What are you roll-eyeing about, exactly?

Post #379,654 by CRConrad 8/21/13 8:03:07 AM Reply	What are you roll-eyeing about, exactly? Stupid is as stupid does; oppressive is as oppressive does. Western security services are working their way up to behaving exactly as oppressively as ever the Cheka or Gestapo, but you go "rolls-eyes" as if they were somehow fundamentally different and better. Different how; better why? What the fuck do you have to snarkily roll your eyes about, mister I'm-rooting-for-the-Stasi? Your behaviour is as offensive as BOxley's equally unjustified gloating. -- Christian R. Conrad Same old username (as above), but now on iki.fi (Yeah, yeah, it redirects to the same old GMail... But just in case I ever want to change.)
Post #379,659 by Another Scott 8/21/13 8:21:56 AM Reply	Shades of grey are important. I'm rolling my eyes because I don't believe in the "slippery slope" as a general principle, and saying that any potential abuse of a system is the same as living under the Stasi or the NKVD, and gulags are just around the corner is over-the-top. Let's be rational about these thing, Ok? Why should we trust Snowden's and Greenwald's spin on things? Why should we ignore their overstatements (I made nearly $200k a year; I could wiretap the President) and tantrums (The UK is going to be sorry they did that! I'm going to write more now!). Principled whistleblowers who are trying to inform the public don't lie about themselves and their capabilities. Principled civil libertarians who are concerned about the public interest don't throw tantrums and act vindictively to spite those governments they disagree with. If the information is so important for the public to know, why does it come out in dribs and drabs, and why should his spouse's treatment have anything to do with what is released? Snowden and Greenwald are flawed messengers who have agendas other than what they've presented. I don't trust their spin on things. YMMV. I'll try to keep my eye-rolling under control, to avoid offending your delicate feelings. It'll be tough on this subject, though. ;-) Cheers, Scott.
Post #379,665 by CRConrad 8/21/13 8:32:24 AM Reply	"Potential"?!?Did they just "potentially" detain mr Miranda? And here I thought they really actually did that. No slope needed, the argument isn't that we're on a "slippery slope towards oppression" -- it is that we are already there. So, sorry, but no: Panzergrau only comes in one single shade. (Heh, BTW... "Miranda". That name may come to take on a parallell meaning in relation to civil rights.) -- Christian R. Conrad Same old username (as above), but now on iki.fi (Yeah, yeah, it redirects to the same old GMail... But just in case I ever want to change.)
Post #379,677 by Another Scott 8/21/13 10:59:50 AM Reply	Did they break the law in detaining him? No. Should the law be changed? Maybe. If you think so, make the case. Don't scream Stasi and gulags and oppression. Here's the law to get you started - http://www.legislati...000/11/schedule/7 HTH! Cheers, Scott.
Post #379,682 by drook 8/21/13 11:48:50 AM Reply	Come on now, I think he's been pretty clear When someone says, "That's wrong," and the wrong thing is legal, that's saying the law is wrong. -- Drew
Post #379,683 by Another Scott 8/21/13 11:55:14 AM Reply	Fine. I dunno. I think it's more productive to say what needs to be changed than to get peoples' back's up by calling them Stasi and the like. Which reminds me, again, of http://forum.iwethey...iwt?postid=379228 Righteous indignation is righteous. It doesn't usually get much done though. Cheers, Scott.
Post #379,688 by rcareaga 8/21/13 12:41:24 PM Reply	But Scott... I linked the other day to a story in the NYT in which a former Stasi Lieutenant Colonel made the comparison (adding admiringly that the NSA was doing it on a scale his old outfit only dreamed of). So are you saying that we oughtn't make the comparison because some people might be offended or have their fee-fees hurt? Geez, man, if the jackboot fits... What needs to be changed? How about we find out where someone has hidden the Fourth Amendment, and put it back in the Bill of Rights? How about deciding that "preventing another 9/11" isn't worth living under High Brezhnevism, or at least how about having that national conversation? Suppose we entertain the possibility that there's no guarantee that these intrusive surveillances will always always be conducted by blameless, disinterested civil servants without political agendas? I mean, geez, the White House—this White House—went trolling through phone records (mere metadata folks, nothing to see here, move along) of reporters hoping to find links to leaky executive branch munchkins. Even if you trust Obama with these tools, these powers (and he has demonstrated to my dissatisfaction that he is either disinclined or unable to prevent the abuses we know about, much less the larger abuses I do not doubt have yet to be revealed), do you want them left lying around to be picked up by President Ted Cruz? This is very, very bad stuff. We had a few previews of how bad it might be during the Cheney Shogunate. If you review the Brandon Mayfield case and conclude that because the feds subsequently "apologized" and hence "the system works," then there's no hope for you. If the Spanish authorities hadn't screamed bloody murder on the purported print match, he'd have spent much, much longer in the hole. There was a supposed case of father-and-son "terrorists" in California in 2005. I know someone closely conversant with the case (I will not further identify the individual, but s/he was at that time in a position to make this pronouncement with authority) who asserted, with real anguish, that the two were "railroaded." Forget whether the indignation is righteous or not: it is justified. And I will say again that Manning and Snowden and even the appalling self-promoting Greenwald have behaved more honorably with respect the the Constitution* of the United States of America than have any of their persecutors up to and including the President. cordially, *Speaking of which, much has been made of Manning "violating his oath." Does anyone know offhand whether he swore to protect and defend Army Intelligence, or the Constitution? Seems to me it would make a difference.
