Desktop

Ask something

74 replies

by jaqui

now go find the actual text of the bill so we can see if that ONE interpretation of it is accurate.
[ probably is, since 9-11 it has become the Fascist States of America in the US Government's war on human rights against the American people. ]

by charliespencer

And you can read it for yourselves here:

http://thomas.loc.gov/home/gpoxmlc110/h1955_rfs.xml

I interpret the first part of it as authorizing the creation of a commission to study the problem for 18 months. That's a long way from banning blogging (or any other form of speech), assuming that's what the commission eventually recommends and assuming those recommendations are adopted.

The next portion allows HomeSec to create a university-based organization to assist HomeSec to develop procedures to fight "radicalization".

899E is a bit worrisome. It authorizes the study and -possible- implementation of the anti-terror methods used by other countries. It does include the phrase "To the extent the methodologies are permissible under the Constitution..." I'd be worried with the current administration and their apparent disregard for the Constitution, but by the time this passes and the studies are finished, someone else will be occupying the Oval Office.

899F - "The Department of Homeland Security?s efforts ... shall not violate the constitutional rights, civil rights, or civil liberties of United States citizens ..."

Take that for whatever you personally feel it's worth. I myself wouldn't mind seeing most blogging disappear, especially one-sided unbalanced blogs like the one that started this discussion.

by jaqui

that was supposed to be the op's task, to post a link to the text of the bill.

how are we supposed to ind out if he is a rabid conspiracy theorist if you go and do thing like that? ;)

by deity_chooch

"I'd be worried with the current administration and their apparent disregard for the Constitution, but by the time this passes and the studies are finished, someone else will be occupying the Oval Office."

Assuming that this "someone else" isn't in the same pocket as the current administration.

by israck

we NEED Max back, i'm too pissed to put together a coherent response to this. but after reading the bill, it sounds like anyone who happens to rant on the gov. could be in serious trouble. now i'm not a fervent anti-bushite like most, and i'm sure this will get the conspiracy nuts juices flowing, but it appears that if "they" try to make any big changes to the way our gov. works, they can then conveniently put down any organized oppostion to said changes. doesn't this verge on (read...bullseye) being unconstitutional?

by the scummy one

started creating lists of people and labeled them as terrorists from what I have read elsewhere. These lists include anyone who disagrees with what the govt. does, and posts it on the Internet.
I guess I must be part of that list, and since I have a gun, I am also probably a dangerous terrorist as well...

by charliespencer

I don't think you're a dangerous terrorist. I think you're an idiot, but I'd feel that way whether you had a gun or not. :-)

by deity_chooch

I don't consider myself an anti-Bushite (did I get that right?), even though he's not my favorite person in the world. I do consider myself a pro-America American who believes in the same values as the founding fathers. So, we haven't had enough of our constitutional rights eroded that now the government doesn't even want us to speak? There are very good reasons that the Bill of Rights was set up: to be able to rise up against an over-bearing government and defend ourselves from tyranny.

So beside the legalized spying, we now can't speak? And the consequence is jail without _habeas_corpus_? And of course they don't want us to own guns or we might be able to defend ourselves. These are fearful times indeed, and I fear we are only seeing the beginning.

by jaqui

the United States of America any more, it's the Facist States of America.
The US government is waging war on the US people.

by dr dij

after all he's the one who wanted to have govt censor newsweek for saying the pentagon tortured people, which they admitted a couple weeks later.

After all, newsweek is simply a 'printed' blog with the additional benefits of oversight to more of a degree than most regular bloggers.

by fregeus

I don't trust your source. Have you seen some of the other things that site promotes? It's like the environmentalist from hell. I'm all for good food, good environment and good living, but that site takes it up a notch too high.

Anyways, if this were true, the "regular" news channels (ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN) would be all over it. Not to mention the internationnal news organisations like Reuters and international news.

TCB

by jaqui

it ain't getting mentioned in regular press.

but hold it, that just means the regular press are in on it with the government, they want to put and end to the independant news coverage of blogs / podcasts ]:)

it's a conspiracy I say!! a conspiracy!
;)

by deity_chooch

Also, if you read the posted article, you will see a quote from the Senate Bill followed by a statement from the author.

"Based on the loose use of logic in Washington these days, and the slippery interpretation of the meaning of words, 'force' could mean:"

Follows is a list of actions that the author personally feels could be encapsulated by this bill. If the author felt that playing video games would fall under this category, he could have included that as well. I guess my point is that this article is merely one person's interpretation of the article and we need to collect more information before we can make intelligent decisions.

by jdclyde

because when they try to play fast and loose with facts, they get their slime-ridden feet held to the fire.

Even the BBC has admitted to being biased to the left of most issues.

by w2ktechman

I am probably on the top 1000000 list of most dangerous people in America. And if I say this on the Internet G. BUSH S*CKS!!! oops, now I am probably at the top 999999 list.

