An Outrage!

[Evaders99]

Basically, it allows the US Government to get information above your right to privacy.

 

The government can spy on or using:

search engines

wiretap

ISP records

 

More here:

 

http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Surveillance/Terrorism_militias/20011031_eff_usa_patriot_analysis.php

 

They don't even need to tell you they're doing it.. not even going to court to request doing so. They can just tap you. I think it's a real threat to liberty in this country.

[SOCL]

They don't even need to tell you they're doing it.. not even going to court to request doing so. They can just tap you. I think it's a real threat to liberty in this country.

That's what I had basically understood from the rest of everyone else, I just wanted to get it confirmed....

 

For the first time (in this thread), Evaders, I think we agree on something.

 

Has it been passed into law yet?

[Guest Scathane]

Scary indeed...

[Evaders99]

Yes it has been signed. Instead of fighting to strengthen our borders, our true weakness, the government wants to be able to track every law-abiding citizen. It's crazy.

[SOCL]

Yes it has been signed. Instead of fighting to strengthen our borders, our true weakness, the government wants to be able to track every law-abiding citizen. It's crazy.

It's been signed?!!

 

Hmm...anyone up for some peaceful (I underline it so those FBI and Secret Service agents watching me don't get the wrong idea) protesting?...

[Trejiuvanat]

It's hard to believe that they actually signed that...

[Guest Scathane]

I recently saw a rerun of Enemy of the State with Will Smith... Its basically about that very same act...

[R2-Opus2]

I remember people here worried about if they had the right to sift through a person's library records and such, and that that had recently been refuted by Ashcroft at some conference.

 

I don't know what to think about it frankly, cause I don't know the details.. I think that some elements of it are probably taken out of context and scrutinzed more than others just in my cursory observations of media coverage on the subject. Actually I truely do wonder if its problems with the Act, or some kind of animosity towards Ashcroft personally. I know there were complications in getting Bush's guy here confirmed, so I could easily understand how any little thing the man says or proposes would get slammed left and right by his critics.

 

But again, this is just the vibe I get just in disseminating what I read and hear on the news. There's so much noise and not enough fact for me to reach any conclusions of my own.

 

Since the news we tend to get is slanted one way or the other, usually for the sake of sensationalizing one thing or other, I have a hard time believing what I hear or see at face value since generally speaking, to get attention and to compete with other news agencies, they go with the other value, shock value to rope people in.

 

The way I view news lately here in the US is largely along those lines. We might not be one of those countries that suffers from propoganda the way other state-run agencies in other contolling countries are, but I tend to get the sense it is only because of the bias that exists in this free market to sensationalize rather than aim for more truth under a free press. There's more opinions than actual facts, and the local news is flooded with bad news and tragedies more than anything else.

 

True, some bad news might be true, but I don't always wanna hear about some car crash or robbery while I'm eating dinner heh

 

Where's all the good true news? All one has to do is scan the news channels for stories on Iraq and you'll know what I mean. Its like they can't wait to tell you when an American soldier or two dies that day, but they say virtually nothing about anything else good that's going on there in regards to getting that country on its feet.

[ElvisMiggell]

Has anything like this happened in the UK? Surely it would have to be an international agreement to make it legal. After all, they can hardly read all your posts and not mine can they? So aren't they invading my privacy as a citizen of another country?

[the_mask]

R2 that's because the media types are mainly interested in their increasing number of viewers and therefore their increasing profit. It's a sad thing, but the more horrible the news are the more likely it is for people to sit there and watch it.

 

Elvis, that's a very interesting thought. Your studies are paying out already

But basically I think everything is filtered for certain key-words, like when you use the phone. So theoretically everyone is already living under a version of this Act

[ElvisMiggell]

Yeah, but if i call someone in America, it means my privacy is being invaded doesn't it? I'll have to check in our library, but i don't recall a privacy statute saying that MY calls are allowed to be lstened to. Hmmmmmm....

