Feinstein wants controls on Internet, Books
One of my senators, Senator Dianne Feinstein, is now arguing on CNN for controls on information put on the Internet, on censorship of books and articles describing how pipe bombs work, and for making it easier to get wiretaps against those suspected of committing thought crimes. One or two more major incidents on top of the recent ones (World Trade Center, Oklahoma City, Dharan, TWA 800, and Olympic Village) and I suspect Congress will simply vote to repeal the Bill of Rights and just be done with this whole experiment in liberty. --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."
Timothy C. May writes:
One of my senators, Senator Dianne Feinstein, is now arguing on CNN for controls on information put on the Internet, on censorship of books and articles describing how pipe bombs work, and for making it easier to get wiretaps against those suspected of committing thought crimes.
One or two more major incidents on top of the recent ones (World Trade Center, Oklahoma City, Dharan, TWA 800, and Olympic Village) and I suspect Congress will simply vote to repeal the Bill of Rights and just be done with this whole experiment in liberty.
Yes, but it won't be nearly that blatant. In classic Orewllian Doublespeak, it'll be called the "Terrorist Victims Bill of Rights and Freedom of Information Act" and will merely 'abridge' the Bill of Rights with the "right" of the government to investigate, wiretap, arrest and detain without trial any suspected "terrorists" and "drug kingpins". Cancelling the Bill of Rights would be too obvious, and probably isn't the outright goal of any but a few extremists in government. Rather, the majority of bureaucrats/elected officials want to redefine the Rights to only apply to "good citizens", for somewhat varying definitions of "good". "They" won't suddenly stage a fascist coup, instead it will (and has been) a long step-by-step process. I don't think that most policy-makers are even aware of what they're doing (DiFi certainly isn't) they're just responding to preceived public pressure and trying to stay elected. The ugliest phrase in American lexicon: "There oughta be a law". -- Eric Murray ericm@lne.com ericm@motorcycle.com http://www.lne.com/ericm PGP keyid:E03F65E5 fingerprint:50 B0 A2 4C 7D 86 FC 03 92 E8 AC E6 7E 27 29 AF
Sorry, me again; I can't resist the irony: Timothy C. May wrote:
One of my senators, Senator Dianne Feinstein, is now arguing on CNN for controls on information put on the Internet ...
There's a diagram of a pipe bomb on the CNN web site, in the story about the horrible things. ______c_____________________________________________________________________ Mike M Nally * Tiv^H^H^H IBM * Austin TX * For the time being, m5@tivoli.com * m101@io.com * <URL:http://www.io.com/~m101> * three heads and eight arms.
Timothy C. May wrote:
One of my senators, Senator Dianne Feinstein, is now arguing on CNN for controls on information put on the Internet, on censorship of books and articles describing how pipe bombs work ...
I can only assume that anybody who reaches adulthood without incidentally learning how to make a bomb, or who at least becomes acquainted with someone else who they can confidently assume knows how to help out in a pinch, is merely an idiot. It appears that Ms. Feinstein herself has no idea how to make a bomb, and that therefore she assumes it's a monstrous cabal of psychotic murderers that passes this sort of information around via illicit texts and, lately, the despicable Internet. Who's never read a spy novel or muder mystery with (possibly bogus, though at least vaguely accurate) bomb-building hints? Who's grown up with violent American television and film without absorbing at least a shred of information regarding bombs? Is it really possible that a marginally intelligent person could find themselves needing to build a bomb but have no idea how to proceed? Either that, or Ms. Feinstein assumes (depressingly, perhaps correctly) that her constituency is itself so collectively idiotic that they'll accept such activity as good work done for their benefit. I doubt the latter. Ms. Feinstein has never in public speech given me intuitive feelings that she's at all a devious, subtly manipulative person. I think she's an honest idiot who turns the fortune of her political power to causes she believes to be right. It's infuriating. So infuriating, in fact, that I'll vent a bit more. How effective does Ms. Feinstein imagine a ban on bomb-building information might be? Those who've already learned can't be expected to forget, so there'll be a period of time during which today's crop of crazed bombers work the urges out of their systems. There'll be the determined traffic in illegal dog-eared volumes traded secretly among those awful militia members in all the "scary" states between Lake Tahoe and the Potomac. Given the rarity of bombings today, can anyone honestly expect that even the most draconian crack-down on information will turn back the clock to the days before virtually every adolescent male knew the raw ingredients of gunpowder? Finally, note that you'd better hurry and order your video copy of the old Star Trek episode "Arena"... [ ... time to mellow out; I'm switching from coffee to beer. ] ______c_____________________________________________________________________ Mike M Nally * Tiv^H^H^H IBM * Austin TX * For the time being, m5@tivoli.com * m101@io.com * <URL:http://www.io.com/~m101> * three heads and eight arms.
Mike McNally writes:
Either that, or Ms. Feinstein assumes (depressingly, perhaps correctly) that her constituency is itself so collectively idiotic that they'll accept such activity as good work done for their benefit.
Of course. She'll have "done something" about the "terrorisim problem". Never mind that it's completely ineffective and restrictive of civil liberties. Most Americans don't particularly care about civil liberties as long as their day-to-day life runs smoothly. Especially if it's other people's civil liberties that are restricted. The media hypes the terrorisim threat because it helps sell air time and newspapers. Fear sells. How many of you were glued to the tube for the dismal "coverage" of the Olympic Park bombing? I was, and I usually hate TV. Fear is a powerful attention-getter, almost at good as sex. Since we're not allowed to have sex in the media, guess what we get? The articicially-generated climate of fear creates a reaction among the populace. Witness the countless studies that show that people's fear of being a crime victim has increased markedly in the last 10 or 15 years while actual crime statistics have for the most part gone down. The politicians have picked up on this reaction with a vengance, being "tough on crime" is a sure way to get (re)elected.
So infuriating, in fact, that I'll vent a bit more. How effective does Ms. Feinstein imagine a ban on bomb-building information might be? Those who've already learned can't be expected to forget, so there'll be a period of time during which today's crop of crazed bombers work the urges out of their systems.
[..] DiFi and crowd isn't thinking of how their information crackdown would actually work. They probably don't really care if it'll be effective or not. The point is to "do something" right now about the "terrible problem". That something just has to sound like it'll be effective; no one will find out if it works or not for 10 or 15 years, which is an eternity for politicians (and most constituents). -- Eric Murray ericm@lne.com ericm@motorcycle.com http://www.lne.com/ericm PGP keyid:E03F65E5 fingerprint:50 B0 A2 4C 7D 86 FC 03 92 E8 AC E6 7E 27 29 AF
Timothy C. May wrote:
One of my senators, Senator Dianne Feinstein, is now arguing on CNN for controls on information put on the Internet, on censorship of books and articles describing how pipe bombs work, and for making it easier to get wiretaps against those suspected of committing thought crimes.
I just thought about this: obviously (witness the CDA which is much less notorious than this proposition) none of what she suggests would ever work technically and pass the courts legally. She may be dumb enough not to realize that BUT I think that she realizes that too. Therefore we can logically conclude that she does it just to score some immediate points with angry electorate. igor
participants (4)
-
Eric Murray -
ichudov＠algebra.com -
Mike McNally -
tcmay＠got.net