Now, how to get to be #1....

by jaqui

to make the top 100 you have to get really nasty and start posting pictures of bush and bin-laden having sex, or details on bilding a nuke, and call it the Facist States of America.

[ I might be getting close to the top 100 ]:) ]

edit to add:

oooohhh see here: # 5 of the Top 100
]:) ]:)

by charliespencer

you do know that the TR Top 100 is not the same as HomeSec's list of Top One Million Dangerous People in the U.S., don't you?

Oh, wait, maybe it is. That's why Max isn't here anymore; the Feds finally caught up with him.

by jester james

No, means you plan ahead :)

JF
"Stupid men are often capable of things the clever would not dare to contemplate..."

by jaqui

if the bill was as criminal as suggested in the original blog, then even the mainstream press would have run with it, since not doing so will raise conspiracy theories like weeds.

learn to read and speak in as many languages as possible, then get your news from the original countries news media, you get all sides of the story so get the full story.

the internet allows for that.

by jdclyde

you weed out rubbish like the OP provided us with.

The bad thing about bloggers is it has increased the number of "nuts with a microphone".

by jaqui

if we had paid attention to the signs.

remember the Rodney King incident in 1994 in Los Angeles?
first major coverage where individuals provided the content.

by deity_chooch

"The bad thing about bloggers is it has increased the number of 'nuts with a microphone'."

I agree. I affectionately call myself an elitist A-hole, but I also believe everyone has the right to free speech (as counter-intuitive as that may sound). I guess that means that the reader has to be intelligent enough to recognize a good, old-fashioned load of crap when they see it.

by jdclyde

The guy is WAY our there, and after reading several of his STORIES it was clear is less than stable.

And yes, stories, because they were more like fairy tales than valid news articles.

by jdclyde

Yeah, I remember also how the film we saw everynight didn't include where he had first lunged at the officers after running several lights in an attempt to get away because he didn't want to go back to jail. Even so, it was police brutality, but taken out of context the media intentionally made it look like the cops were just beating random black men for shits-n-giggles.

The big question about individuals providing content. With camera phones and portable video recorders EVERYWHERE, why are we not seeing footage anymore of UFO's or Bigfoot? ;\

by jaqui

"the reader has to be intelligent enough to recognize a good, old-fashioned load of crap when they see it. "
just ain't the case. to many people don't have the intelligence of gnats.

by jdclyde

is they get all bent out of shape when OTHERS use THEIR free speech to counter the points the crying made.

Kind of like many of the pro-Man-made-global warming/cooling/climate shifters.

by jaqui

the odd thing about the man made issue, there has been documented evidence to support it for a couple of hundred years now. the winters in Great Britain went very mild at the height of the coal buring period, from the pollutants produced.
[ actually most of europe has records that show this, including how the deforestation increased the warming trend ]

edit to add:

oh, yeah, the point, the recent discussion about scientists stating that man affects the warming trends.. no sh!t sherlock, the records show it ya fool.
[ which is why I have stayed out of that one. ]

by deity_chooch

I don't think anyone is denying that mankind changes the weather. As you said, there are scientific evidences of that. And I dislike the term Global Warming because it is misleading. The global temperature is in a warming state; that is a fact. But what the long-term effects of man-made changes to the weather system are still (as far as I have seen) unclear because we don't have the data from several hundreds (thousands? millions?) of years past. Also, if I recall correctly, the Earth has been much colder and much warmer than that of today.

by jdclyde

is to how to what degree man is responsible for back in the 70's of the coming ice age, to now that we are doing just the opposite?

More factors, life forest fires and eruptions that are MAJOR influences, seem to be ignored.

Does it make sense to be as clean about our environment as we can? Of course.

Does it make sense to conserve? Of course.

Do we put the UN in charge of handing out fines based on junk science? Of course not.

by nicknielsen

...into your life it will creep.

If you read the bio at the bottom of the page, Mike Adams [i]is a holistic nutritionist with a strong interest in personal health, the environment and the power of nature to help us all heal.[/i]

What part of nature is he using to help improve his personal mental health?

by jmgarvin

WTF is going on here. *sigh* while I'm not a fan of the bill, it is doing NOTHING of the sort.

As an added BONUS, no more Bush in less than a year...so all this crap will just fade away! HOORAY!

by jdclyde

because the people on "the left" will just find someone else they can hate as much as they do Bush.

Keep in mind, most of "them" hated Bush before we went into Iraq. They have just changed their excuse for being so hateful.

Hate is a powerful emotion, and it is how they mobilize the mindless masses that will vote for anyone with a "D" behind their name to keep the gravy train rolling.

by absolutely

"Hate is a powerful emotion, and it is how they mobilize the mindless masses..."

