about and criticize 'the system' why would that be your first response ? B/c in the end it does come down to - American, love it or leave it. Which is not an expression of a democratic ideal.



This is a very valid question with a very valid answer, and whether or not it strikes a chord of “America, love it or leave it,” in your mind is irrelevant because it is an expression of Democratic ideas. I have the right to voice my opinions too. With that said, it is only “America, love it or leave it,” in your mind, because the valid answer of, “I prefer to stay in this country and make it better,” [sic] or any other valid answer given satisfied my query.
Quote:


The primary differences here are that nobody back then was pining away about foreign lands that had it better than us, and the people who were not satisfied with the Government had other ideas for change.

There are several problems with this post. The first is that you're saying that people who are making comparisons (which even US News and World Report acknowledges are valid - google "How They Do It Better") are pining for foreign countries. Way to go mischaracterizing what people are saying ! And you complain about a question mark ... The other thing you seem to be saying is - if you're not ready for armed revolt, STFU. Again, certainly not in the spirit of democracy where people are supposed to be able to discuss their political opinions.



What my post pointed out was that the people back in the days of the Revolutionary War, both Loyalist and Rebellion had different options available.
Quote:


... I think we all know how good we actually have it here in the United States, and I think these blubbering idiots ... who try to sound intelligent by slamming the Government, know that real happiness can only be found at home, and it has nothing to do with our Government.

There are multiple problems here as well. Do we all really know how good we have it here in the US ? And even if we did, does that mean there's no room for improvement ? Does just criticizing the government qualify people as 'blubbering idiots' ? That certainly doesn't seem very democratic. Do we all - like Dorothy in The Wizard of Oz - have to find happiness in our own back yards no matter what the government does ? That would have disqualified your father from leaving Hungary, b/c - according to you - his happiness should have been in his own back yard irrespective of the government.


I'll leave this one alone.
Quote:


It is great that you wish to take this country back to its roots based on freedom, but to what avail? Are you willing to take up arms?

Here's that theme again ... if you aren't ready to violently overthrow the government you should STFU.



In my original post I said that taking up arms was needed to create this nation, and if someone was willing to do so I would not assist them and would do everything in my power to combat the rebels because I did not think the Federal Government was that far away from what the founding fathers had implied when the Government was formed. I did say that I thought it was great that people wanted to bring this nation back to its roots, and this is why I am standing with the Ron Paul camp right now, because I feel he is our best bet to bringing the nation closer to its roots. The STFU part was read into my post by you.
Quote:


... I think that the author of this post complained like he did in a totally non-relevant medium like this to draw out these types of remarks, as did many of the following posters, so they were getting in my opinion what they wanted. Non-relevant medium

- RWE in a discussion board where people discuss ??? If this is a non-relevant medium, what, in your opinion is the appropriate medium for political discussion in a democracy ?



I already apologized for that.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 6, 2007 5:31 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


And yet out of all this:
Quote:

2001

January

Presidential directive delays indefinitely the scheduled release of presidential documents (authorized by the Presidential Records Act of 1978) pertaining to the Reagan-Bush administration. Link

Bush and Cheney begin process of radically broadening scope of documents and information which can be deemed classified. Link

February

The National Security Agency (NSA) sets up Project Groundbreaker, a domestic call monitoring program infrastructure. Link

Spring

Bush administration order authorizes NSA monitoring of domestic phone and internet traffic. Link

May

US Supreme Court rules that medical necessity is not a permissible defense against federal marijuana statutes. Link

September

In immediate aftermath of 9-11 terror attacks, Department of Justice authorizes detention without charge for any terror suspects. Over one thousand suspects are brought into detention over the next several months. Link (pdf)

October

Attorney General John Ashcroft announces change in Department of Justice (DOJ) policy. According to the new policy DOJ will impose far more stringent criteria for the granting of Freedom of Information Act requests. Link

September-October

NSA launches massive new database of information on US phone calls. Link

October

The USA Patriot Act becomes law. Among other things the law: makes it a crime for anyone to contribute money or material support for any group on the State Department’s Terror Watch List, allows the FBI to monitor and tape conversations between attorneys and clients, allows the FBI to order librarians to turn over information about patron’s reading habits, allows the government to conduct surveillance on internet and email use of US citizens without notice. The act also calls for expanded use of National Security Letters (NSLs), which allow the FBI to search telephone, email and financial records of US citizens without a court order, exempts the government from needing to reveal how evidence against suspected terrorists was obtained and authorizes indefinite detention of immigrants at the discretion of law enforcement and immigration authorities.