Post #379,691 by Another Scott 8/21/13 1:06:09 PM Reply	Thank you for the thoughtful response. I appreciate it.
Post #379,687 by boxley 8/21/13 12:39:00 PM Reply	Stazi had the law on their side, what they did was legal Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
Post #379,690 by Another Scott 8/21/13 12:55:39 PM Reply	And??? Will someone please explain the next step or two to me? If the US is already Nazi Germany or Stalin's USSR or the Khmer Rouge's Kamuchea or ... then what are we to do? If Congress can authorize any atrocity you can imagine, and the courts are toothless, and the oligarchs already run everything through a secret shadow government, then what are we to do? "The laws authorize trampling on the Constitution!!11 And even if they don't, it happens anyway because thieves and criminals run the government!!!111 And even if they don't, we're heading that way anyway!!111 And even if we aren't, the potential is there so panic anyway!!!11" Again - http://www.nytimes.c...oehler-stasi.html The Unification Treaty specifically permits the belated prosecution of individuals who committed acts that were punishable under the East German criminal code and who due to official connivance were not prosecuted earlier. Seriously. You've said before that the NSA should be forbidden from having US data. You haven't explained how they are supposed to do that (in the age of the internet when packets go everywhere and come from everywhere) in a way that is different from what they say they are doing or are authorized to do (e.g. the metadata). If you mean that they should have no US metadata, well the courts have said they can. If you don't want them to, you need to convince Congress that they can still do their job without having that information, and the law needs to be enacted. Or you need to convince the courts that they were wrong. And our system says that our elected representatives have to do their jobs. Yelling about Obama and the NSA is misdirection. Yelling Stasi is beyond silly. It's not an argument. It's not a way to get the law changed. <sigh> Cheers, Scott.
Post #379,694 by rcareaga 8/21/13 3:05:05 PM 8/21/13 5:44:34 PM Reply	No one here has claimed that the US is already Nazi Germany or Stalin's USSR or the Khmer Rouge's Kampuchea Several of us have asserted that the moral distance separating this country from those historical examples has visibly narrowed in living memory and continues to narrow. I do not assert that the American "security" apparatus is in a class with Beria's NKVD, but in my opinion it's come in aggregate a lot closer to Andropov's KGB than I might have imagined twenty years ago. Consider that Manning has just been sentenced to 35 years, and consider the bestial conditions under which he was held (on this administration's watch, I grieve to say), and then consider that no one of, I believe, above the rank of E6 served a single day of hard time for the torture and murder of prisoners at Abu Ghraib and in Afghanistan and other "black sites." Consider that none of the US Marines who killed 24 unarmed Iraqi men, women and children at Haditha 2005 were ever convicted. "Yelling Stasi" is no sillier than yelling "fire" if, in fact, a corner of the goddamn house is alight. I'm trying to understand you here, A_Scott, I really am. I take the following impressions from what you've posted on this and related issues recently: - You disapprove of the actions of Manning and Snowden. - You are not particularly troubled by the recent detention of Greenwald's associate. - You are, broadly speaking, comfortable with those elements of NSA surveillance that have recently come to light, and feel that these details should not have been released. - You think it unlikely that the state's expanded surveillance powers will be subject to abuse in the near-term. - You believe that, these repressive measures having been put in place (in an atmosphere of national panic and hysteria, I remind you) we must humbly "convince" Congress and the courts to reconsider. Have I misunderstood you on any of these points? cordially, [edit: missing preposition] Edited by rcareaga Aug. 21, 2013, 05:44:34 PM EDT Expand All History
Post #379,697 by Another Scott 8/21/13 4:12:15 PM Reply	Brief answers. Boxley has come very close to asserting that we have lost all of our freedoms. Whether in jest or not, I have trouble saying. Re Manning. What we "know" about his treatment may not be what actually happened - http://www.balloon-j.../#comment-4581890 1) Yes, I disapprove of the actions of Manning and Snowden. At the same time, more discussion of what has been permitted under the Patriot Act is good - but much of that discussion has been underway for years without sufficient attention. 2) I am not troubled at all by Miranda's detention for 9 hours, based on what we know about it thus far. Things are different at international terminals in airports, for many good reasons. I've outlined my thoughts on Miranda earlier. 3) What has been released about the NSA's activities have been broadly known for years and in some cases decades. They're doing what the US Congress told them to do. I've gone through the caveats before, and they still apply. Of course, they sometimes grabbed US data when they weren't supposed to. AFAIK, they attempted to mitigate those mistakes. 