Death of Usenet? Might be real this time
Fred Moore
Time Warner Cable pulls the plug on all newsgroups after the state AG's
office finds child porn on 88 of them. Verizon and Sprint plan to limit
Usenet too.
<http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9964895-38.html>
-----
More dim-witted politicians and fascist monopolists at it again. Can't
have the people exercising their freedom because 0.1% of them are
abusing it. So are they going to apply this standard to DUI and gun
violence?
--Fred
Adrian
This sounds like a good argument for shutting down the Web! I would put
money on there being several thousand more dubious Web sites than there
are Usenet groups.
--
Adrian
E Z Peaces
The New York times claimed they were blocking child-porn websites.
Time-Warner and Sprint denied it. Now, tonight, NBC News said these
providers were blocking child-porn websites. Are they lying or just
careless? Maybe corporate media don't like usenet authors competing
with the propaganda they publish. As the CNET article said, maybe
politicians, too, are uncomfortable with free speech on the internet.
How about Google? Are they out to destroy usenet?
Warren Oates
E Z Peaces <ca...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> Maybe corporate media don't like usenet authors competing
> with the propaganda they publish.
What's a "usenet author?" Can you name one?
--
W. Oates
Király
> What's a "usenet author?" Can you name one?
Warren Oates.
--
K.
Lang may your lum reek.
Jamie Kahn Genet
It's funny how we've talked about the internet being a great tool for
freedom in places like China, but I'll be more than a little amused when
the same thing happens in the US with it's oppressed citizens forced to
work around filtering by their government.
It's true - people never learn, especially moronic politicians pandering
to an ignorant majority of the public... :-D
Times like this make me glad I live in New Zealand. I'm not saying we're
perfect, but we're not a police state either.
Regards,
Jamie Kahn Genet
--
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
Tim Streater
Certainly the US is the most policed state I've ever come across. All
sorts of people appear to have police powers.
Gregory Weston
Tim Streater <timst...@waitrose.com> wrote:
Mostly it's a de facto power that comes from large swaths of the
individual and institutional population being too lazy and/or fearful to
actually stand up to bullies.
--
"Harry?" Ron's voice was a mere whisper. "Do you smell something ... burning?"
- Harry Potter and the Odor of the Phoenix
Kurt Ullman
> Certainly the US is the most policed state I've ever come across. All
> sorts of people appear to have police powers.
Last time I counted something like 17 different agencies (from the
State Capital Police, to FBI) had police powers in at least part of
Indy. Probably missed a couple.
Tim Streater
Gregory Weston <u...@splook.com> wrote:
If I'm in a State Park and there's a guy in Smokey the Bear drag, and
he's packing a heater, I'm not about to argue with him whether he's de
facto or de jure.
Am !?
fishfry
Fred Moore <fmo...@gcfn.org> wrote:
Yeah that is such bullshit. Might as well outlaw the U.S. mail since
it's sometimes used to transmit illegal porn.
The pols aren't actually dimwitted. Their constituents are, and the
politicians respond by doing what keeps them in office. Namely lying and
holding press conferences about how they're "protecting the children."
Jolly Roger
<BLOCKSPAMfishfry-A1...@comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
fishfry <BLOCKSPA...@your-mailbox.com> wrote:
> Yeah that is such bullshit. Might as well outlaw the U.S. mail since
> it's sometimes used to transmit illegal porn.
Hell, why stop there?? We should outlaw *PEOPLE* too!
--
Please send all responses to the relevant news group rather than directly
to me, as E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry
SPAM filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google Groups.
You'll need to use a real news reader if you want me to see your posts.
JR
Gregory Weston
Tim Streater <timst...@waitrose.com> wrote:
That's power that comes from having superior weaponry. I'm talking about
power that people have for no other reason than that the people over
whom they have power gave it to them without a struggle or a second
thought. Most of the "policing" we have is self-policing.
SabaGuy
months..."
How many pictures does Cuomo have to look at to determine it's porn?