[R2-Opus2]

Well, they (they being a different country than yours) don't have a right to directly tap YOU directly if your in a different country from the person you are calling. But they do have a right, by tapping the one their after, to listen to tapes of that call traffic if they've fullfilled what they had to do to tap that person in the first place (by whatever law that is).

 

In other words, even if the subject of your call was innocent, they would still have to go through the suspect's logs on that end (the one they could bug by said law) to be sure.

 

The senario of tapping you too, would only be followed up by your country's authorities if they thought you had some criminal ties with the bugged caller overseas (and they weren't looking to bust you right away, but maybe dig up others too first). So it would depend on your country's laws in that respect, then probably international laws if there was a larger web of crime spread around different nations involving others.

 

Just my take on it, I could be wrong heh. Not agreeing one way or the other if I support the notion, but I understand how they might do something like this to dig up international criminals from one side's source. There's so many legal hoops any given side would have to hurdle I'd imagine, especially too if extradition were an aspect in where their tried/jailed.

[Guest Scathane]

I don't see why they shouldn't listen in on ElvisMiggell or any other countryman for that matter...

[ElvisMiggell]

Checked the Acts and legislature. It's very cleverly been left open enough that America isn't breaking the law by listening to my side of the conversation. Here it's even worse. Our Anti-Terrorism act basically says that the powers that be, can do whatever is deemed necessary. So they could happily put video cameras all round my house or whatever they want if they convince themselves it's neccessary. Of course the act is not worded as such, just left vague enough that they can if they want.

[ElvisMiggell]

And of course because it was passed before i was old enough to vote, there's nothing i can do about it unless i become PM and get it repealed.

[Guest Scathane]

If you're going to become PM, I think it's only fair that the world's leaders keep an eye and ear on you...

[Evaders99]

If you seriously are considering running for elected office, I ask: WHY?

 

Quote for today: The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

[the_mask]

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

funny to see, that some sayings are found in many languages.

[R2-Opus2]

I don't see why they shouldn't listen in on ElvisMiggell or any other countryman for that matter...

 

I don't know if you meant this how you worded it, but I think you mean "I don't see why they should listen in on ElvisMiggell or any other countryman for that matter"

 

Maybe my English is terrible, but I thought you thought by that, that there is a reason to listen in on ElvisMiggell hehe

 

Seriously though, this "war on terror" crap needs to be watched carefullly. In a way, from a law enforcement perspective, I can understand certain frustrations in rooting out criminals, but I'm still left asking myself are these kinds of laws the best way to go about it?

 

There's also questions of tech-know-how by said criminals. What if the only way to track a suspect or even discover one is through monitoring money trails or cell phone traffic? If you don't know about them through any other means, they never get busted unless they screw up majorly in some other more obvious fashion.

 

It just seems to me that its also more than just the laws in question, but what methods criminals are using to avoid law enforcement that justify said laws. Our times dictate how these things evolve certainly, and that's true of the criminal and the cop. But in tracking them, how far is too far and how far is enough to get the job done without infringing on our basic rights?

[ElvisMiggell]

Ah, i don't mind being watched, hell, it might be interesting. As long as there are the proper watchdogs in place. Which i am assured DO exist here, but DON'T exist in America.

 

I'm not seriously considering running for office, but there is a germ of an idea about it running around in my head now.

 

And yes, the road to hell is paved with good intentions, but the road to heaven is paved with all intentions. And seeing as no-one is going to hell, i don't think it's going to be a problem.

[R2-Opus2]

Ah, i don't mind being watched, hell, it might be interesting. As long as there are the proper watchdogs in place. Which i am assured DO exist here, but DON'T exist in America.

 

Oh we've got our watchdog groups alright. You may not ever hear of any (again, probably some media bias cropping up), but they exist.

[Jin_Roh]

I normally try to avoid these threads because the anti-Americanism that always surfaces is tough on my poor old heart.

 

But when I see the normally genial, affable and reasonable ElvisMiggell post a gem like this, I just can't sit still:

 

"Ah, i don't mind being watched, hell, it might be interesting. As long as there are the proper watchdogs in place."