4) "Abuse" does a lot of the heavy lifting in that sentence. Is it "abuse" if the NSA is doing what its charter says it should do? I take "abuse" to mean work outside those parameters. If there is abuse at the NSA, then the people doing it should be caught and retrained/reprimanded/prosecuted. As what is happening in the Snowden case. Of course, people will be tempted to act outside the laws and rules and constraints. The ACLU goes through all of the laws applicable in 2005 here - https://www.aclu.org...americans-illegal Title III and the Electronic Commnunications Privacy Act make up the statutes that govern criminal wiretaps in the United States. ECPA - http://www.law.corne...code/text/18/2511 and subsequent f. Nothing contained in this chapter or chapter 121 or 206 of this title, or section 705 of the Communications Act of 1934, shall be deemed to affect the acquisition by the United States Government of foreign intelligence information from international or foreign communications, or foreign intelligence activities conducted in accordance with otherwise applicable Federal law involving a foreign electronic communications system, utilizing a means other than electronic surveillance as defined in section 101 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, and procedures in this chapter or chapter 121 and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 shall be the exclusive means by which electronic surveillance, as defined in section 101 of such Act, and the interception of domestic wire, oral, and electronic communications may be conducted. [...] Any investigative or law enforcement officer, or other Federal official in carrying out official duties as such Federal official, who by any means authorized by this chapter, has obtained knowledge of the contents of any wire, oral, or electronic communication, or evidence derived therefrom, may disclose such contents or derivative evidence to any appropriate Federal, State, local, or foreign government official to the extent that such contents or derivative evidence reveals a threat of actual or potential attack or other grave hostile acts of a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power, domestic or international sabotage, domestic or international terrorism, or clandestine intelligence gathering activities by an intelligence service or network of a foreign power or by an agent of a foreign power, within the United States or elsewhere, for the purpose of preventing or responding to such a threat. Any official who receives information pursuant to this provision may use that information only as necessary in the conduct of that personÂs official duties subject to any limitations on the unauthorized disclosure of such information, and any State, local, or foreign official who receives information pursuant to this provision may use that information only consistent with such guidelines as the Attorney General and Director of Central Intelligence shall jointly issue. [...] Whenever any wire or oral communication has been intercepted, no part of the contents of such communication and no evidence derived therefrom may be received in evidence in any trial, hearing, or other proceeding in or before any court, grand jury, department, officer, agency, regulatory body, legislative committee, or other authority of the United States, a State, or a political subdivision thereof if the disclosure of that information would be in violation of this chapter. [...] Whenever it shall appear that any person is engaged or is about to engage in any act which constitutes or will constitute a felony violation of this chapter, the Attorney General may initiate a civil action in a district court of the United States to enjoin such violation. The court shall proceed as soon as practicable to the hearing and determination of such an action, and may, at any time before final determination, enter such a restraining order or prohibition, or take such other action, as is warranted to prevent a continuing and substantial injury to the United States or to any person or class of persons for whose protection the action is brought. A proceeding under this section is governed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, except that, if an indictment has been returned against the respondent, discovery is governed by the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. And so forth. There are rules in place that are publicly available for discussion and debate. There are protections. Congress has the power to change those rules and protections and it is their responsibility to do so when appropriate. NSA officials are subject to the law just like everyone else. They know that they are limited to foreign intelligence. How is it in their interest to break the law? I don't think that sensible civil service employees of the NSA are going to risk jail over some future higher official wanting dirt on some domestic political opponent. Do you? Recall that the law was different when Hoover and Bush's cronies were doing their evil-doings. 5) One can be as upset and outraged and righteous in their indignation about the corner of the house (apparently) being on fire, but unless you can convince a court or the Congress that you are right about the changes you propose, nothing is going to change. HTH. Cheers, Scott.
Post #379,700 by rcareaga 8/21/13 4:39:02 PM Reply	just following orders [The NSA is] doing what the US Congress told them to do. I'd be very surprised if the relevant legislation did not prove to have been in large part drafted by the NSA, wouldn't you? cordially,
Post #379,702 by Another Scott 8/21/13 4:52:20 PM Reply	Dunno. Does it matter? Do you really think that the NSA wants to spy on Americans? If so, why? The people who work for the NSA aren't extra-terrestrials who live in gated communities and never interact with other people. They're tens of thousands of people just like you and me. Do you think they want to be spied on by their employer when it is illegal to do so? http://nymag.com/dai...es-100-words.html My $0.02. Cheers, Scott. (Who feels like he's beating this topic to death...)