Such general epithets go both ways.

by boxfiddler Hot topic

the favorite tools of the pols appear to be hate, fear, and greed. Both sides use them equally well.

Unfortunately we have enough 'mindless masses' that they succeed extraordinarily at keeping the clarity of the thinking people out of public discourse.

Blech...

by Former member

It's just far too for people to polarize with so few options. I would bet the vast majority of R's and D's don't even know what positions on every issue constitute an 'R' or a 'D' Sneech, or that not every R or D conforms to all those positions. Or that if they ignored the labels for a few minutes and actually compared points on a few hundred of the issues - sans the marketing spins , they'd find they agree more than they disagree.

by boxfiddler Hot topic

at every opportunity for years. And emailing everybody in my contacts to do the same whenever federal elections roll around.

The only way to get an alternative party established is to vote it whether the candidate can win or not. The only way to get the attention of the D's and R's is to grow enough 3rd party votes to make them 'stand up and take notice'.

It's a long road...

by jdclyde

Because such a mind numbingly stupid response such as your "crack pot" is more fitting on a grade school play yard, not a place of discussion. Is your hero "Pee Wee Herman"? All you have been doing lately is a lot of "I know you are but what am I" crap.

If you have a point, make it.

by jmgarvin

The current state of politics:
Republicans: 9/11, 9/11, 9/11, terror
Democrats: We shouldn't have gone to Iraq, terror, global warming

However, the Democrats have the Clinton spin machine, so it's 10 times worse than any of the tripe the Republicans are throwing out.

by jdclyde

welfare medical, We shouldn't have gone to Iraq, global warming.

There is no terror, didn't you get the memo? It was all made up by Bush because he wanted to kill Sadam.

by deity_chooch

"10 times worse"? I don't know about that. Maybe depending on which side of the political "spectrum" you fall on. Different, yes; worse, I'm not quite sure.

I do agree that both sides are too busy "playing the game" and sensationalizing their points to do any good for the country. The two-party system is hurting America for exactly the reasons mentioned previously: people simply vote for their affiliation, not on the issues at hand. I think Lewis Black said it best: "...the Democrats are the party of no ideas and the Republicans are the party of bad ideas."

by tonythetiger

[i]people simply vote for their affiliation[/i]

Vote the way some "celebrity endorser" wants them to vote.

I'm all for freedom of speech but if some people realized the way the celebrities thought of them ("You little people are too stupid to know how to vote, so I'll tell you"), I suspect they'd lose some popularity :)

by jdclyde

is more people get their political news from "The Daily Show" than they do from broadcast news. This leaves most political knowledge being gained from snarky comments made by a comedian that are meant to make fun of people rather than inform them.

Is it really any wonder there seems to be so little middle ground any more?

Look at what is said, and by how, and it seems clear that HATE is more of a weapon of the left. The right has others they use to their advantage for sure, but hate and race baiting are lock/stock/barrel Democrat tools.

by jmgarvin

The Dems are more shrill by far. It's like fingernails on a chalkboard. While the Repubs slowly burn the Constitution, the shrillness of the Dems keeps ANYTHING they say from being believed.

If my choice is Hillary or Rudy, I'll choose to vote Mickey Mouse. Hell, what's the point of voting at that point?

by jdclyde

Alice Cooper. During the last election cycle he said it best. "Anyone that gets their political advice from a rock or movie star is a moron".

by jmgarvin

I think it's because CNN, Fox, et al, are so biased one way or the other, people just don't want to hear it anymore.

What would be nice is some real reporting for once...

by kjell_andorsen

The Right and Left are very much equal when it comes to using fear and hate to demonize the other side. People just tend to disregard the hate spewing from the side they agree with. Look at the hateful bile spewed by the likes of Limbaugh, Hannity and Ann "Liberals are all unGodly Traitors" Coulter. Judging solely from what you've written you seem to have some pretty strong negative feelings towards the "left" yourself.

Personally I think it's time people stop trying to put all aspects of Politics somewhere on a hopelessly outdated left/right axis that was inadequate when it was first conceived in the 19th Century and is downright ridiculous in the 21st.

by dr dij

not illegal.

It cracked me up but link from computerworld to techdispenser site had some blogger who had miss- spellings[sic] like ilegal. (the new Apple Legal Advice pod?)

by tig2

To loan you the shovel Mae loaned me last week. It's a reasonable size, easy to swing.

Make sure you do a proper job of it...

by Former member

Most don't want to 'waste' their vote on someone who obviously isn't going to win. I wonder who many people vote the lesser of two evils because of this?

Me - I am not allowed to participate in primary election because I won't declare myself either a Republican or a Democrat. SOmehow that just doesn't seem right...

by tonythetiger

realizes just who the hell is supposed to be working for whom any more. Today's government is about control, the [b]exact opposite[/b] of liberty!