Fred Moore
<BLOCKSPAMfishfry-A1...@comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
fishfry <BLOCKSPA...@your-mailbox.com> wrote:
Sadly, you're correct. Talking of dumb constituents and free speech
reminds me of a classic stunt some enterprising Boy Scouts pulled
(before the organization got so reactionary) in the 1970s. They set up a
table in a shopping mall asking people to sign a petition supporting
free speech and other rights. Fewer than 1 in 10 (IIRC) would sign. They
actually got a number of people accusing them of being commies or
anarchists. The text of the petition was (wait for it):
The First Amendment to the US Constitution, i.e. the _first_ of the 10
items called the Bill of Rights. Its complete text:
'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.'
This experiment was repeated a number of times in different places with
similar results. Sure gave me a lot more respect for the intelligence
and enlightenment of the US founding fathers, and a lot more despair for
the future of the country.
The more things change, the more they remain the same. <sigh>
--Fred
Jamie Kahn Genet
Sounds plausible to me if you combine in widespread ignorance and
gullability (and I credit most country's populations with those two
flaws) as well as the larger than average collection of nuts the US
harbours.
I don't want the above to sound like I'm US bashing. I'm trying not to.
It's just hard not to get pissed of as the US's dangerous and stupid
policies can and do all-too-easily affect the freedoms other countries
enjoy. I read about the low voter turnouts in the US and I get very mad.
Jamie Kahn Genet
17? Wow. So that's (1) State Capital Police and (2) FBI as you said.
3) Secret Service
4) Sherif's department?
5) State Troopers
6) regular police
7) border patrol maybe? (would that make any sense in Indiana?)
8) Military police?
Hmmm... that's the limit of my US law enforcement knowledge, at least
off the top of my head. What else is there? *curious* (hey - it's a slow
day at the office :-D ).
Here in NZ I suppose country-wide we have... ahhh... Police
<http://www.police.govt.nz/>, SFO (Serious Fraud Office)
<http://www.sfo.govt.nz/>, SIS (NZ's intelligence agency)
<http://www.nzsis.govt.nz/>... that's all I can think of. Though I don't
believe either the SFO or SIS have the power to apprehend criminals -
that is the NZ Police's job.
Jamie Kahn Genet
> In article
> <BLOCKSPAMfishfry-A1...@comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
> fishfry <BLOCKSPA...@your-mailbox.com> wrote:
>
> > Yeah that is such bullshit. Might as well outlaw the U.S. mail since
> > it's sometimes used to transmit illegal porn.
>
> Hell, why stop there?? We should outlaw *PEOPLE* too!
Oviously a dangerous quantity! Robots will be much safer.
E Z Peaces
Once in a while a cop is arrested for his child-porn hobby, and he'll
say he got addicted while performing such duties.
We're supposed to take the word of officials about what's pornography.
A woman in my county was arrested when a photographic developer reported
to police, as required, that she'd submitted photos of a naked child. It
was her two-year-old daughter in the bath tub, but under the law that's
pornography. The newspaper reported it as if this were pornography, and
she was facing serious charges.
Peter Townshend was arrested for giving his CC number to a child-porn
site. He said he went there because he was writing a book about child
exploitation. Police seized all his computers and found no child porn,
so I'll buy his explanation. He was not guilty of possession, but the
judge gave him a warning and required that he make a public apology.
His reputation was damaged.
Presumably, newspaper reporters are also forbidden to find out what
these sites offer. Only officials are authorized to know about what
they say is a huge business that exploits children. That's not good.
America's Most Wanted ran several items about a rich man in a small town
who ran a website with thousands of pornographic photos and videos of
boys from 6 to 14. He had hidden video cameras in his house, where he
would use force or drugs to rape boys. Because of the law, honest
citizens were unaware of his internet business.
Eventually, he victimized a boy who reported it to a school cop.
Several others then came forward. The judge let him out on bail. He
ordered the perp to stay away from minors but also told cops to stay
away from his house. Observers saw him continue bringing boys to his
house at night. Apparently parents were still in the dark.