Post #379,706 by rcareaga 8/21/13 5:30:45 PM Reply	Hokay I'm going to risk sounding mysterious, and I don't wish to, but ever since Flatline, Comatose, Torpor & Drowse mutated into BrainDead Systems, my work has brought me into way closer daily contact with the security organs, though not the NSA, than I ever anticipated. I do not mean to suggest by this that I am privy to exotic or secret information: I am not, and frankly my masters would be crazy, or at least highly ill-advised, to entrust me with such. But I've learned a thing or two about the institutional mindsets of various parts of Homeland Security (NSA is run by Defense, I believe), and so far as I may extrapolate from this experience, I'm guessing that what the "tens of thousands of people just like you and me" on the NSA payroll think—and a non-negligible fraction of these are going to be True Believers—matters not a rat's ass in terms of policy formulation, and that the agency's senior managers are motivated first and foremost by the imperative of accumulating institutional power. Now, maybe I'm wrong, and maybe they have a completely different institutional culture than the Homeland Security boys do. But if the culture is similar, then those senior managers utterly conflate that imperative with the agency's notional mission (all of them variations on the tired old theme of "Keeping America Safe"), and sincerely believe that any obstacle placed before them, any restraint on the exercise, scope or growth of their authority, endangers this country. Again, I don't want to sound like I'm privy to the mindset of the Federal Illuminati or anything like that, but I've seen, I continue to see even from my somewhat oblique position, ample and daily evidence of this mindset, "the sombre imbecility of tyranny," as Conrad (Joseph, not Christian) once memorably called it. And as to the rank-and-file NSA worker bees who are like you and me? Hey, I've trespassed in small ways against the dictates of my conscience over the past ten years, and because I'm neither as idealistic, reckless or courageous as Manning and Snowden, I'd probably be prepared to trample on it considerably harder in the admittedly unlikely event it was required of me because—modified Nuremberg defense—I have a mortgage to pay. If we're ever reduced to relying on employees and contractors and peripheral personnel as craven as I am as the last bulwark of our civil liberties, then we'll be buried so deep in shit that we'll never dig out. cordially,
Post #380,109 by CRConrad 9/1/13 6:24:51 PM Reply	Bloody Cousin Joe, always stealing all my best lines! ...long before I even got the chance to say 'em myself! I ask you, is that fair?!? -- Christian R. Conrad Same old username (as above), but now on iki.fi (Yeah, yeah, it redirects to the same old GMail... But just in case I ever want to change.)
Post #379,716 by Ashton 8/21/13 8:03:08 PM Reply	You're scaring me.. I much regret having to conclude that your 'sensibilities' are quite more -trusting? -hope-filled? than mine can be. While your expositions are always logical, there remains that truism re. Logic is not always Enough.; I hesitate calling your POV naive, as you are well-equipped to see nuance where nuance-is-All--but you seem to be falling-back to the simplicities of Mr. Boole, to a degree uncomfortable for (this psyche, anyway.) I've admired your equanimity in several similar matters, considering that you are more even-tempered than am I. That is, when I perceive I am faced-with -->\|\| intransigence in a matter where Power is my adversary and logic-is-Not-enough: I will meet Power [joules/Sec] beyond mere physics terminology and on into: that which makes us Human: moral-Consequence of an action which sheer-Power means next to take. Or Has taken, willy-nilly. And when you use such phrases as then the people doing it should be caught and retrained/reprimanded/prosecuted. I reply: Shoulda Coulda Woulda.. ACTIONS (or their absence) are all we get to see of this or any Government's actual Performance. Any authentic Oversight of these explosively-expanding Snoops: is ITSELF 'Classified!' == You ain 't got no links to make any case for, Trust Me--I'm Honest! and similar doggerel the mind rejects-on-inspection (or it is a mind so Open that: there's no keeping anything In or Out of it.) So you're scaring me lately, in your logical-defense of matters which you can only Hope: match your high standards of civility, probity and Clarity. Words! {can..} trump Naked-Power, any time their truthiness manifestly outweighs stated/most-often vague-words lacking clear-Referents: [see history of every Revolution since Eve ate the Apple^iMac?] Y'know Scott, as I approach my 78th annum (next Beethoven's b'day) on this oblate spheroid, I can testify that I do not deem that I am possessed of anything like a Great- 'mind'; I believe I posses an adequate-mind--adequate to having parsed, reviewed, stapled & mutilated ie survived : the previous War-Century which-damned-near decimated not just Homo-bellum-perpetuo: but most other entirely-innocent mammals along with Him (Males make War.) (Having had the luck, across decades to observe Great- minds doing what they do: no-Way could I exaggerate my own mentation. qed) I recall vividly the euphemism(s) via which cowed sheep rationalized the odious Senator McCarthy, apologized for the supreme-egoist McNamara Et Alia--and of course: I Learned from the sloppy-mentation of My GrammaÂ ~~ what I could next expect from (some) 'adults'. Many thousands/millions? are Dead because of the likes of these successful manipulators of the mentally un-Armed: via Words, mainly. Lots of folks are smarter than I am; you may be one of them. This isn't about Right/Wrong and the digital-think of today's lazy minds. But if many folks with your demonstrated comprehension of abstruse matters from physics to {{ugh}} econ--also support your, Let's Wait and See mindset? Well, I'll just return to rescuing cats--one Life at a time--only more intensively: enough to finally completely tune-out the daily-SOUND of the collapsing of virtually Every 'Principle' which once made this tribe seem to be almost~Human, frequently [instead of, today: so rarely.] IMO it is not just The Weather which has surprised the boffins with the Rate of its changes: it is also the accelerated rate at which doors are slamming upon daily mores/folkways to whose presence we had become inured. And we cannot-yet fully notice the rapidity with which antediluvian minds can force regression... to an untenable future/based upon koans from the Darker ages. Think: a Tea-Senate, for just One horror. Short form: I believe that your Trust is misplaced, just-possibly horribly.. "We'll See." [but: how soon shall many/enough? See. See Enough?] Not much prescience is needed as of 8/21/13, I wot.