Hell, even Joe Citizen is getting in on the action. "I don't like what 'those people' are doing (it makes no difference if they're harming anyone or not), so I'll get some signatures to get it on the ballot to have it banned!"

by boxfiddler Hot topic

"not allowed to participate in primary elections because I won't declare myself a democrat or republican."

Isn't that just disgusting? As though the only thing worth being is a dem or rep? That is another thing that boils me. I haven't seen a dem or rep in years that was worth his/her weight in salt, yet I have to declare myself as one thing or another to enable my voice to be heard in the primaries.

More bite me. OOOh! Bite me Uncle Sam! lol

Hmmm... I could get on a subversive list...

edit missing word

by jdclyde

What you have deliberately missed is the difference between political "commentators" and politicians.

Sure, I have heard a lot of venom from Colter, but from Hannety and Rush I have never heard hate.

I HAVE heard hate directly from the heads of the Democrat party. It now turns out Pelosi KNEW since 2002 about waterboarding and didn't have a problem with it until it could be used politically to hurt Bush and the US military.

BIG difference between entertainers and leaders of the party, but I doubt you will be honest even with yourself about that.

by jdclyde

It is CLEARLY a lie, because we have already been told that ALL scientists have PROVEN that if wasn't for man intentionally poluting our of the joy of it, the world would actually be about 30 degrees colder right now than it is and the glaciers would be advancing on us all! :0

Or maybe not.

GW gives weak minded lemmings something to believe in that gives them purpose. Talk about ambition. We can't round up all the illegal aliens in the US because it is too big of a problem, but we can control the temperature of the whole PLANET? Moronic.

by Member 25348569

Nick, if you're going to post stuff on this, post something authoritative rather that the outpourings of that mad git Fred Singer! He's an electrical engineer for fcks sake, not a climate scientist, and doesn't believe that cigarette smoke is harmful! The guy is a self-serving sh:t and anything from his organisation, SEPP, is as slanted and as filled with deliberate misinformation and misinterpretation as the very best that the Intelligent Design mob produce.

Neil :)

Interesting that both the pro-ID and the anti-GW brigade seem to come from the same wing of US politics.

by tonythetiger

[i]... new data ...[/i]

There's ALWAYS going to be new data, and scientists should no more "stop thinking" now than they should should have stopped thinking 30 years ago. But the (mostly liberal) greenies want us to think that there IS a conclusion and that THEY found it and that the world must now "stop thinking" and bow down and kiss their asses.

by sharpj

"by the people, for the people" should mean Joe/Jane Citizen, not the elected elite!

Greed, power and corruption abounds. :o(

just my .02,
Jerry

by dr dij

is that without an org to check them they put up pretty much what they want. of course that is the ideal of free press and there should be no laws to stop that, short of slander, threats, etc.

However as recent events revealed, they can be easily 'corrupted' to write good blogs about a product by being given goods. So 'real people' are just as corruptable as the 'greedy media'

by jmgarvin

I'd rather have blogs, the media, and word of mouth...then...MAYBE I'll have a clue. Hell, the media is so biased now, it's hard to tell if it's spin, or SPIN, or just total BS.

by jdclyde

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/342281_bali05.html

Heard about this on the radio on the way into work, that because of all the private planes, there isn't enough places to park them all.

How many Global warming leaders does it take to INCREASE the effects of Global Warming? Depends on how many conferences they fly to in order to save everyone else.

If these "leaders" and experts REALLY knew so much and REALLY cared, would they really be flying all over the planet? A fool would think so.

by kjell_andorsen

Excuse me. YOU were the one bringing up snarky comments by comedians. Then you moved right into how hate was a tool of "the left".

How many people on "the right" get their political news from pundits like LImbaugh, Hannity and Colter?

Hate is used in equal measures by both sides of this hopelessly inadequate axis. It's time to ditch the conservative/liberal labels and come up with political models that aren't 200 years old.

Oh and since you want to talk about Political leaders:

"Go f*ck yourself." --Dick Cheney to Sen. Patrick Leahy, during an angry exchange on the Senate floor June 25, 2004

by tonythetiger

... for now. But they may well be made into laughing stocks very shortly. I want to see Gore's face when the Nobel committee tries to take the prize back :)

by jmgarvin

Are you claiming that ANY ONE of the political candidates really gives a flying [beep] about blogging?

* edit for spelling

by sn53

I read HR 1955. Here are the take-aways:
Study the problem.
Create a Center of Excellence.
Evaluate what other countries with a longer history of home-grown terrorism have done to counter their problems.
Report back to the Congress after all the money has been spent.

Seems like a good, proactive response to me.

by em dubyah

you are an illegal alien, or coming to America for eduction whilst your homeland is in the middle east.

This discussion is closed to new replies.