After six years, the prosecutor announced that he was dropping charges.
Some victims had gotten cold feet. Those still willing to testify had
been arrested on various minor charges, which the prosecutor felt could
be used to discredit them in court.
It seems to me that in a case like that a monster could get off by
paying one judge to delay the trial for years and one cop to roust
witnesses, and it's feasible as long as the law keeps the public vague
about the pornography. Meanwhile, officials arrest a woman for
photographing her baby and point the finger at those who want to keep
current on Macs.
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <1iifh8r.13732x913bjaonN%jam...@wizardling.geek.nz>):
> Kurt Ullman <kurtu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <timstreater-2C00...@news.individual.net>,
>> Tim Streater <timst...@waitrose.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Certainly the US is the most policed state I've ever come across. All
>>> sorts of people appear to have police powers.
>>
>> Last time I counted something like 17 different agencies (from the
>> State Capital Police, to FBI) had police powers in at least part of
>> Indy. Probably missed a couple.
>
> 17? Wow. So that's (1) State Capital Police and (2) FBI as you said.
>
> 3) Secret Service
> 4) Sherif's department?
> 5) State Troopers
> 6) regular police
> 7) border patrol maybe? (would that make any sense in Indiana?)
Indiana's on Lake Michigan. There'll be border cops, but I _think_ that
they're now in ICE (Immigration & Customs Enforcement) who most definitely
will be around, so see below.
> 8) Military police?
Probably not military police, unless you're in the military.
You missed, at least:
At the Federal level:
DEA
US Marshals
ATF
ICE
National Park Service
Plus, at the State level, in addition to the State Police:
Fish & Wildlife
Transportation
State Park Service
And, at the county and local level:
School Police.
That's 15, so I missed two.
>
> Hmmm... that's the limit of my US law enforcement knowledge, at least
> off the top of my head. What else is there? *curious* (hey - it's a slow
> day at the office :-D ).
>
> Here in NZ I suppose country-wide we have... ahhh... Police
> <http://www.police.govt.nz/>, SFO (Serious Fraud Office)
> <http://www.sfo.govt.nz/>, SIS (NZ's intelligence agency)
> <http://www.nzsis.govt.nz/>... that's all I can think of. Though I don't
> believe either the SFO or SIS have the power to apprehend criminals -
> that is the NZ Police's job.
>
> Regards,
> Jamie Kahn Genet
>
--
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.
Kurt Ullman
jam...@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
> Kurt Ullman <kurtu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <timstreater-2C00...@news.individual.net>,
> > Tim Streater <timst...@waitrose.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Certainly the US is the most policed state I've ever come across. All
> > > sorts of people appear to have police powers.
> >
> > Last time I counted something like 17 different agencies (from the
> > State Capital Police, to FBI) had police powers in at least part of
> > Indy. Probably missed a couple.
>
> 17? Wow. So that's (1) State Capital Police and (2) FBI as you said.
>
> 3) Secret Service
> 4) Sherif's department?
> 5) State Troopers
> 6) regular police
> 7) border patrol maybe? (would that make any sense in Indiana?)
> 8) Military police?
Three school systems have their own police forces, at least two
universities (IU and Butler), the rest of the Fed Alphabet (such as
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, Drug Enforcement Administration, the US
Marshals, Internal Revenue enforcement people, border patrol because
they also do they also do the enforcement on employing illegals and
such. etc,), Excise Police for the bars, each township could have it is
own constable (but I only know of one right off that has one), a village
(Rocky Ripple) had their own, but I don't recall if they replaced him
when he resigned. The Park Dept. has Rangers with police powers.
Airport has its own independent cop force. If you want to stretch the
definition a little, there are Postal Inspectors if you mess with the
Mail. I am sure there a couple others I can't think of right off.
Then we can also include the Speedway (city, not the track) and
Lawrence city PDs.
Damn, the list is longer than I thought and I am sure I am missing a
couple.
