Re: OT Anti/Klan Protest march.

On Thu, 17 Jan 2002 19:15:51 GMT, babette7401@no-spamhotmail.com
(OldSalt) wrote:

>On Thu, 17 Jan 2002 14:53:06 GMT, Brian Wagner
><brian.wagner@cle.philips.com> wrote:
>>OldSalt wrote:

I've steered clear of this thread so far but there's a couple of
points I feel I have to respond to:

<Many snips>

>>> None of it. It's actually just looking at today's world and comparing
>>> it to our history. Yes... it was real unfortunate that we sent
>>> innocent Japanese to camps.
>>
>>It was more than unfortunate. It was an outrage.
>
>An outrage ?? It was war. Japan bombed us and we weren't sure of the
>enemy's ability to communicate between the US and Japan....or who the
>enemy was. Too f*cking bad that innocents got sent off. It was war.
>Get over it !!!!

Whether it was war or not, whether the perceived risk of 5th column
justified it or not, the point is that internment involved saying that
all US citizens were NOT equal, on the basis of their race - and that
is and was unconstitutional. I've seen and read quite a bit on that
period of history, including accounts of camp survivors, one chap who
objected to being interned managed to get before a judge who ordered
he be freed - on his first step outside the court he was arrested by
soldiers, when he waved his bail papers and said 'this says I am free'
soldiers cocked weapons and said 'this says you're coming with us'. He
never got near a court again, but his lawyer managed to get the appeal
to the supreme court, where it was turned down when the gov. presented
totally falsified evidence of sabotage plots and spying. Actually,
they never uncovered one shred of evidence - or even real suspicion -
against a single Japanese American to back up these invented
allegations - and the case in question was re-opened just recently,
when the chap finally got his exoneration, his internment was ruled
unconstitutional, and the gov. admitted the evidence had been
fabricated.

It's not whether it *should* have been done (that's a debatable
issue), it's the *way* it was done that points up the risks. 'Too
f*cking bad' is a dangerous response, IMHO. You never know... if OBL
et. al. manage to, say, attach a bloody great bomb to the hull of a
CVN, it might be divers they come for next...

snip...

>BUT....I have nothing to hide. I've said it before... the local
>police have had a key to my house when I was gone on vacation for 2
>weeks or a month. Let the local police Chief check out my panty
>drawer and have a good sniff !! He'll find I'm clean. If YOU have
>doubt about your doings and background, that's YOUR problem !!

Again this is dangerous... one of the reasons I left the UK for
America was some of the draconian new laws that have been introduced
there:

- There was concern about organised criminals and drug dealers where
the cops were having trouble getting enough evidence to prosecute. So
they cooked up a law where, if the cops accuse you of being a drug
dealer, YOU have to prove that you got all your money and property
lawfully, or they confiscate it - without you ever being convicted of
a crime. But of course, if you're clean you have nothing to worry
about...

- There was concern about English soccer fans who have a reputation
for going to overseas games to fight, not watch the game. But often
they couldn't get enough evidence. So they cooked up a law where, if a
senior enough policeman would stand up and say 'I suspect X of being a
soccer hooligan', the court would require X to not leave the country,
and surrender their passport a week before any big soccer game
involving English teams abroad. But of course law-abiding soccer fans
have *nothing* to worry about, if they're clean...

- There was concern that criminals were using encryption to prevent
cops from gathering evidence from their computers. So they cooked up a
wonderful law which allows the police to get an order requiring you to
give them your passwords. Tough luck if you've forgotten them though -
if you don't give them the law states you ARE guilty unless you can
*prove* you've genuinely forgotten them (!). If you can't prove this,
you go to jail. And if you're in the habit of sending or receiving
encrypted emails, the cops can get a surveilance order which requires
you to hand over the passwords so they can read the emails - and you
can't tell a living soul about the warrant, or you go to jail. You
can't even check with your lawyer to see if the warrant is legal. None
of these bad things will happen to people who are clean, I'm
certain...

Think it couldn't happen here?

Sorry Salty, 'the innocent have nothing to fear' is one of the most
dangerous phrases in the English language. IMHO.

BTW, don't get the wrong idea about where I'm coming from - I've lived
slap in the middle of New York for nearly four years now, I was here
on 9/11, I was in my basement for part of the morning of 9/11
wondering if the Empire State building was going to be next (I live
just a block away from it) - so I have very strong feeling about the
bastards responsible, and the need for the war against them. I'm sure
as hell no 'bleeding heart liberal'. But this is a war unlike any
we've faced before. It's going to last many decades, I suspect - hell
it may be a 'permanent' war. So we have to be all the more careful
about what attitudes we adopt, what liberties we surrender, 'for the
sake of the the war on terror'.

Mike
http://www.corestore.org
"All I know is that I'm being sued for unfair business practices by Microsoft. Hello
pot? It's kettle on line two" - Michael Robertson.