Post #379,720 by Another Scott 8/21/13 9:28:57 PM Reply	Just my opinions... :-) I don't know the future better than anyone else. I don't work for the NSA and have no special insight on what goes on there. But I do have some experience dealing with DOD people. Any authentic Oversight of these explosively-expanding Snoops: is ITSELF 'Classified!' == You ain 't got no links to make any case for, Trust Me--I'm Honest! and similar doggerel the mind rejects-on-inspection (or it is a mind so Open that: there's no keeping anything In or Out of it.) Oversight is possible, and much is already in place. Is it enough? Probably not, especially when Congress seems to choose to refuse to do its job here (as well as in other areas). http://www.nsa.gov/a....shtml#oversight1 1. How are the activities of the NSA/CSS regulated and who monitors them? The U.S. Constitution, federal law, executive order, and regulations of the Executive Branch govern NSA's activities. As a Defense Agency, NSA operates under the authority of the Department of Defense. As a member of the Intelligence Community, NSA also operates under the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. NSA/CSS activities are subject to strict scrutiny and oversight both from outside and from within. External bodies such as the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), the President's Intelligence Oversight Board, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the Department of Defense, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the Department of Justice help ensure that NSA adheres to U.S. laws and regulations that are applicable to the Agency's activities. Internally, the Office of the Inspector General conducts inspections, audits, and investigations to make certain that NSA/CSS operates with integrity, efficiency, and effectiveness while the Office of the General Counsel provides legal advice. The Office of Compliance ensures the Agency conforms to the standards, policies, and standards under which it operates. Most importantly, each NSA/CSS employee is charged with knowing, understanding, and obeying to the fullest the laws of the nation. Nobody likes being a patsy. People who work for the government in those oversight positions take their jobs seriously, and they're outside of the chain of command of those they investigate. The committees in bold above have the power and the responsibility to fully investigate what the NSA (and the other 3-letter intelligence agencies) are doing. Just today a FISA Court ruling was declassified (along with a bunch of other stuff). The supposedly toothless, compliant court made the NSA make changes to some unconstitutional activities. See the DNI's new Tumblr for more (linky in another forum here). Who's on the House and Senate Committees? House majority members - http://intelligence....-majority-members House minority members - http://intelligence....-minority-members Senate members - http://www.intellige...mberscurrent.html These are the people who need to be railed at - not people working at the NSA. Rail at them to fully investigate what the NSA's been doing and release public versions of the information. Rail at them to make it impossible for them to collect any information from US persons without a specific warrant if that's your goal. Let's get some official information on whether Snowden and Greenwald's interpretations of what's been going on are correct or not. (I'm tempted to make some snarky remark questioning why Greenwald doesn't rail against the House for not doing its job, but I'll let it pass.) (No, I'm not naive enough to believe that some special report from Congress on the NSA will lead us all to sing Kumbaya. There are kooks out there who still claim to believe a bunch of nonsense about the attacks on the Pentagon and the WTC on 9/11.) Like everyone else, my opinions are based on my experiences and what I've learned over the years. PJ at Groklaw has had a visceral reaction to the recent reports and the arguments about e-mail. That's unfortunate, and I believe it is misguided. But she has to do what's right for her. RC said (roughly) that bureaucracies always want to increase their power, and moreso in the cases of the military or security organizations. And that is true. People get larger salaries and more power by having more people and larger areas to work on. But, remember that the NSA's area of operation is foreign intelligence. The FBI and similar groups cover domestic investigations. The FBI is jealous of their area and wants to protect it, just as any bureaucracy would. There's only so much money to go around - if the NSA tries to horn in on the FBI's area, there will be pushback. So, in a way, the bureaucracy is another protection against over-reach. Believe it or not. (And yes, I hear the guffaws from the peanut gallery...) I'm not afraid of the NSA spying on me. Not because of the "well, if you're not guilty then you have nothing to worry about" reasons commonly trotted out. But because the NSA has no institutional interest in me. Investigating me would be a distraction and make doing their job more difficult. It would not help them perform their mission. And it's illegal. But what about Hoover and all the other abuses? Times and the laws change. Hoover had no oversight - he was a force unto himself and had a lifetime appointment. Clapper isn't and doesn't. Clapper and Alexander and Brennan and Cox and all of the other heads of the three-letter intelligence agencies, all of them, have to follow the law. Spying on us is a distraction from their mission. What if Cruz is elected president and has a compliant Congress, Senate and Judiciary? Well, then they'll be able to do what they want under the changes they make to the system. Right? That's how our system works, isn't it? If you've got the votes, you get to make changes. I'm not sure what I'm supposed to agree to that would make that impossible, (even though I agree that it would be a disaster to have that dystopian future). I'm not willing to sign up for a BDFL to keep Cruz from winning, and I don't think that it's sensible to say that Internet communications is off-limits to investigation, or that a court warrant is required for any bit of data to be collected about me. The answer to all of these (real or potential) outrages is to elect sensible people to sit in government. If we can't do that, then no Constitution or laws or courts or whistle-blowers are going to protect us. The NSA isn't the problem. Yelling about the Stasi isn't the solution. I fear I've become too big a distraction, and too much of a lightning rod on this stuff. I don't mind, but I don't want to cause bad feelings among our little group. I think I've said about all I can to explain my position, so I'll try to shut-up for a while. :-) FWIW. YMMV. My $0.02. EOT. NO CARRIER. Cheers, Scott.