Kurt Ullman
J.J. O'Shea <try.n...@but.see.sig> wrote:
>
> Indiana's on Lake Michigan. There'll be border cops, but I _think_ that
> they're now in ICE (Immigration & Customs Enforcement) who most definitely
> will be around, so see below.
We were talking about Indy (the city). However, even in the good old
land-locked Circle City ICE does the semi-annual raid on illegal
immigrant employment and do their thing in that respect.
>
> > 8) Military police?
>
> Probably not military police, unless you're in the military.
Maybe in the confines of the Armory, but I don't think we have
anything left in the way of military bases within the County any more.
>
> Fish & Wildlife
> Transportation
> State Park Service
Forgot those in my follow-up at the state level. Although I did
include them at the city. Also the rail lines running through town have
their own police force (the railroad cops tend to be a whole different
breed-g).
Anybody know what we are up to?
George Kerby
On 6/11/08 10:37 PM, in article
1iifh8r.13732x913bjaonN%jam...@wizardling.geek.nz, "Jamie Kahn Genet"
<jam...@wizardling.geek.nz> wrote:
> Kurt Ullman <kurtu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <timstreater-2C00...@news.individual.net>,
>> Tim Streater <timst...@waitrose.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Certainly the US is the most policed state I've ever come across. All
>>> sorts of people appear to have police powers.
>>
>> Last time I counted something like 17 different agencies (from the
>> State Capital Police, to FBI) had police powers in at least part of
>> Indy. Probably missed a couple.
>
> 17? Wow. So that's (1) State Capital Police and (2) FBI as you said.
>
> 3) Secret Service
> 4) Sherif's department?
> 5) State Troopers
> 6) regular police
> 7) border patrol maybe? (would that make any sense in Indiana?)
> 8) Military police?
>
> Hmmm... that's the limit of my US law enforcement knowledge, at least
> off the top of my head. What else is there?
Here we got Metro Police (for our public transportation-bus, etc.), and
School District Police, as well a kazillion "Security" police.
But - it's Texas...
Kurt Ullman
George Kerby <ghost_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> School District Police, as well a kazillion "Security" police.
>
Do the SP have police powers and are they a distinct force? Many
places in Indy (for example the big hospitals) have their own security
forces with police powers, but that is because their guys go through the
same training as Sheriff reserves, so they really don't count under the
terms of this exercise as a separate police force.
George Kerby
On 6/12/08 8:31 AM, in article
kurtullman-4D9C7...@70-3-168-216.area5.spcsdns.net, "Kurt
Ullman" <kurtu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
I'm not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, but they have all the decoration
like a real cop (cuffs, tazer, baton and firearm). Like a regular citizen,
they can "arrest" until the 'real' police arrive and will testify at trial,
like a cop does.
Tim McNamara
jam...@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
> I read about the low voter turnouts in the US and I get very mad.
Amen brutha! My voting precinct is just over 1/4 mile from my house.
There are dozens in my city, nobody here is likely to be more than a
mile from where they vote. How much more convenient can it be?
Then I see news from other countries where people may travel for days,
stand in line for hours and even risk their lives to cast a vote. While
I feel glad that perhaps the US has served as some kind of model for the
idea, I feel ashamed that less than half- sometimes less than one-third-
of us can get off the friggin' couch long enough to go vote. It's
really unbelievable.
Of course, one of the consequences of that is that small active groups
of people end up with a disproportionate voice. But in a democracy, the
people get the government they deserve.
Tim McNamara
define "police powers." I can think of 24 in a few minutes:
Ordinary citizens ("citizen's arrest")
Deputized citizens
Private security firms
City Police Department
County Sheriff's Department
Certain City agencies with limited powers (e.g., fire inspector)
Certain County agencies with limited powers (e.g., child protection)
County Court bailiffs and judges
National Guard
State Police Department
Attorney General's Office
State Capitol security
State Parks Department
State Department of Revenue
Federal Bureau of Investigation
Drug Enforcement Agency
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms
US Fish and Wildlife
National Park Service
US Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines
US Border Patrol
Immigration and Naturalization
US Marshals
Internal Revenue Service
I'm sure there's more than a few I forgot.