NJ Superior court judge and civil liberties scholar Anthony Napolitano, author of A Nation of Sheep, has described the law’s assault on first and fourth amendment principles as follows, “The Patriot Act’s two most principle constitutional errors are an assault on the Fourth Amendment, and on the First. It permits federal agents to write their own search warrants [under the name “national security letters”] with no judge having examined evidence and agreed that it’s likely that the person or thing the government wants to search will reveal evidence of a crime… Not only that, but the Patriot Act makes it a felony for the recipient of a self-written search warrant to reveal it to anyone. The Patriot Act allows [agents] to serve self-written search warrants on financial institutions, and the Intelligence Authorization Act of 2004 in Orwellian language defines that to include in addition to banks, also delis, bodegas, restaurants, hotels, doctors' offices, lawyers’ offices, telecoms, HMOs, hospitals, casinos, jewelry dealers, automobile dealers, boat dealers, and that great financial institution to which we all would repose our fortunes, the post office. Link 1 | Link 2

November

Executive order limits release of presidential documents. The order gives incumbent presidents the right to veto requests to open any past presidential records and supercedes the congressionally passed law of 1978 mandating release of all presidential records not explicitly deemed classified. Link

2002

Winter

FBI and Department of Defense (DOD), forbidden by law from compiling databases on US citizens, begin contracting with private database firm ChoicePoint to collect, store, search and maintain data. Link

Spring

Secret executive order issued authorizing NSA to wiretap the phones and read emails of US citizens. Link

Spring

Transportation Security Adminstration (TSA) acknowledges it has created both a “No Fly” and a separate “Watch” list of US travelers. Link

May

Department of Justice authorizes the FBI to monitor political and religious groups. The new rules permit the FBI to broadly search or monitor the internet for evidence of criminal activity without having any tips or leads that a specific criminal act has been committed. Link

June

Supreme Court upholds the right of school administrators to conduct mandatory drug testing of students without probable cause. Link

November

Homeland Security Act of 2002 establishes separate Department of Homeland Security. Among other things the department will federally coordinate for the first time all local and state law enforcement nationwide and run a Directorate of Information and Analysis with authority to compile comprehensive data on US citizens using public and commercial records including credit card, phone, bank, and travel. The department also will be exempt form Freedom of Information Act disclosure requirements. The Homeland Security department’s jurisdiction has been widely criticized for being nebulously defined and has extended beyond terrorism into areas including immigration, pornography and drug enforcement. Link 1 | Link 2

2003

February

Draft of Domestic Security Enhancement Act (aka Patriot Act 2), a secret document prepared by the Department of Justice is leaked by the Center for Public Integrity. Provisions of the February 7th draft version included:

Removal of court-ordered prohibitions against police agencies spying on domestic groups.

The FBI would be granted powers to conduct searches and surveillance based on intelligence gathered in foreign countries without first obtaining a court order.

Creation of a DNA database of suspected terrorists.

Prohibition of any public disclosure of the names of alleged terrorists including those who have been arrested.

Exemptions from civil liability for people and businesses who voluntarily turn private information over to the government.

Criminalization of the use of encryption to conceal incriminating communications.

Automatic denial of bail for persons accused of terrorism-related crimes, reversing the ordinary common law burden of proof principle. All alleged terrorists would be required to demonstrate why they should be released on bail rather than the government being required to demonstrate why they should be held.

Expansion of the list of crimes eligible for the death penalty.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency would be prevented from releasing "worst case scenario" information to the public about chemical plants.

United States citizens whom the government finds to be either members of, or providing material support to, terrorist groups could have their US citizenship revoked and be deported to foreign countries.