 

Come again? The whole notion is an oxymoron. The watchers and the watchdogs are necessarily going to be the same group of hoods. There's no point in them watching unless they can act on what they see. EM continues:

 

"Which i am assured DO exist here, but DON'T exist in America."

 

So, ahh, you don't mind a police state looking over your shoulder, just so long as it's not an American police state?

 

I personally prefer no Big Brother. But Elvis, if you are going to argue that there is a stronger guarantee of individual liberty anywhere in the world than the U.S. Constitution, then you need to get a refund on your tuition dude. If my freedom was ever imperiled by something I posted or some site I visited on the 'net, I would rather take my chances of having a fair trial and getting an unjust law repealed here than anywhere else in the world. Btw, I might just note that I haven't seen the NY Times post any lists of people jailed by Ashcroft for Internet Thought Crime, at least not yet...

 

I don't like to thump my chest about how great America is because it just doesn't set well with a lot of folks, and especially isn't in keeping with the international flavor and feel of this board. Americans know they aren't inherently better, or for that matter different, than any one else. I honestly don't know a single American who believes that we are. I see proof of the brilliance of people in other countries on this board all the time: in the sheer technical know-how of vakundok and Billy Loomis, and even Jahled's manic creativity. We aren't smarter than anyone else and we aren't better. How could we be? We came (and continue to come) from everywhere...I think that's also why the animosity and distrust that many people in other countries feel towards the US is both hurtful and bewildering to so many Americans - we still feel our roots, still feel connections with our mother countries, even after generations, and are surprised that the bond is not somehow shared. And I think that Americans are so convinced of the commonality of our desires and aspirations with those of everyone else, that they are genuinely surprised when the opposition to what the US is doing is so vehement. That may well mark us as arrogant, SOCL, but I tend to believe it simply demonstrates that we are still in many ways a naive people.

 

I do believe there is one thing which sets the U.S. apart: we were blessed (you'll excuse the expression EM) to have Founders who bequeathed to us institutions like a written Constitution, which attempt to maximize our civil liberties and enshrine the rule of law. I believe if all countries had such institutions there is no limit to what their people could achieve - certainly as much if not more than what we've accomplished in our two centuries. We are a young country, but one of the oldest representative republics. U.S. citizens don't have to envy anyone Elvis, not even the UK, when it comes to the guarantees of personal freedom we enjoy, Patriot Act not withstanding.

 

From what I know of the Patriot Act, it does sound horribly misguided. But I don't accept the notion that it's the result of the evil machinations of a bunch of neo-brownshirts who want to conquer the world for Big Oil, and jail the opposition here. (Which reminds me, has anybody else in the states every stopped to compare the cost of a gallon of gasoline to the cost of a gallon of milk? And last time I checked, we don't have to drill under the North Sea or out in remote deserts for milk, then ship it around the world in supertankers. Yet the oil companies are reviled for supplying a product that is essential to our economies and doing so at a reasonable price. People are funny. I say, down with "Big Dairy"! But where was I? Oh yes, "fascist America"...)

 

Here is what I think: I think George Bush was scarred by September 11 (note "scarred", not "scared"). I think those events traumatized him to some degree, and I think it has driven his foreign and domestic policy since. I think he recognizes that the threat posed by terrorism to the U.S. and eventually to the West is existential (I will stipulate for the record that the notion of the "West" is perhaps outdated). The madmen who flew planes into the WTC and the Pentagon would have used more terrible weapons if they had had them.

 

Obviously Bush has made mistakes since then, and I count the Patriot Act as one of them. But the characterizations aside, Bush is no fool. He had to know how legislation like the Patriot Act would be perceived by both liberals and some conservatives in this country. He also had to know how it would be portrayed by the editorial staffs of the major media, who regard him with a loathing that is nothing short of pathological. I think he signed the legislation out of a personal conviction that despite the risks of a theoretical or even probable injury to the right of privacy, that it would save American lives. I think he was misguided, but not evil, and I do think that such laws put us on a slippery slope.