Simon Slavin
DDEC90.174...@news-server.columbus.rr.com>:
> New York pushes ISPs to curb Usenet access
This thread is related to politics and has nothing to do with Macintosh
system software. Please stop posting on this matter to
comp.sys.mac.system.
Simon.
--
http://www.hearsay.demon.co.uk
Kurt Ullman
Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net> wrote:
> Hmmm, this is an interesting game, some of which depends on how you
> define "police powers." I can think of 24 in a few minutes:
Since this is more or less my game (g), we were talking about police
AGENCIES. police powers would be those of arrest, ability to
enforce/serve warrants, carry a firearm and usually requires some kind
of formal training. Have to conform to local and/or state requirements
for a law enforcement officer.
Madwen
Simon Slavin <slavins.delete....@hearsay.demon.co.uk>
wrote:
> On 10/06/2008, Fred Moore wrote in message <fmoore-
> DDEC90.174...@news-server.columbus.rr.com>:
>
> > New York pushes ISPs to curb Usenet access
>
> This thread is related to politics and has nothing to do with Macintosh
> system software. Please stop posting on this matter to
> comp.sys.mac.system.
>
> Simon.
Speaking of police...
Madwen
Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net> wrote:
If only the ill effects could be felt solely by those who are too lazy
to vote. OTOH, we could be just like the current president, his
travesty George, <gag> and simply disobey the laws with which we don't
agree. Yeah, we can probably write better "signing statements" too.
Wes Groleau
> That's 15, so I missed two.
University Police. They can enforce any state law
outside of University property but they generally
don't unless asked by the regular police of that
jurisdiction.
--
Wes Groleau
"If it wasn't for that blasted back-hoe,
a hundred of us could be working with shovels"
"Yeah, and if it weren't for our shovels,
a thousand of us could be working with spoons."
Jamie Kahn Genet
wrote:
> On 10/06/2008, Fred Moore wrote in message <fmoore-
> DDEC90.174...@news-server.columbus.rr.com>:
>
> > New York pushes ISPs to curb Usenet access
>
> This thread is related to politics and has nothing to do with Macintosh
> system software. Please stop posting on this matter to
> comp.sys.mac.system.
>
> Simon.
Meh. So kill the thread. Anything this important to Usenet is worth a
little OT discussion IMHO.
Regards,
Jamie Kahn Genet
--
Jamie Kahn Genet
> In article <1iifh8r.13732x913bjaonN%jam...@wizardling.geek.nz>,
> jam...@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
>
> > Kurt Ullman <kurtu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <timstreater-2C00...@news.individual.net>,
> > > Tim Streater <timst...@waitrose.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Certainly the US is the most policed state I've ever come across. All
> > > > sorts of people appear to have police powers.
> > >
> > > Last time I counted something like 17 different agencies (from the
> > > State Capital Police, to FBI) had police powers in at least part of
> > > Indy. Probably missed a couple.
> >
> > 17? Wow. So that's (1) State Capital Police and (2) FBI as you said.
> >
> > 3) Secret Service
> > 4) Sheriff's department?
> > 5) State Troopers
> > 6) regular police
> > 7) border patrol maybe? (would that make any sense in Indiana?)
> > 8) Military police?
> Three school systems have their own police forces, at least two
> universities (IU and Butler), the rest of the Fed Alphabet (such as
> Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, Drug Enforcement Administration, the US
> Marshals, Internal Revenue enforcement people, border patrol because
> they also do they also do the enforcement on employing illegals and
> such. etc,), Excise Police for the bars, each township could have it is
> own constable (but I only know of one right off that has one), a village
> (Rocky Ripple) had their own, but I don't recall if they replaced him
> when he resigned. The Park Dept. has Rangers with police powers.
