So Jenny,

Does that mean that his royal middleness, GWB, could be our George III?

... and yes, I know that George I turned down the ORIGINAL honor. :grin:

On 2002-07-25 09:52, Jenny Genser wrote:

By the way, before Old King George went mad, he was a pious teetolaling actively religous and sober man (as was his wife, who bore his 17 children).

However, many of his children rebelled against his strictures. His eldest son, the Prince Regent (who later became George IV), on the other hand, was a roue, a libertine, who lived quite the wild life and had a common-law marriage with a non-royal who had 10 kids with him. However, George III made him marry a princess to assure the succession. As soon as Princess Caroline gave birth to Princess Charlotte, young George promptly left her, where she lived out a wild life on her own. When aa middle-aged George finally succeeded to the throne, Caroline prompted quite a stir by claiming her right as Queen, even though she and George couldn't stand each other. It was quite the scandal.

Meanwhile, Princess Charlotte grew up, married another royal prince, and went about fulfilling her duty to assure the succession. Unfortunately she and the babe died in childbirth, prompting a battle among George III's other 16 children as to whom could produce the next heir (they had also rebelled by setting up housekeeping with mistresses, and so had to marry properly). The winner was the third son, whose wife bore the babe who became Queen Victoria. Unfortunately for this prince, he died shortly after the birth of his daughter.

The second son's wife sadly had miscarriages and if I remember correctly, a baby who died in infancy, but no surviving issue. So while the second son reigned as William the something, he was succeeded by his niece, Victoria.

Anyway, sorry for the digression. I am a Regency buff. :grin:

Well done, Jenny! You have the makings of a script for a daytime drama here.

Novak is a good source. And if the attitude among Republican pols is what he says it is, then we can probably expect an attack on Iraq as a distraction before the November elections.


http://www.suntimes.com/output/novak...t-novak25.html

(For educ. and discussion purposes only)


Retreat not sweet for GOP

July 25, 2002

BY ROBERT NOVAK SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST

Six Republican senators traveled last weekend to the Greenbrier resort at White Sulphur Springs, W.Va., for their party's annual Senate Council retreat. The private event usually is a pep rally with contributors, whose donations to the GOP qualify them to attend, doing the cheering and the senators leading the cheers. This year, the mood was foreboding.

The six senators are all respected members of the GOP ideological mainstream: George Allen (Virginia), Kit Bond (Missouri), Jim Bunning (Kentucky), Mike Crapo (Idaho), Orrin Hatch (Utah) and Fred Thompson (Tennessee). They conveyed to about 200 of the party faithful that fear grips more than Wall Street this summer.

This is the counterpart of Democratic chortling that the political tide has turned for the first time since Sept. 11. Republicans worry that the stock market collapse may mean a calamitous midterm election unless the economic malaise is corrected. But what to do? While the senators at Greenbrier had no answers, the implication was that President Bush must do more. That Congress may be making matters worse was not suggested.

Herein lies the difficulty of Republicans coming to grips with the first genuine bear market experienced by many of today's politicians. Aside from praying that investor disenchantment does not infect the still robust American consumers, they are reduced to echoing the Democratic demand for more punitive treatment of corporate business. While stock prices have continued to fall as the accounting reform bill neared passage, Bush Monday expressed hope that its passage may reassure investors.

Republican senators mentioned two critical dates last weekend. The first was Aug. 14: the deadline for the Securities and Exchange Commission requirement of June 27 that CEOs and chief financial officers of 947 large corporations swear that their corporate financial reports are accurate. It is widely viewed on Wall Street as doing the right thing at the wrong time.

Inside the financial community, the SEC order is seen as contributing to the market swoon. The dire Republican assessment looks to the future. One senator at the Greenbrier put it this way: ''If only about 10 companies have significant restatements, we are probably OK. If it is 50 companies, we are in trouble.''

The second date is Sept. 1: the end of the summer recess by Congress and the traditional start of the campaigning season. If economic destabilization continues after Labor Day, say the GOP senators, Bush will begin to get blamed and can no longer put the responsibility on Bill Clinton. Participants at the Greenbrier came away saying, ''It's the economy, stupid!''--a message to the White House that preoccupation with the war against terrorism is no longer viable for the 2002 elections.

Circulating through the corridors of Washington this week were reports on the Greenbrier retreat as well as an e-mail from supply side consultant Jude Wanniski to House Majority Leader Dick Armey warning that the market has been roiled by congressional acquiescence in the expensing of stock options. Wanniski described this as a threat to the entrepreneurial start-up companies that provide the dynamic element of the U.S. economy.

I asked one economically savvy Republican operative who had read Wanniski's e-mail what he had done with it. ''Threw it in the wastebasket,'' he said. The reason: Nothing can be done about it.

The accounting reform bill nearing passage does not overtly mandate expensing stock options, with such proposals sidetracked in the Senate. Instead, as Senate Banking Committee Chairman Paul Sarbanes predicted on CNN last weekend, expensing will be instituted by the Financial Accounting Standards Board. Sarbanes made clear that the FASB under the new legislation will be empowered by government financing instead of voluntary contributions by the accounting industry that influenced the board's decisions.

That back-door approach negates the president's opposition to expensing, which seems a futile gesture. The accounting reforms coincide with a worsening economic climate where the interest rate spread between the gilt-edged corporations and small businesses has widened, and capital for new initiatives has evaporated. That's justification for fear not only among Republicans but the whole country.

Stonewall posted, for discussion purposes:

Perhaps now we know why the U.S. military has been engaged in all those urban training exercises in cities across America. For years, we have heard of armed forces personnel rappelling out of hovering helicopters in the middle of the night in populated areas, of troops practicing house-to-house searches and seizures on unsuspecting citizens and local officials, and of military training exercises being conducted in residential neighborhoods throughout the United States. We assumed these exercises were preparations for foreign operations; however, could it be that those exercises are actually preparing our armed forces for action against U.S. citizens? A decision to suspend Posse Comitatus suggests this may indeed be the case.

Our Founding Fathers did not oppose old King George of England because of his Christian profession or lack thereof. They opposed him because he was a tyrant! A tyrant is a tyrant, party label or Christian profession notwithstanding. It is clear that the Bush regime is becoming increasing tyrannical by the day. When will Christians and conservatives wake up to this reality?

I hardly think of myself as someone with their head buried in the sand. And still I am hard pressed to remember all those military guys jumping out of helicopters in the middle of the night. (were the helicopters black?)In residential neighborhoods no less. I mean really one would THINK wouldn't you, that these loud obnoxious helicopters would keep the residents awake. Right? After all whenever the cop helicopter swings by, it wakes me up. But, WOW if a helicopter were to be stationary over my house while troops did manuvers and I didn't grab my video camera, I'd have to be in a coma or something.

And practicing house-to-house searches and seizures on unsuspecting citizens MY GOODNESS!! This sounds like a career launcher for some eager lawyer, or an ACLU case BEGGING for attention. I guess the ACLU has better things to do than go after real injustices like, oh, Christmas Lights on Elementary Schools. God knows those Christmas Lights are a FAR BIGGER threat to freedom over HOUSE TO HOUSE SEACH AND SEIZURES.

May I quote, ". For years, we have heard of armed forces personnel rappelling out of... Years, hum....How long has GWB been president? hint: less than 2.
But, yet, it makes sense to blame Bush with this summation:"It is clear that the Bush regime is becoming increasing tyrannical by the day. "

This is classic CLASSIC CLASSIC parinoia at it's best: State a whole bunch of unsupported "facts" (the kind that breed paranoia) then tie them into some recent legislation. Then support your arguement by loosely asking questions such as,"We assumed these exercises were preparations for foreign operations; however, could it be that those exercises are actually preparing our armed forces for action against U.S. citizens?"
Now the stage is set, move in for the kill with your final knife wound.
" A decision to suspend Posse Comitatus suggests this may indeed be the case. "

NOTICE: the authour of this article doesn't actually say what he believes. He just sets up the straw man and allows you to draw your own conclusions based on his bad information.

On 2002-07-25 10:09, David '47 wrote:
So Jenny,

Does that mean that his royal middleness, GWB, could be our George III?

... and yes, I know that George I turned down the ORIGINAL honor. :grin:

This was NOT a political jab at our President; just a humorous and light digression.

Personally, I see GWB in the role of Herbert Hoover, but bear in mind that he is the boss of the Secretary of Agriculture, who is the boss of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services, who is the boss of the Administrator of the Food and Nutrition Services, who is the boss of the Director of the Office of Analysis of Analysis, Nutrition, and Evaluation (OANE), who is the boss of the Director of the Family Programs Staff, OANE, who is the boss of the Chief of the Family Programs Analysis Branch in OANE, who is MY boss. So there are seven layers of bosses between me and GWB. :grin:

Justmom:

I have not witnessed any of these exercises myself. But there have been a number of them held in recent years in various cities. Obviously, you would have to be resident of one of this handful of cities in order to have experienced it. The latest one in the news is Boise, Idaho which either has just experienced the exercises or will experience them shortly (I do not remember the date but it was this summer). But recent news reports concerning it can be turned up very easily through a search since it has been publicized over the past few months.

Justmom:

I quickly found this UPI article from last spring. I guess the Boise exercises I referenced occurred in late April. However it seems to me that it was recently reported that another city was getting it in July or August. Regardless, this article references such exercises in Boise, Little Rock, and some place in North Carolina. Whether these exercises are a cause for concern or not is a different matter. I am merely verifying the above author's claims which you ridiculed.


http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=...2-024315-8298r

(For educ. and discussion purposes only)


Boise to be test target for Marine snoops

From the National Desk
Published 3/30/2002 3:33 PM

BOISE, Idaho, March 30 (UPI) -- In a bid for a more realistic training experience, Marine Corps reconnaissance teams will attempt to evade nosey neighbors and noisy
dogs as they prowl the streets of Boise in a mock infiltration exercise this spring.

The city and the Marines announced Friday that about two-dozen leathernecks would attempt to infiltrate Boise during practice intelligence-gathering missions sometime between May 6 and 10.

Although the Marines routinely practice their craft in mock urban settings on military bases, some skills can only be honed in a genuine city.

"What happens in these urban training facilities is we don't have dogs; we don't have garbage trucks driving down the street and we don't have the rhythms that you would see in your day-to-day life," Maj. Chandler Hirsch told a news conference.

The scenario of the exercise conducted by the Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory calls for 24 reconnaissance-team members to fly to a National Guard training facility outside Boise in late April. The Marines will then attempt to slip into the city, spy on specific targets and then get out of town unnoticed; other Marines will act as enemy sentries guarding the target buildings.

Hirsch said the Marines would be wearing military-style clothing and would not be carrying loaded weapons. They will also not go on to private property. The goal is for the Marines to carry out their missions without being noticed by Boise's 186,000 citizens.

A Marine will be assigned to the Ada County 911 center to monitor any calls from suspicious residents, and a Boise police officer will serve as an escort for each team in the event a civilian who didn't get the word attempts to intervene.

Such exercises by the military are not unusual. A similar larger-scale exercise last month in North Little Rock, Arkansas frightened some residents who came upon armed troops skulking around their neighborhoods.

An Army Special Forces soldier was shot to death and another was wounded Feb. 23 during such a surreptitious exercise when they jumped a Bragg County, North Carolina deputy sheriff whom they thought was a role-playing actor in an exercise.

Despite the chance of running into a citizen with a shotgun or a snarling 100-pound Rottweiler, urban exercises are seen as an important training tool, particularly as the U.S. military finds itself increasingly involved in chasing guerilla forces such as al Qaida.

"We are looking at the urban environment because we know no military can beat the U.S. military in an open battle space," said Jenny Holbert, spokeswoman for the Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory. "We proved that in Desert Storm, but now there is an increased likelihood our enemies will fight us in foreign cities. Cities are complex, difficult environments where our techniques may not be as effective."

(Reported by Hil Anderson, Los Angeles)

Copyright ? 2002 United Press International

On 2002-07-25 11:27, Jenny Genser wrote:

On 2002-07-25 10:09, David '47 wrote:
So Jenny,

Does that mean that his royal middleness, GWB, could be our George III?

... and yes, I know that George I turned down the ORIGINAL honor. :grin:

This was NOT a political jab at our President; just a humorous and light digression.

I know, but I've working on some way to get the George III joke into a post, and you handed me the key.


I can't apologize, though :grin:

Personally, I see GWB in the role of Herbert Hoover, but bear in mind that he is the boss of the Secretary of Agriculture, who is the boss of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services, who is the boss of the Administrator of the Food and Nutrition Services, who is the boss of the Director of the Office of Analysis of Analysis, Nutrition, and Evaluation (OANE), who is the boss of the Director of the Family Programs Staff, OANE, who is the boss of the Chief of the Family Programs Analysis Branch in OANE, who is MY boss. So there are seven layers of bosses between me and GWB. :grin:

OK, I'm game. What does a Family Programs Analyst analyze ... and how do I get into that? It sounds like fun.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: David '47 on 2002-07-25 14:22 ]</font>

On 2002-07-25 14:20, David '47 wrote:


OK, I'm game. What does a Family Programs Analyst analyze ... and how do I get into that? It sounds like fun.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: David '47 on 2002-07-25 14:22 ]</font>

My agency, the Food and Nutrition Service, administers all of the nutrition programs that go to low- (and sometimes not so low-income Americans.

The "Family Programs" are the ones that can go to anyone. These include the Food Stamp Program, the Nutrition Assistance Program for Puerto Rico and the Marianas Territories, and the Food Program Distribution for Indian Reservations. I do analysis on the Food Stamp Program, answering questions like what percent of people who qualify for food stamps actually participate, and how many legal immigrants will come onto the program after April 1, 2003, when the Farm Bill restores their eligibility.

The "Special Nutrition Programs" are the ones targeted to specific groups. These include the School Lunch and School Breakfast Programs (here is where middle-class people like my daughter come in), the Child and Adult Care Food Program, the Summer Food Program, the Supplemental Food Program for Women, Infants, and Children (also known as WIC), and a few other small programs.

OANE oversees research studies, does a few studies in house, and crunches numbers for the Agency.

So that's my job in all its wonkish glory. :grin:

_________________
Living begins not on the day you are born
but on the day you recognize your consciousness -- Prem Rawat

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Jenny Genser on 2002-07-25 14:44 ]</font>

Here we go again. Jackass John "Janet" Ashcroft at it again, obviously with the implicit support of the handlers of the imbecile in the Oval Office to whom he reports. No databases? Yeah, right. Why not just leave the American people the hell alone. This government was created to serve them, not harass and rule them.


http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...te_2&printer=1

(For educ. and discussion purposes only)


Ashcroft Touts Citizen Vigilance Plan
Thu Jul 25, 2:47 PM ET

By JESSE J. HOLLAND, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - Attorney General John Ashcroft ( news - web sites) assured senators Thursday that a program that would ask millions of Americans to report suspicious activity won't create an Orwellian government database that could be used against innocent Americans.

"We don't want a new database, I've recommended that there be no database and I've been assured there won't be one" created by the program, Ashcroft told the Senate Judiciary Committee ( news - web sites) Thursday.

Operation TIPS ? Terrorism Information and Prevention System ? is being developed by the Justice Department ( news - web sites) and is scheduled to be launched later this summer.

It is a part of the Citizen Corps, an initiative announced by President Bush ( news - web sites) in his State of the Union address, and is designed to enable the public to participate directly in homeland security.

Operation TIPS plans to give millions of American truckers, train conductors, ship captains, utility employees and others "a formal way to report suspicious terrorist activity," its government Web site said.

Those people are crucial because "they are regularly in the public," Ashcroft said. "They can spot anomalies ? things that are different ? (such as) truck drivers seeing things happen that don't usually happen."

But some lawmakers have echoed the American Civil Liberties Union ( news - web sites)'s call that the program could result in Americans spying on one another.

"We don't want to see a 1984, Orwellian-type situation here where neighbors are reporting on neighbors," said Sen. Orrin Hatch ( news, bio, voting record), R-Utah. "We want to make sure that what this involves is legitimate reports of real concerns that might involve some terrorist activities."

A government database of terrorist tips, whether truthful or not, could be used against people when they apply for government benefits at agencies like the Department of Veteran's Affairs, said Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D- Vt.

He conjured a scenario where a person applies for a VA loan or a job and is told that a suspicious activity has been logged in the databank because somebody "didn't like their dog barking in the middle of the night" or the political shirt they were wearing.

But Ashcroft assured senators that Operation TIPS would only be a clearinghouse, with all relevant information passed on to the appropriate law enforcement agencies, which already have well-established policies on how information can be used.

"TIPS will be a referral agency that sends information that is phoned in to appropriate federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies," Ashcroft said.

Ashcroft also defended his proposal to immediately destroy government records of people who buy guns, disputing a congressional report that said his idea could help criminals get firearms illegally.

Other "records that are maintained can be used to detect the illegal purchases," said the attorney general, responding to a General Accounting Office ( news - web sites) report released earlier in the week.

Ashcroft last year suggested shortening from 90 days to no more than one business day the time during which the government keeps records on people who try to purchase firearms.

But the GAO, Congress's watchdog agency, said one-day destruction of records would mean that the FBI ( news - web sites), which conducts background checks on people who buy guns, would not be able to go back and check its work to look for fraudulent transactions or mistaken approvals.

Only seven out of 235 illegal gun sales between July 2001 and January 2002 were noticed after one day, the GAO report said.

The National Instant Criminal Background Check system electronically checks law enforcement records while gun buyers are waiting to make purchases. Felons, drug users and people subject to domestic violence restraining orders are among those prohibited from buying guns.

But some databases checked by the FBI have missing or incomplete records. If new information shows up within three months that proves the gun purchase should have been denied, the FBI calls local police and has the weapon confiscated.

The FBI wouldn't be able to do that if the gun purchase records are immediately destroyed, Sen. Edward Kennedy ( news, bio, voting record) told Ashcroft.

However, Ashcroft said NICS would still have the firearm dealer information and government agencies like the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms could still track down illegal gun purchases through those records.

Jenny - It was William IV. And George IV had many more children than the 10 by his mistress and 1 by his wife, but they are almost impossible to track because his other girlfriends were married and their husbands dutifully accepted legal responsibility for the Regent's natural children. But there was plenty of gossip by the 1820s as to which young men in society bore a physical resemblance to the King. He was also secretly married to a Catholic before Caroline which was a violation of the 1702 Law of Succession, and this marriage was secretly annulled. Ah, for the days of the Regency.

Pax,

Dave Krein

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: David Krein on 2002-07-25 19:33 ]</font>

Back in 1997 the Authors wrote a post called the Long Boom? I amazed now that some of the predictions are coming true.

Topic: The Long Boom?
Topic Posted by: Neil Howe and William Strauss
Date Posted: Sat Aug 30 14:51:45 US/Pacific 1997
Topic Description:
The Long Boom?


T he economy keeps humming, the Dow Jones booms, Washington celebrates a budget deal, and NATO absorbs half the Warsaw Pact without a shot. The headlines seem loaded with good news to which two responses are possible.

The first is to draw a straight line and extrapolate a future of stunning and endless optimism. According to cyberage visionaries, our economy is launched on a telecosmic transformation that puts the industrial revolution to shame. With infotech, biotech, nanotech, and every other tech going critical, wage growth is about to move into warp drive. The Dow will likewise break every speed barrier, according to what business columnist James Glassman calls the flourishing TTID ("this time it's different") breed of financial forecaster. In Washington, supply-siders quarrel gleefully over how to use the enormous federal surpluses (one guru is announcing $300 billion by the year 2000) that are certain to emerge. As for national security, why bother in an era of global affluence, evaporating state boundaries, and assures the Pentagon incontestable U.S. military technology?

For a full-dimensioned rendering of this scenario, see "The Long Boom: A History of the Future, 1980-2020" in the July issue of Wired. "We are watching the beginnings of a global economic boom on a scale never experienced before," write authors Peter Schwartz and Peter Leyden, who proceed to take the reader on a time journey through a future world so overoptioned and superabundant, yet also so exhilarating and enlightened and creatively destructive that it would leave the Tofflers gasping for breath.

So much for the first response. The second begins with the premise that saecular history inhabits a curved universe and focuses on facts that remind us why, after all, our future is apt to reflect the recurring rhythms of our past.

Fact One: Today's economic upswing is unlikely to survive much beyond the year 2000, when it would match the all-time business expansion record (1960-69). Soon after, the elapsed time since the last serious recession (1982) would approach a full phase of life something, again, that's never happened before. Though often likened to the "boom" of the American High ("These are the good old days," announced a recent Fortune essay), today's expansion is very different. Back in the '50s, people talked about rising real wages, mass markets, infrastructure, cartels, and collective bargaining; in the '90s, they talked about rising inequality, niche markets, leisure goods, risk taking, and free agency. That was a First Turning; this is a Third Turning.

Fact Two: Sooner or later, it will dawn on investors that stock prices vastly exceed discounted future earnings and that the market value of corporate equity cannot indefinitely outpace GDP or national wealth. This discovery, which will drop the Dow, may also drop the economy. Any K-wave thesis based on "generational forgetting" could derive plenty of support from the absolute conviction among Americans Silent-age and younger that stocks are a long-term sure thing. Big market corrections (as happened last week) are simply laughed off. This may mean that the ultimate "correction" will arrive with all the tentative probing of a locomotive roaring off a cliff.

Fact Three: Federal fiscal policy is out of control. Despite Washington's self-congratulation, the only certain outcome of the recent budget deal is a larger deficit which remains on track to shatter the economy by the time 13ers are hitting their peak midlife earning years. America's demographic window of opportunity for phasing in gradual entitlement reform (1990 to 2005) is rapidly closing, and last month's unenforceable "deal" is merely the latest excuse for inaction. If this news doesn't hit Wall Street until the first large Boomer cohort starts selling off its 401-k's (in 2005) or picking up its first Social Security checks (in 2008), we could be looking at the first tremor of the Fourth Turning.

Fact Four: U.S. defense spending is now lower, as share of GDP, than any year since Pearl Harbor Sunday and is projected to keep dropping in the outyears. Having fiscally preannounced their unwillingness to project power, Americans should not overassume their ability to preserve peace abroad. Remember: History has never recorded a long era of peace in a multi-polar world. Global amity requires, as guarantor, a powerful global hegemon a role for which our nation might qualify but one that it is clearly unprepared to assume.

The long boomers pay little attention to these ordinary facts. Instead, having committed what we call the fallacy of linearism, they search only for reasons why their trend must defy all precedent why, at last, history is about to jump its rails.

Some day, historians may indeed refer to a "long boom" as a shorthand for an era of economic expansion and financial optimism, roughly two decades long, that began with the GDP and Dow trough of 1982. But if so, historians will also forever associate this "boom" (most of which is already behind us) with America's Third-Turning and with all of the emphasis on tearing down barriers and unleashing the individual that accompanies such eras.

Come the Fourth Turning, Americans will celebrate other virtues, an inevitability that Schwartz and Leyden don't understand. "In a nutshell," they conclude, "the key formula for the coming age is this: Open, good. Closed, bad. Tattoo it on your forehead." In our view, the next generational constellation is more likely to regard the open as dangerous, the closed as necessary. And as for tattoos, most graying 13er parents would rather their kids not know that, when the Dow hit its peak, they once wore one. That's our view. What's yours?

On 2002-07-25 20:08, Tristan Jones wrote:
Back in 1997 the Authors wrote a post called the Long Boom? I amazed now that some of the predictions are coming true.

Fact One: Today's economic upswing is unlikely to survive much beyond the year 2000, when it would match the all-time business expansion record (1960-69). Soon after, the elapsed time since the last serious recession (1982) would approach a full phase of life something, again, that's never happened before.

here S&H seem to be saying that an economic boom cycle has always had SHORTER length than a turning (and therefore S&H and Mike Alexander are incompatible); therefore, the end of the boom in 2001 means (in S&H's view) that there are almost definitely at least a few years to go (from 2001) before the next turning

"Open, good. Closed, bad"? Well Bush has done the tariff thing, that's bad. And Tom Cruise is taking his kids to Australia, that's good. And foreign capital is fleeing the Big Apple, and that's bad. But the networks are going back to the eighties, so that's good.

So I say, keep a close eye on the Donahue Show on MSNBC: Thumbs down, good. Thumbs up, bad.

That's what I say, and you can take it to the bank, young fella! :lol:

You got it, Number Two! Go with the incompatible "compatible" theories. The two are a good mix of incompatible compatibilities. :smile:

And Mike will agree with me on this, too. :smile:

Here is a good one which describes some of the favored activities of the disgusting perverts whose salaries you are forced to pay at gunpoint. "Vat have you been reading? Ve vant to see ze books." If we do not use this 4T to rid ourselves of these nasty things like the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and its attendant blatantly uncontitutional court, then there really is no point in even bothering working toward the next 1T.


http://www.counterpunch.org/

(For educ. and discussion purposes only)


July 25, 2002

Ashcroft's Assault on Bookstores

The Fiction Behind National Security

by Walt Brasch


Between a diner and an empty store that once housed a shoe store, video store, and tanning salon, in a small strip mall in Bloomsburg, Pa., is Friends-in-Mind, an independent bookstore.

On the first floor are more than 10,000 books on more than 1,200 running feet of shelves that create aisles only about three feet wide. On top of the shelves are stacks of 10, 15, even 20 more books. On the floor are hundreds more, stacked spine out three- or four-feet high. There are books in metal racks, drawers, and on counters. It's hard to walk through the store without bumping into a pile in the 1,000-square foot store. In the basement, in reserve, are 2,000 more books.

"Sometimes I order four or five copies of a title, but often I only order one copy, but I want to have whatever my customers want," says owner Arline Johnson who founded the store in 1976 after working almost two decades as a clinical psychologist and teacher. Unlike the chain stores with magazine and newspaper racks, wide aisles, track lighting, and even a coffee shop, Friends-in-Mind has only books and some greeting cards. Also unlike the chain stores with large budgets for space and promotion to attract hundreds of customers a day, Johnson says she sees "on a real good day" maybe 25 or 30 people; often she sees fewer than a dozen.

In September 1984, she saw someone she didn't want to see. A week after the Naval Institute Press shipped three copies of Tom Clancy's cold war thriller, The Hunt for Red October, the FBI showed up. The FBI, which apparently got the information from the publisher, "wanted to know where the books were and who purchased them," says Johnson. She says she told the two men that she couldn't remember to whom she sold two of the copies, but acknowledged she sent one copy to her cousin, who had served aboard a nuclear submarine, "and had all kinds of clearances." Johnson says she wasn't pleased about the interrogation--"and my cousin certainly wasn't happy about anyone checking on what he was reading."

The FBI never returned, but occasionally residents in this rural conservative community will complain about what's in the store. She's been challenged for selling books about Karl Marx, gay rights, and even dinosaurs. Johnson says she tells the "book police" that "it's important that people learn and read about everything, whether they believe it or not." She also stocks copies of the Constitution and the Federalist Papers. Left-wing. Right-wing. Business. Labor. Anti-establishment. Everything's available in her store. "It's not the government's job to tell me or anyone what they can read," she says.

But the government has decided that under the cloak of "national security" it can abridge the rights of the citizen. The base is the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). Under that Act's provisions, the government may conduct covert surveillance of individuals only after seeking an order from a special government- created secret court. However, that Court, in its first two decades, granted every one of the government's more than 12,000 requests.

The most recent series of intrusions upon civil liberties began in 1998 when special prosecutor Ken Starr demanded a book store to release records of what Monica Lewinsky had purchased. It was a sweeping allegation that had no reasonable basis of establishing any groundwork in Starr's attacks upon President Clinton. Since then, there have been several cases in which police, operating with warrants issued in state courts, have demanded a bookstore's records.

In state actions, individuals have the right to ask local and state courts to quash subpoenas for records. If denied, they may appeal all the way to state supreme courts. There is no such protection under FISA. Not only can't individuals and businesses be represented in that secret court, they're bound by a federal gag order prohibiting any disclosure that such an order was even issued. There is no recourse. No appeal.

Then came the USA Patriot Act, drafted by the Bush administration, and fine-tuned in secret by the House and Senate leadership following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. The Patriot Act, which incorporates and significantly expands FISA to include American citizens, was overwhelmingly approved by the Congress, most of whom admit they read only a few paragraphs, if any at all, of the 342-page document. President Bush enthusiastically signed the bill, Oct. 26.

Among its almost innumerable provisions, the Act reduces judicial oversight of telephone and internet surveillance and grants the FBI almost unlimited, and unchecked, access to business records without requiring it to show even minimal evidence of a crime. The FBI doesn't even need to give the individual time to call an attorney. Failure to immediately comply could result in that person's immediate detainment. The federal government can now require libraries to divulge who uses public computers or what books they check out, video stores to reveal what tapes customers bought or rented, even grocery and drug stores to disclose what paperbacks shoppers bought.

The effect of the USA Patriot Act upon businesses that loan, rent, or sell books, videos, magazines, and music CDs is not to find and incarcerate terrorists--there are far more ways to investigate threats to the nation than to check on a terrorist's reading and listening habits--but to put a sweeping chilling effect upon Constitutional freedoms. The Act butts against the protections of the First (free speech), Fourth (unreasonable searches), Fifth (right against self-incrimination), and Sixth (due process) amendments.

If the Act is not modified, book publishers will take even fewer chances on publishing works that, like The Hunt for Red October "might" result in the government investigation; bookstore owners may not buy as many different titles; and the people, fearing that whatever they read might be subject to Big Brother's scrutiny, may not buy controversial books or check books out of the library. Even worse, writers may not create the works that a free nation should read. How ironic it is that a President who says he wants everyone to read is the one who may be responsible for giving the people less choice in what they may read.

Chris Finan, president of the American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression, believes "we've seen some shift" in the hard-core attitudes of the government's position. He believes public opinion will eventually shift "from the panic after Sept. 11 to allow a reasonable debate of the dangers" created by the USA Patriot Act. The Act has a built-in sunset provision--several sections will expire, unless Congress renews them, on Dec. 31, 2005.

Judith Krug of the American Library Association isn't as optimistic as Finan. "It's going to be used as long as they think they can get away with it," says Krug, one of the nation's leading experts in First Amendment rights and civil liberties. Krug says until the people "start challenging the Act in the federal courts, we'll be lucky if we can 'sunset' out any of it."

In the meantime, Arline Johnson says she doesn't keep computer records, accept credit cards, or even have a store newsletter, all of which can compromise the Constitutional protections of her customers. "I once lived and taught in Bulgaria," says Johnson, "and I don't like totalitarian regimes." It makes no difference if it's a Balkan dictatorship or one created out of fear in a democracy. The Bush administration has put far more fear into the American people than any terrorist could.

As Benjamin Franklin once argued, a nation that gives up freedom to gain security deserves neither.

On 2002-07-25 15:17, Stonewall Patton wrote:
Here we go again. Jackass John "Janet" Ashcroft at it again, .....

You aren't even fit to kiss John Ashcroft's shoes, Mr. Patton. He is so much more a quality person than you could ever hope to be.

He has done wonders for this nation and is a breath of fresh air after crooked Janet Reno who looked the other way when Al Gore massivly broke Federal campaign law at the buddist temple as well as looking the other way on numerous Clinton felonies when she had a duty to investigate.

On 2002-07-26 08:22, takascar2 wrote:

On 2002-07-25 15:17, Stonewall Patton wrote:
Here we go again. Jackass John "Janet" Ashcroft at it again, .....

You aren't even fit to kiss John Ashcroft's shoes, Mr. Patton. He is so much more a quality person than you could ever hope to be.

He has done wonders for this nation and is a breath of fresh air after crooked Janet Reno who looked the other way when Al Gore massivly broke Federal campaign law at the buddist temple as well as looking the other way on numerous Clinton felonies when she had a duty to investigate.

So if Ashcroft is a decent man, why did he cooperate with his boss(es?) in killing all Clinton administration investigations thereby ensuring that none of the offenders will ever be punished? A decent man would have resigned before cooperating with and furthering that sort of fraudulence, no ifs, ands, or buts, and no excuses. I will not even touch how such furthering of corruption reflects upon his alleged Christian credentials.

On 2002-07-26 08:22, takascar2 wrote:
You aren't even fit to kiss John Ashcroft's shoes, Mr. Patton.

On the other hand. It's apparent our colleague takascar is more than fit to lick Mr. Ashcroft's boots.

On the other hand. It's apparent our colleague takascar is more than fit to lick Mr. Ashcroft's boots.

No, I just agree with him and admire his style after 8 years of fraud and deceit.

On 2002-07-26 10:48, takascar2 wrote:

No, I just agree with him and admire his style after 8 years of fraud and deceit.

Us Missourians lived under Ashcroft for much of the 1990s. We subsequently voted for a "dead guy" over him in the 2000 senate elections.

We obviously have extremely divergent opinions of what America is.

On 2002-07-26 11:23, madscientist wrote:

On 2002-07-26 10:48, takascar2 wrote:

No, I just agree with him and admire his style after 8 years of fraud and deceit.

Us Missourians lived under Ashcroft for much of the 1990s. We subsequently voted for a "dead guy" over him in the 2000 senate elections.

We obviously have extremely divergent opinions of what America is.

No, I think takascar means he admires Ashcroft's particular style of fraud and deceit. I'll agree, too, that it is somewhat refreshing after 8 years of the same old fraud and deceit to see some fresh faces...

On 2002-07-26 11:23, madscientist wrote:

On 2002-07-26 10:48, takascar2 wrote:

No, I just agree with him and admire his style after 8 years of fraud and deceit.

Us Missourians lived under Ashcroft for much of the 1990s. We subsequently voted for a "dead guy" over him in the 2000 senate elections.

We obviously have extremely divergent opinions of what America is.

Aren't you exaggerating a bit? Bush, like Carnahan, won an extremely close election--yet I don't say that "us Americans [sic]" voted for Bush.

(Yes, I'm aware that Bush didn't get a popular plurality. But I don't even claim that "us Nevadans" voted for Bush; actually, it was just enough--barely--to win the state).

On 2002-07-26 11:33, Justin '77 wrote:

On 2002-07-26 11:23, madscientist wrote:

On 2002-07-26 10:48, takascar2 wrote:

No, I just agree with him and admire his style after 8 years of fraud and deceit.

Us Missourians lived under Ashcroft for much of the 1990s. We subsequently voted for a "dead guy" over him in the 2000 senate elections.

We obviously have extremely divergent opinions of what America is.

No, I think takascar means he admires Ashcroft's particular style of fraud and deceit. I'll agree, too, that it is somewhat refreshing after 8 years of the same old fraud and deceit to see some fresh faces...

:lol:... we had long since run through our standard Clinton/Gore comedy material