 

As for Iraq, I don't think Bush was either evil or misguided. And I don't think that this was a war about "maintaining America's position in the world" as was stated earlier in this thread. I think ultimately it was a war about saving first American, then British, Dutch, German, French and even Iraqi lives. (For citizens of those countries who will be "outraged" by the suggestion that we fought a war in their name: I made no such suggestion. But I do assert that if America ceased to exist, you would be next in the line of fire, through no fault of ours or yours. And I assert that if America succeeds in helping the Iraqi people build a free and prosperous Iraq, it is not only the US which will benefit or American lives which will be saved.). The Iraqi war was a horrible gamble, and Bush had to know it. But I also think he reckoned that if something doesn't happen to change the dynamic of dictatorship, poverty, and fundamentalist extremism in the Middle East, that the cost in lives will someday run into the millions. The madrases (sp?) keep turning out their suicide bombers day after day...

 

I know it's fun and probably a little satisfying for you guys to rail against our "cowboy" foreign policy, to paint Bush and Ashcroft as a belligerent simpletons, and generally vent against America. (Note to Scathane: sorry, but Bush's policies do not represent the dramatic departure you suggest: The US Senate voted 94-0 against Kyoto - it was going nowhere. The ABM treaty was with a country that no longer exists, and which if memory serves was not the Netherlands,btw . I would say that if the possibility of defense against a nuclear attack exists, our leaders are duty bound to pursue it. The M.A.D. concept which the ABM treaty sought to preserve was horribly immoral, the product of a nightmare era. Exiting the treaty before pursuing a missle defense was an example of political and diplomatic honesty, which come to think of it does represent something of a departure. And finally, if you want to read some really classic sabre-rattling, take a Google stroll through some of Clinton's, Albright's, and Sandy Burger's public pronouncements on Iraq in the latter 1990's.)

 

If and when you've had your fill of slamming Uncle Sam, remember this: we were and are allies, we need each other now as much as ever, and like it or not, history has put us on the same side of a war against people who are determined to destroy our shared concept of civilization, and us in the process if we resist. You may call that last statement xenophobic. I look at the images from lower Manhattan and reply: "Yes. What's your point?".

 

So, off of my soapbox, and enough apologia for Bush and America. My company is in the middle of a hardware upgrade for our largest customer, and I had time to kill. I'm sorry for chewing up so much bandwidth and sucking all the air out of this forum. I think I berated another poster once for trying to win hearts and minds to America on this board: people don't want to hear it and more importantly it just doesn't work, and I know it. But I don't think it is fair to smear Americans as jingoistic for expressing patriotism and deep love of country (more than unfair - it's jaded and simplistic). I guess that is one difference between Americans and many other peoples: we still believe in the nation state. It works for us because of those institutions I mentioned earlier. That we celebrate it and want to protect it is nothing more than common sense. That many of you, especially in Europe, take a dim view of nationalism and regard it as a source of war and strife is understandable given the slaughter of the last century. But our attitude is no less understandable, and I would argue that we are not wrong for loving, supporting, and defending our country.

 

Last I would hope you folks accept at least the possibility that what is happening in the US now isn't necessarily the will of multinational corporate stooges or neo-fascists. There are millions of thoughtful Americans who feel we are in a fight for our lives. Though we detest war and it's terrible cost, we don't feel we have any choice but to fight.

 

Note to Evaders: dude, can we base forum ranks on the number of words we write, rather than the number of posts? I'd make Warlord in no time!

[ElvisMiggell]

Um, err, well, um....

 

All i can say is it lightens my heart to see conclusive proof yet again against the popular stereotype of the 'Stupid White Man' (who is not limited ust to America in any sense!).

 

When i say i don't mind being watched, i say it in so far as it isn't actually restrticting me in any sense. It may be misguided, and is certainly something i would seek to immediately repeal were i PM. But as the current situation stands, i'm not going to object too strenuously, because much like in the USA, no-one has gotten in trouble with it yet. And it doesn't appear to have been abused. If it should be obviously abused then i shall be forced to re-evaluate my position.