> Airport has its own independent cop force. If you want to stretch the
> definition a little, there are Postal Inspectors if you mess with the
> Mail. I am sure there a couple others I can't think of right off.
> Then we can also include the Speedway (city, not the track) and
> Lawrence city PDs.
> Damn, the list is longer than I thought and I am sure I am missing a
> couple.
What are constables in respect? Like Sheriffs?
And boy - I really wasn't thinking too hard! Some of the above are new
to me, but I forgot heaps!
Jamie Kahn Genet
Agreed - that's pretty much my thinking. Which also means NZ really only
has one force with police powers - oddly enough... The Police :-D
Correct me if I'm wrong (as I often am, heh).
Of course the US is a HUGE country by comparison, so a little more
diversity is understandable! :-)
Oh, and would the CIA count as a police force in the US? Seems like they
don't just leave internal security to the FBI anymore.
Kurt Ullman
jam...@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
> What are constables in respect? Like Sheriffs?
>
You guys in NZ familar with Barney Fife from the Andy Griffith
show (g).
Constables are usually one/two man forces, often part time,
usually a buddy of township trustee. They have to go do the same
training minimums of any other officer. Most often used in rural areas,
but do show up from time to time in urban areas. At least this is my
understanding in Indiana. Other states will vary even as to their
existence.
Kurt Ullman
jam...@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
> Kurt Ullman <kurtu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Oh, and would the CIA count as a police force in the US? Seems like they
> don't just leave internal security to the FBI anymore.
>
Probably not. Even outside the US, the are more investigative and
less enforcement.
Warren Oates
> I'm sure there's more than a few I forgot.
Apartment Building Janitors
--
W. Oates
Jamie Kahn Genet
> In article <1iihcav.xnqjzo1k660s3N%jam...@wizardling.geek.nz>,
> jam...@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
>
>
> > What are constables in this respect? Like Sheriffs?
> >
> You guys in NZ familar with Barney Fife from the Andy Griffith
> show (g).
Nah, not me. Give me the five second brief?
> Constables are usually one/two man forces, often part time,
> usually a buddy of township trustee. They have to go do the same
> training minimums of any other officer. Most often used in rural areas,
> but do show up from time to time in urban areas. At least this is my
> understanding in Indiana. Other states will vary even as to their
> existence.
Huh, I've never heard of them before. You learn something new every day
:-) Here constable is a Police officer rank.
Kurt Ullman
jam...@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
> Kurt Ullman <kurtu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <1iihcav.xnqjzo1k660s3N%jam...@wizardling.geek.nz>,
> > jam...@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
> >
> >
> > > What are constables in this respect? Like Sheriffs?
> > >
> > You guys in NZ familar with Barney Fife from the Andy Griffith
> > show (g).
>
> Nah, not me. Give me the five second brief?
Barney is viewed as the media archetype of the small town deputy
sheriff. He can be officious, overzealous and humorous. Basically all
you need to know is that he carries a gun.. and one bullet... which he
keeps in his shirt pocket.
>
> Huh, I've never heard of them before. You learn something new every day
> :-) Here constable is a Police officer rank.
My understanding in your area that the Constable is probably close
to the beat or road cop here. Does most of the initial reports for minor
crimes, auto accidents, etc., patrols his or her area of responsibility,
and is generally the first line of authority, the one who does the most
direct interfacing with the citizenry.
J.J. O'Shea
(in article
<kurtullman-ACDA4...@70-3-168-216.area5.spcsdns.net>):
> Barney is viewed as the media archetype of the small town deputy
> sheriff. He can be officious, overzealous and humorous. Basically all
> you need to know is that he carries a gun.. and one bullet... which he
> keeps in his shirt pocket.
And that he shouldn't be trusted with the one bullet.
Tim McNamara
J.J. O'Shea <try.n...@but.see.sig> wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 09:45:21 -0400, Kurt Ullman wrote
> (in article
> <kurtullman-ACDA4...@70-3-168-216.area5.spcsdns.net>):
>
> > Barney is viewed as the media archetype of the small town deputy
> > sheriff. He can be officious, overzealous and humorous. Basically all
> > you need to know is that he carries a gun.. and one bullet... which he
> > keeps in his shirt pocket.
