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.
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 Moore <fmo...@gcfn.org> wrote: > 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.
> 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
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.
Fred Moore wrote: > 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.
> 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
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.
Fred Moore <fmo...@gcfn.org> wrote: > 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.
> 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'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.
> > 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.
> > 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'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.
Certainly the US is the most policed state I've ever come across. All sorts of people appear to have police powers.
> > > 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.
> > > 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'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.
> Certainly the US is the most policed state I've ever come across. All > sorts of people appear to have police powers.
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
In article <timstreater-2C0062.21014311062...@news.individual.net>, Tim Streater <timstrea...@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.
> > > > 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.
> > > > 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'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.
> > Certainly the US is the most policed state I've ever come across. All > > sorts of people appear to have police powers.
> 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.
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.
In article <fmoore-DDEC90.17480710062...@news-server.columbus.rr.com>, Fred Moore <fmo...@gcfn.org> wrote:
> 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.
> 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
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."
In article <BLOCKSPAMfishfry-A10845.15365611062...@comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
fishfry <BLOCKSPAMfish...@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.
> In article <uce-A527CB.16214811062...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net>, > Gregory Weston <u...@splook.com> wrote:
> > In article <timstreater-2C0062.21014311062...@news.individual.net>, > > Tim Streater <timstrea...@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.
> > 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.
> 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.
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.
-- "Harry?" Ron's voice was a mere whisper. "Do you smell something ... burning?" - Harry Potter and the Odor of the Phoenix
fishfry <BLOCKSPAMfish...@your-mailbox.com> wrote: > In article <fmoore-DDEC90.17480710062...@news-server.columbus.rr.com>, > Fred Moore <fmo...@gcfn.org> wrote:
> > 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.
> > 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
> 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."
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>
> > > > 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.
> > > > 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'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.
> > Certainly the US is the most policed state I've ever come across. All > > sorts of people appear to have police powers.
> 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.
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.
Regards, Jamie Kahn Genet -- If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
Kurt Ullman <kurtull...@yahoo.com> wrote: > In article <timstreater-2C0062.21014311062...@news.individual.net>, > Tim Streater <timstrea...@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? *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 -- If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
SabaGuy wrote: > "Cuomo's office said it had reviewed millions of pictures over several > months..."
> How many pictures does Cuomo have to look at to determine it's porn?
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.
>> In article <timstreater-2C0062.21014311062...@news.individual.net>, >> Tim Streater <timstrea...@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.
> > In article <timstreater-2C0062.21014311062...@news.individual.net>, > > Tim Streater <timstrea...@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.
In article <g2r0co02...@news5.newsguy.com>, J.J. O'Shea <try.not...@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?
<jami...@wizardling.geek.nz> wrote: > Kurt Ullman <kurtull...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> In article <timstreater-2C0062.21014311062...@news.individual.net>, >> Tim Streater <timstrea...@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.
In article <C4768C80.8EE4%ghost_top...@hotmail.com>, George Kerby <ghost_top...@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.
On 6/12/08 8:31 AM, in article kurtullman-4D9C76.09311512062...@70-3-168-216.area5.spcsdns.net, "Kurt
Ullman" <kurtull...@yahoo.com> wrote: > In article <C4768C80.8EE4%ghost_top...@hotmail.com>, > George Kerby <ghost_top...@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.
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.