 

My next point is this: I'm PRO AMERICA!!!!!! I think the USA is great. I don't want my country to be like it, because i want individuality amongst the countries of the world, but if we could all be a bit more like America, and actually worked together to fight (not neccessarily in a literal sense!) for democracy the world would be a much much better place. However, much like you have concerns about us, for example not having a written constitution. My concerns recently were raised by Michael Moore's book Stupid White Men. I am not fool enough toassume that everything he has written is neccessarily the gospel truth. But if even ten percent of it is, then you have some major problems regarding your education and welfare systems, and your military spending. And also Mr George W Bush.

 

Now don't get me wrong. I would not consider myself a 'Bush-basher'. Heck, he seems like a really nice guy. He seems vaguely genuine, which is more than we can say for a lot of European presidents and PM's. But, and i'm not an expert on this, his ascent to power is not convincing. Several years on, i'm still not convinced he actually won the election! However there are so many factors involved in this, and i have so little knowledge of your voting system that i am not prepared to pass judgement on this. I'm simply not qualified. So if the majority of Americans say he's rightfully in power, then i'll just have to accept that. But there is one interesting statistic i read the other day (i know, i know, statistics are often inaccurate, and only one is by no means definitive proof, but...) which was that on September 11th you had almost the whole world's sympathy, certainly 99% of Europeans were sympathetic to you guys. I still am. But apparently, in a recent poll, 77% of Europeans stated that they thought America, well, to be more fair, the American government were the single grgeatest threat to world peace! Now how they forgot about all the countrties currently involved in conflicts around the world i don't know, but to even be near the top of that list, is not a good place to be. I'd quote you my source, but i read so much these days that i honestly can't remember.

 

America is a great country. I love it. You in a sense are our offpring anyway, and that's how i kinda think of you sometimes, our lil brother. I remember during the war, having an opinion that went something like this:

 

America is too young. GB, France and all the others have been around for a long time. And we realised long ago, that violencec generally doesn't work. Hell, look at what happened when we trtied to interferre in America. we got an ass kicking. Now fortunately you guys turned out all right. But look what we've done to any number of our old empire and colonies. Must of them are in a shocking state, and have been for a long time. We've known fo a long time that when a crisis arises, violence tends not to be the way, look at Suez. The problem with America is that they're too young to have had time to learn this lesson the hard way, cos believe you me, it doesn't seem to be possible to learn it the easy way!

 

Now i'm not saying that opinion was right, but there was, and i think still is an impression of America being a bit like the bull in the international china shop. Guys, RELAX (i suppose when i say guys i mean the administration). It doesn't all have to be sorted out straight away. Take your time, don't rush through an act passed in paranoia. Stop. Think. What is this going to mean for your country. Is it really what you need? Is it too harsh? Does it need moderation?

 

In no way have we got it right over here, but i think we're nearer to getting it right. Hell i don't know, we were just as involved in the Gulf as you were. We're crappy too when it comes to sorting out the world. Want to know why?

 

WE'RE NOT GOD!!!

 

I'd love to leave it at that, i dearly would. But i can't. I have one last thing to say. I don't love Ameirca. I don't love the UK. I don't love Europe, or any other party/state/country. What do i love? I love my freedom. Do i feel it's being threatened? At the moment, NO!

 

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

 

DISCLAIMER:

 

I in sense mean to offend with any of these comments. They are merely my own rants concerns and opinions that enter my head when i started writing this post. I did not sit down and plan it out. I merely rambled away. There may be something in there worthwile, there probably isn't. My opinion is my own, i do not speak for anyone else, though there may be echoes of the opinions of others in my post. Once again, no offense is meant.

[Evaders99]

Wow, calm down. Good threads, good thoughts. Thanxs ppl for not flaming!

 

 

Off-topic:

 

Hm... rank by word count eh? Dunno if that would stop spam or encourage spam...

[ElvisMiggell]

I think we're pretty calm aren't we peeps. Though i must say, if i do seem to lose my cool, it's due to stress at unni, never you guys. Having a spot of bother at the mo.

 

I think either way you'll get spam. Copy and paste is a very useful thing to up word counts. You'd only have to post it and then delete it and it would still count!!!

 

Though it might encourage more people to role-play....