Post #379,724 by rcareaga 8/21/13 11:48:42 PM 8/21/13 11:54:18 PM Reply	Re: Just my opinions... I fear I've become too big a distraction, and too much of a lightning rod on this stuff. I don't mind, but I don't want to cause bad feelings among our little group. It's precisely because you've more than established your street cred as a reasonable person that you are being engaged rather than dismissed out of hand. You're not causing any bad feelings. Oh, sure, CRC was a little brusque, but you need to gauge that against pre-fatherhood CRC and I think you'll conclude that this was right up there with blowing you a kiss. I'm not afraid of the NSA spying on me. Not because of the "well, if you're not guilty then you have nothing to worry about" reasons commonly trotted out. But because the NSA has no institutional interest in me. But you're not an investigative reporter. Aren't you the least bit worried about these powers being brought to bear against the public's putative right to know what its supposed public servants are up to? I wish I could give you details, but I've frightened myself by now: About five or six years ago I sat in on a meeting with some Stasi types in my capacity as graphic designer. They wanted me to prepare some oversize graphics in a pending court case regarding a foreign infant who had died while it and its parents were detained by an arm of DHS. If you had been there, it would have put paid to any illusions you might have had about the essential decency of our secret police. If there was a fucking particle of compassion for the infant or for its parents in evidence, I must have missed it. And these are probably decent people in their private lives, but in their official capacity they are as impersonally heartless as any Third Reich railroad clerk who cleared the trains back to Poland. You dare not trust them to abide by "the law," particularly when "the law" has become so infinitely elastic. You need not reply. But I hope you'll reflect. cordially, Edited by rcareaga Aug. 21, 2013, 11:54:18 PM EDT Expand All History
Post #379,731 by boxley 8/22/13 8:39:05 AM Reply	they werren't lawyers were they? Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
Post #379,732 by boxley 8/22/13 8:54:23 AM Reply	naw don't stop I start with a soviet shoe banging on the table saying they will bury us. They have, freedoms we took for granted are gone. New freedoms have arrived in the form of the civil rights act and others but the freedom to moce freely, associate with others are gone. In it's place is a system of checks usually by petty clerks with badges to see if you are allowed to go somewhere. Cops have always profiled, always will. DWB DWI DWH are used depending on the jurisdiction you are in. Too many times I have read or heard or watched cops using their authority to jail, arrest, beat people on a whim. In texas they are giving deep cavity searches to women totally against trooper regulations, texas law and common decency, because they can. I guarranty that higher up the food chain people are being targeted because of "gut instinct". You didn't admire reagan and his Iran Contra antics did you? Why don't you check and see where Negreponte and Poindexter are up to now adays? From the early days of ther OSS to today our government does bad things to people. Sometimes bad people. A lot of it used to be illegal and a jail sentence was handed out if caught. Now we have a giant get out of jail free card with the patriot act stapled to the front of it. When I compare the NSA with the Stazi it is because they are both doing/did the work of the state. Collecting massive amounts of information about it's citizens and diseminating that information to anyone with a government badge on it that wants to use that information for any purpose they wish. Do I think the average guy who goes to work at fort meade every day wear jackboots? No, The clerks who did the filing in Luybyanka worked hard, went home at the end of their shifts and got used to the screaming in the basement. Part of the job. Do what you are told. Get paid and keep your privileges. Of course the clerks at fort meade dont hear screaming unless its on a piece of information they are scanning Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
Post #379,737 by rcareaga 8/22/13 9:56:48 AM 8/22/13 10:29:05 AM Reply	Good lord, boxley That was actually coherent. I could parse every sentence. Is it the lithium? BTW, only a couple of 'em were lawyers. cordially, Edit: Add this PS: You should be aware that when Khrushchev said* "We will bury you" he was employing an old Russian homily the sense of which was, as any native speaker would have understood, "We will outlive you; we will be present for your funeral." The Sovs never did get long-range planning right. It was misrepresented in the US press, and is still apparently misremembered, as having the sense of "We have Stakhonovite shock troops standing by to heap spadefuls of earth upon your still-living forms as you lie writhing in the trench." *And he was wearing both shoes when he uttered the line. Edited by rcareaga Aug. 22, 2013, 10:29:05 AM EDT Expand All History
Post #379,741 by mmoffitt 8/22/13 11:07:18 AM Reply	The misrepresentation was ... both intentional and highly useful to the Military Industrial Complex. We're still paying for that.