Although the bill itself has never (yet) been advanced in congress due to public exposure, some of its provisions have become law as parts of other bills. For example The Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 grants the FBI unprecedented power to obtain records from financial institutions without requiring permission from a judge. Under the law, the FBI does not need to seek a court order to access such records, nor does it need to prove just cause. Link 1 | Link 2

March

Executive order issued which radically tightens the declassification process of classified government documents, as well as making it far easier for government agencies to make and keep information classified. The order delayed by three years the release of declassified government documents dating from 1978 or earlier. It also allowed the government to treat all material sent to American officials from foreign governments -- no matter how routine -- as subject to classification, and expanded the ability of Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to shield documents from declassification. Finally it gave the vice president the power to classify information. Link 1 | Link 2

March

In a ruling seen as a victory for the concentration of ownership of intellectual property and an erosion of the public domain, the Supreme Court in Eldred v. Ashcroft held that a 20-year extension of the copyright period (from 50 years after the death of the author to 70 years) called for by the Sonny Bono copyright Extension not violate either the Copyright Clause or the First Amendment. Link

April

In Demore v. Kim, the Supreme Court ruled that even permanent residents could be subject to mandatory detention when facing deportation based on a prior criminal conviction, without any right to an individualized hearing to determine whether they were dangerous or a flight risk. Link

Fall

The FBI changes its traditional policy of destroying all data and documents collected on innocent citizens in the course of criminal investigations. This information would, according to the bureau, now be permanently stored. Two years later in late 2005 Executive Order 13388, expanded access to those files for "state, local and tribal" governments and for "appropriate private sector entities," which are not defined. Link 1 | Link 2

Fall

As authorized by the Patriot Act, the FBI expands the practice of national security letters. NSLs, originally introduced in the 1970s for espionage and terrorism investigations, enabled the FBI to review in secret the customer records of suspected foreign agents. This was extended by the Patriot Act to include permitting clandestine scrutiny of all U.S. residents and visitors whether suspected of terrorism or not. Link

2004

January

The FBI begins keeping a database of US citizens based on information obtained via NSLs. Link

Spring

John Ashcroft invokes State Secrets privilege to forbid former FBI translator Sibel Edmunds from testifying in a case brought by families of victims of the 9-11 attacks. Litigation by 9-11 families is subsequently halted. Link 1 | Link 2

June

Supreme Court upholds Nevada state law allowing police to arrest suspects who refuse to provide identification based on police discretion of “reasonable suspicion.” Link

2005

January

Supreme court rules that police do not need to have probable cause to have drug sniffing dogs examine cars stopped for routine traffic violations. Link 1 | Link 2

June

Supreme Court rules that the federal government can prosecute medical marijuana users even in states which have laws permitting medical marijuana. Link

Summer

The Patriot Act, due to expire at the end of 2005, is reauthorized by Congress. Link

Winter 2005

Senate blocks reauthorization of certain clauses in Patriot Act. Link

2006

March

Senate passes amended version of Patriot Act, reauthorization, with three basic changes from the original including: recipients of secret court orders to turn over sensitive information on individuals linked to terrorism investigations are not allowed to disclose those orders but can challenge the gag order after a year, libraries would not be required to turn over information without the approval of a judge, recipients of an FBI "national security letter" -- an investigator's demand for access to personal or business information -- would not have to tell the FBI if they consult a lawyer. New bill also said to extend Congressional oversight over executive department usage guidelines. Shortly after bill is signed George Bush declares oversight rules are not binding. Link 1 | Link 2

June

Supreme court rules that evidence obtained in violation of the “knock and announce” rules can still be permitted in court. Link

September

US Congress and Senate approve the Military Commissions Act, which authorizes torture and strips non- US citizen detainees suspected of terrorist ties of the right of habeas corpus (which includes formal charges, counsel and hearings). It also empowers US presidents at their discretion to declare US citizens as enemy combatants and subject to detention without charge or due process. Link 1 | Link 2 | Link 3

October

John Warner Defense Authorization Act is passed. The act allows a president to declare a public emergency and station US military troops anywhere in America as well as take control of state based national guard units without consent of the governor or other local authorities. The law authorizes presidential deployment of US troops to round-up and detain “potential terrorists”, “illegal aliens” and “disorderly” citizenry. Link 1 | Link 2

2007

May

National Security Presidential Directive 51 (NSPD-51) establishes a new post-disaster plan (with disaster defined as any incident, natural or man-made, resulting in extraordinary mass casualties, damage or disruption) which places the president in charge of all three branches of government. The directive overrides the National Emergencies Act which gives Congress power to determine the duration of a national emergency. Link 1 | Link 2

June

In “Bong Hits for Jesus” case Supreme court rules that student free speech rights do not extend to promotion of drug use. Link

July

Executive Order 13438: "Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq, issued. The order asserts the government’s power to confiscate the property “of persons determined to have committed, or to pose a significant risk of committing, an act or acts of violence that have the purpose or effect of threatening the peace or stability of Iraq or the Government of Iraq or undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq or to provide humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people."