>
> And that he shouldn't be trusted with the one bullet.
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=barney+fife&search_type=&aq=f
Paul Fuchs
Wishful thinking. How about the black sites that Dana Priest of the
WaPo dug up and extradinary rendition. Plug "rendition" into your
dictonary widget.
--
Never believe anything until it's officially denied.
Kurt Ullman
paulfuchs@porkain'tkosher.oink (Paul Fuchs) wrote:
> Kurt Ullman <kurtu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <1iihcq8.1b3jdet18x4wtbN%jam...@wizardling.geek.nz>,
> > jam...@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
> >
> > > Kurt Ullman <kurtu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Oh, and would the CIA count as a police force in the US? Seems like they
> > > don't just leave internal security to the FBI anymore.
> > >
> > Probably not. Even outside the US, the are more investigative and
> > less enforcement.
>
> Wishful thinking. How about the black sites that Dana Priest of the
> WaPo dug up and extradinary rendition. Plug "rendition" into your
> dictonary widget.
Thought of that when I made the statement. Rendition is an attempt
to get information, at least according to the wikipedia and a couple
others. Source watch says Extraordinary rendition is the CIA activity of
"transferring" or "flying captured terrorist suspects from one country
to another for detention and ***interrogation****" without the benefit
of "formal legal proceedings. This is still more investigative than
enforcement to my mind, anyway. YMMV.
Paul Fuchs
Ten months of torture in a Syrian dungeon, like that poor Canadian who
was "rendered" out of Kennedy airport in NYC, sort of blurs the line.
Investigative, enforcement, and punitive all in one gulp. BTW, the
Canadian government awarded him Can$ 10,000,000 in compensation for
their cooperation with the CIA which led, to some degree, to the
fuck-up.
Mr. Uh Clem
> New York pushes ISPs to curb Usenet access
>
> office finds child porn on 88 of them. Verizon and Sprint plan to limit
> Usenet too.
>
> <http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9964895-38.html>
> -----
>
> More dim-witted politicians and fascist monopolists at it again. Can't
> have the people exercising their freedom because 0.1% of them are
> abusing it. So are they going to apply this standard to DUI and gun
> violence?
>
> --Fred
[sorry, can't resist responding to this OT post...]
Throw in clueless reporters:
<http://uk.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idUKN0930574820080611>
<< ...
His office said its undercover investigation uncovered a major source of
online child pornography known as "Newsgroups" -- an online service not
associated with websites.
Users can use Newsgroups as online bulletin boards where users can upload
and download illicit files. The investigation uncovered 88 different
Newsgroups that contained a total of 11,390 sexually lewd photos featuring
prepubescent children.
...
(Reporting by Christopher Kaufman and Yinka Adegoke; Editing by Louise
Heavens and Braden Reddall)
>>
Our online freedom is in jeopardy.
--
Clem
"If you push something hard enough, it will fall over."
- Fudd's first law of opposition
The Translucent Amoebae
> New York pushes ISPs to curb Usenet access
>
> Time Warner Cable pulls the plug on all newsgroups after the state AG's
> office finds child porn on 88 of them. Verizon and Sprint plan to limit
> Usenet too.
>
> <http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9964895-38.html>
> -----
>
> More dim-witted politicians and fascist monopolists at it again. Can't
> have the people exercising their freedom because 0.1% of them are
> abusing it. So are they going to apply this standard to DUI and gun
> violence?
>
> --Fred
It wasn't so long ago that one of the great promotional features of
the interweb was that it was uncontrollable...
ha!
THEY can control anything they want to control.
As a side note; Democracies are the easiest form of government for
despots to lead, because the damp masses think that they're free, and
if they have any doubts, the government constantly reminds them that
they're free...
uhhhh, just like our government does...???