Post #379,742 by boxley 8/22/13 11:43:59 AM Reply	I know that it was meant that their system would bury ours It has. Everytime someone in a cave in the hills of pahktunland see's a cameraphone vid on youtube of cops jamming their fingers up some lady's cranial cavity because she may have thrown a cigarette but on the highway, he laughs and sez "we did that" Chaos at an airport. Moo lines of human cattle tickle them immensly. Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
Post #379,776 by Ashton 8/23/13 3:03:02 AM Reply	Agree; it was a collective effort, though.. Khrushchev aside (however an early 'spiritual' antagonist to the US System)--yet unable to achieve a er, 'Red Plenty'-fulness of consumer gadgets amid simultaneous/massive military drain. Count up the individual-Outrages committed by 'us'/U.S. in too-many nations, locales, times--the total #of people injured doesn't need steenkin numbers: it's staggering. bin-L's utterly-cheap single (set of) Action!(s) was the Inflection Point though, IMO; add-in all those unfulfilled, persistent, individual feelings of Vengeance-denied: ..and 9/11 was >their< First physical==palpable event of striking-back at the Perpetrator of their loss, their pain and all that festering thirst for Vengeance ... against a (say) rich, bumbling and geographically-insulated bully. [Pretty simplistic/lots glossed over that was Not-evil, etc. but I'd bet on that simple/unsorted Vengeance-thing as the commonality of n-people.] bin-Laden may or may not have been prescient re. Murican response--at least to the devastating degree we now see was achieved. (But he has to be the #1 Champion of max-ROI on any biz deal ever made, no?) So.. now that we see ~ What we Are/ and have Been: how many of 'us' plan to become authentic humans, next? Hmm? Nobody Knoze.. Yet. Cosmic Humor, perhaps?
Post #380,112 by CRConrad 9/1/13 6:30:27 PM Reply	Driving While... Black, Indian, Homo? And what kind of Indian (if any); "Birdie num-num" or "Paleface follow Tonto"? -- Christian R. Conrad Same old username (as above), but now on iki.fi (Yeah, yeah, it redirects to the same old GMail... But just in case I ever want to change.)
Post #379,735 by mmoffitt 8/22/13 9:43:39 AM Reply	If I offended you, I apologize. I think people will have differing ideas about these topics based upon their own experiences. When I see what is happening in this country, I remember my late father's close friend, Kyril and his years in the Gulag for what he said. I remember being followed by KGB agents everywhere. I remember always referring to people we'd met in Soviet Russia as "my friend" and when the person under discussion wasn't clear to the person you were talking to, how you went into the bathroom, turned on every spigot full blast, leaned over into the sink and whispered the name into the ear of the other person. I remember looking for (and often finding) the microphones in every hotel room we stayed in while in the USSR. I remember seeing my classmate and friend Sergei accosted by agents as we were walking along the street and put in the back of a Zil to be interrogated about "What has the American told you?" I remember all of this crap in detail even though it happened more than 40 years ago and in reference to what has been happening in America I think to myself, "I know what the end game of this looks like." So, yeah, I'm guilty of getting a little emotional about this topic and I am vastly more accepting of the views of emoprogs (thanks for the new vocabulary btw) as a consequence. I feel this way and I never suffered anything myself over the kind of treatment millions have received that are the consequence of what we are tolerating right now.
Post #379,743 by Another Scott 8/22/13 12:04:51 PM Reply	No offense taken, and none given, I hope. Thanks. If you're ever in Budapest, stop by the Terror House. It's an amazing place, and it's good that they've kept it open as a reminder. http://www.terrorhaza.hu/en/index_2.html Cheers, Scott.
Post #379,773 by Ashton 8/23/13 1:46:51 AM Reply	Certainly none taken here, as well. When Box takes the time to craft complete sentences--incidentally proving to any in doubt, that: he Can--IMO this constitutes due respect for any sometimes-'opposition' ... nowadays so rarely seen elsewhere. I deem IWE to be an Aberration in any event.. not merely for its I-net-remarkable longevity (In an ocean of anticipated impermanence) but, aside from a very-occasional flake, we are that rarity: no dimwits hang-out here. Most here, I wot are aware of several instances when he has lapsed into flawless Queen's English, slyly enhancing his Point via the induced Gasps (?) Isn't that Cheating?!11ONE!! Obviously this thread could not-today resolve the huge Question of ... call it, again maybe: Just How corrupt is America/are Americans.. anyway? We each/all have duly noticed the paucity of ethical behavior within bizness, the too-often illegal performances of cops, today's literally Criminal behavior in Finance: from Top to Bottom-feeders, in each category. No need (or space) to list several more groups. Because there are forces clearly dedicated to maintaining as much chaos as possible (as we have ~~identified here, all along) and whose motives have often been dissected, methinks we'll be experiencing many more cusps--likely in rapid-succession--before it could become clear, not just How Murica might survive/heal/smarten-up?--but If. Meanwhile, as we remain in suspense, I trust it shall remain a pleasure to congregate here and try to keep these fuels from carrying-out their planned demolition-beyond-repair. *Hell.. IWE might have to form the First post-Apocalypse Cabinet!--should the ruling plutocrat Junta really screw the pooch, while raiding any scraps still left in the Treasury!.*
Post #380,116 by CRConrad 9/1/13 6:40:45 PM Reply	Nope, that's actually not the main effect. Ash: When Box takes the time to craft complete sentences--incidentally proving to any in doubt, that: he Can-- [...] slyly enhancing his Point via the induced Gasps (?) Nope. We knew that already, so the wow-can-he-actually-do-that? effect doesn't work any more; a surprise only works once. The humongous annoyance of his usual fucking gibberish, though, works every fucking time. And far from being alleviated, it is of course only aggravated by this occasional proof that it IS actually intentional. So, BOx-fucker: Write like the above all the time, please, or don't write at fucking all. Thank you. -- Christian R. Conrad* Same old username (as above), but now on iki.fi (Yeah, yeah, it redirects to the same old GMail... But just in case I ever want to change.)
Post #380,165 by Ashton 9/2/13 8:15:46 PM Reply	It could be a Right- Left- Orthogonal- brain dysfunction, in which case we might sympathize (or not.) Still, possessing no (other) direct experience with organisms in which normal cell-division of the [÷2] mitosis-kind somehow became ... [÷3??] I can't see how possibly I could empathize with some accidental metamorphosis of a discarded urine bag on some nameless asteroid in a belt around Uranus [presuming that Urea is ~Galaxy-wide.] Guess we have to be guided by the current Chair of Philosophy of Welcoming Aliens: Ripley. (No telling what destruction even One--loose amidst the flock--might wreak.) --premeditated Language-Murder-One, say? {{shudder}} :-0
Post #380,181 by CRConrad 9/3/13 4:36:46 AM Reply	Sorry, was that intended only for the BOx? Sounded like pure BOxlish to me; didn't understand a word. -- Christian R. Conrad Same old username (as above), but now on iki.fi (Yeah, yeah, it redirects to the same old GMail... But just in case I ever want to change.)
Post #380,211 by Ashton 9/3/13 4:48:03 PM Reply	IF !=a bi-brain like 'us', but has a tri-brain? THEN: Being alien: a likely explanation for: ~~Mission~~ Communication Impossible. Just a theory..
Post #379,709 by boxley 8/21/13 6:28:15 PM Reply	think you skipped a paragraph Defense attorneys for communist officials have maintained that the difficulty lies in the fact that hundreds of thousands of political opponents were tried under laws of the DDR. Although these laws were designed to smother political dissent and grossly violated basic human rights and democratic norms, they were nonetheless laws promulgated by a sovereign state. How could one justly try individual Stasi officers, prosecutors, and judges who had simply been fulfilling their legal responsibility to pursue and punish violators of the law? Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
Post #380,114 by CRConrad 9/1/13 6:34:44 PM Reply	And the answer, of course, was provided in Nuremberg. (No, in 1946, not -32.) -- Christian R. Conrad Same old username (as above), but now on iki.fi (Yeah, yeah, it redirects to the same old GMail... But just in case I ever want to change.)
Post #380,108 by CRConrad 9/1/13 6:12:46 PM Reply	Did I say what the Gestapo and Cheka did was illegal? No, sure, mr Miranda was detained just as "legally" as any Jew was disappeared in the Third Reich. Isn't "making the case" what everybody has been doing since, Idunno, at least since that chick Manning got thrown in the slammer, or possibly before? You just don't seem to want to hear it. -- Christian R. Conrad Same old username (as above), but now on iki.fi (Yeah, yeah, it redirects to the same old GMail... But just in case I ever want to change.)
Post #379,689 by rcareaga 8/21/13 12:43:16 PM Reply	IRLRPD So, sorry, but no: Panzergrau only comes in one single shade. (I am so stealing that.)
Post #379,717 by Ashton 8/21/13 8:19:24 PM Reply	;^> (Sometimes a simple emoticon out-minimizes Unix, however un-English. I wot.) But appropriately: this one is also © CRC--all Rights reserved. Tally-Ho..
Post #380,117 by CRConrad 9/1/13 6:47:08 PM Reply	Naah; I think I introduced it here, to this gang... ...but I'm fairly sure I stole it from somewhere; probably rasfwrj. (What? Ah, yes: rec.arts.sf.written.robert-jordan, a Usenet newsgroup.) As such, I can't of course claim any rights. (Well, except if someone does an exhaustive search and doesn't find it there. Which would be cool. But I'm not going to try.) -- Christian R. Conrad Same old username (as above), but now on iki.fi (Yeah, yeah, it redirects to the same old GMail... But just in case I ever want to change.)
Post #380,118 by CRConrad 9/1/13 6:48:28 PM Reply	"Du bist Willkommen", as the Germans say. Well, not on this type of occasion, of course. Bitteschön, I mean. -- Christian R. Conrad Same old username (as above), but now on iki.fi (Yeah, yeah, it redirects to the same old GMail... But just in case I ever want to change.)

Welcome to IWETHEY!