October

The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Act passes the House of Representatives 400 to 6 (to be voted on in the Senate in 2008). The act proposes the establishment of a commission composed of members of the House and Senate, Homeland Security and others, to "examine and report upon the facts and causes of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence in the United States” and specifically the role of the internet in fostering and disseminating extremism. According to the bill the term `violent radicalization' means the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change, while the term 'ideologically-based violence' means the use, planned use, or threatened use of force or violence by a group or individual to promote the group or individual's political, religious, or social beliefs.”

you can find nothing about which to be concerned. Interesting.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 6, 2007 11:40 PM

CITIZEN


Quote:

Originally posted by rallem:
I think that if there is something taken out of the quote before the text you provide, that you are supposed to give three periods before to show there was text before your quote, “…quote,” or three periods after for text afterwards, “Quote…” or if anything is different about the quote you should use a [sic] to show that.

[sic] indicates that an error in grammar or spelling in the quote is original, and not added. It's like saying "I know this is wrong, but in order not to change the original quote I have included it as is".

It's latin, originally sicut meaning "just as that".



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 7, 2007 4:15 PM

RALLEM


Citizen, thank you for correcting me. Rue, I basically won't reply to that post because I don't want to repeat myself. I was going to try and research some stuff from the Supreme Court, but until a I get a day off it is too difficult to manage my time.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 7, 2007 4:37 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Nearly all of the points are well documented. But unless you want to go to the congressional record (for example) to read the USPATRIOT Act (which I have done - be prepared for most of the bill to be by reference to previous bills) - you'll have to depend on the media for the executive summary. Before you put in that kind of effort, ask yourself if you have any trust in the media - assuming you will scan several reliable sources for your information (not Drudge, TownHall, or FOX).

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 7, 2007 4:39 PM

RALLEM


I could tell from what I have been able to check out that you did research this well, but I would like to research it myself.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 7, 2007 4:46 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Absolutely ! Just a small friendly hint that it may be a big mountain of work, is all.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, December 8, 2007 10:18 AM

RALLEM


For my limited time ability while at work I will try to tackle a few of these bulletins per post

2001

Quote:



January

Presidential directive delays indefinitely the scheduled release of presidential documents (authorized by the Presidential Records Act of 1978) pertaining to the Reagan-Bush administration. Link

Bush and Cheney begin process of radically broadening scope of documents and information which can be deemed classified. Link




I have no comment regarding this other than I think you are probably right if your thoughts are suspicious, but personally I believe that most suspicions here are cast upon the Vice President.

Quote:



February

The National Security Agency (NSA) sets up Project Groundbreaker, a domestic call monitoring program infrastructure. Link

Spring

Bush administration order authorizes NSA monitoring of domestic phone and internet traffic. Link




I think this goes back to my statement that I think it is the job of the Executive Branch of our Government to enforce our Countries laws and securities by any means available, and for them to depend upon the Judicial Branch to catch any possible Unconstitutional acts.

Quote:



May

US Supreme Court rules that medical necessity is not a permissible defense against federal marijuana statutes. Link




This goes back to the 1969 I believe when Timothy Leary was able to have the Supreme Court rule that The Marijuana Tax Act was unconstitutional, and has nothing to do with our current Administration.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
A.I Artificial Intelligence AI
Sat, December 21, 2024 19:06 - 256 posts
Hollywood exposes themselves as the phony whores they are
Sat, December 21, 2024 18:55 - 69 posts
Elections; 2024
Sat, December 21, 2024 18:29 - 4989 posts
Music II
Sat, December 21, 2024 18:22 - 135 posts
WMD proliferation the spread of chemical and bio weapons, as of the collapse of Syria
Sat, December 21, 2024 18:15 - 3 posts
A thread for Democrats Only
Sat, December 21, 2024 18:11 - 6965 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Sat, December 21, 2024 17:58 - 4901 posts
TERRORISM EXPANDS TO GERMANY ... and the USA, Hungary, and Sweden
Sat, December 21, 2024 15:20 - 36 posts
Ellen Page is a Dude Now
Sat, December 21, 2024 15:00 - 242 posts
human actions, global climate change, global human solutions
Sat, December 21, 2024 14:48 - 978 posts
Who hates Israel?
Sat, December 21, 2024 13:45 - 81 posts
French elections, and France in general
Sat, December 21, 2024 13:43 - 187 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL