tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7260692.post113864512542489709..comments2023-05-13T02:24:42.139-07:00Comments on Stones In the Field: I love me my stereotypesMachttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01846076773328384778noreply@blogger.comBlogger35125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7260692.post-1138936493557690332006-02-02T19:14:00.000-08:002006-02-02T19:14:00.000-08:00No apologies necessary. I'm delighted to have you ...No apologies necessary. I'm delighted to have you here, and I'm delighted to hear some actual numbers, and see some citations.<BR/><BR/>I've been a bit stymied in what little research I've done, in that I've found lots of rhetoric, with little by way of facts and figures--which always pisses me off, and which is also why I'm not arguing a lot harder. <BR/><BR/>Like most Americans, I have a limited number of hours I can give to educating myself about these things. This, of course, is why we have elected officials. Where do you turn when you don't trust your elected officials, though? Or when, as in my case, my state senators are both Dems, with a limited amount of clout in the current DC climate?<BR/><BR/>Part of being an informed populace is having the discipline to research and discuss these sorts of issues.<BR/><BR/>So my gratitude to everyone participating here. *grin*Machttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01846076773328384778noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7260692.post-1138921747663295322006-02-02T15:09:00.000-08:002006-02-02T15:09:00.000-08:00Dear Anonymous,""Check your facts" is good advice....Dear Anonymous,<BR/>""Check your facts" is good advice."<BR/>Quite.<BR/>So would you site the source behind your assertion that the FISA court has to deal with the "the incredible numbers requested on a daily basis today."? I cna't find any factual basis for this statement backed up with statistics anywhere in the public domain. Perhaps I'm being thick but all I could find was opinion and counter opinion from the left and the right with everyone screaming unresearched statements at each other.<BR/><BR/>We can show that in 2004 (the last full year for which figures are available) the government submitted 1758 requests, of which 1754 were approved, and 3 were withdrawn by the government (the other one was a retroactively resubmitted application from 2003). That works out to just under 5 requests a day for the 10 rotating FISA judges to process. Many federal and state courts swear out at least that many warrants an hour. What the court has begun to do more regulary is modify requests; maybe becuase as the court itself noted in a 2002 <A HREF="http://news.findlaw.com/nytimes/docs/terrorism/fisa51702opn.pdf" REL="nofollow">opinion</A> the DoJ "supplied erroneous information to the court in more than 75 applications for search warrants and wiretaps, including one signed by then-FBI Director Louis J. Freeh". Surely those who claim the title "conservative" favor oversight of the inefficent, bureaucratic federal government? Or this just another case of "activist judges"?<BR/><BR/>Regarding the supposed logjam at the FISA court, the (civil liberties defending? Liberal? I guess who you choose to define them is up to you) <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Frontier_Foundation" REL="nofollow">Electronic Frontier Foundation</A> reports that "The FISA law contains intentionally flexible provisions designed to provide speed and agility in expediting emergency requests. The law grants the attorney general enormous power and discretion to authorize secret “emergency” electronic surveillance and physical searches for up to 72 hours, before any court order is granted. No court order at all is required if the surveillance is terminated before the 72-hour period ends."<BR/><BR/>So I'd love to learn more, if you can tell me, about this overwhelming deluge of applications. And if the pipeline isn't snagged by volume but rather by judicial quibbles over the veracity of the government's cases (and bear in mind the vast majority of FISA tap apps still go through unmolested) tell my why that makes it ok for the President to break the law while proclaiming one of the things that seperates us from the Islamofascists is that we are a nation of laws?<BR/><BR/>Now I really must apologise to MAc for getting into this here- it is awfully rude of us to argue on someone else's blog without really having said hello to her, especially as what we all appaer to be looking for is consensus rather than division.Wisdom Weaselhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18216020315074987565noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7260692.post-1138918715971659652006-02-02T14:18:00.000-08:002006-02-02T14:18:00.000-08:00You're information is terrific but lacks the criti...You're information is terrific but lacks the critical element of the arguments above:<BR/><BR/>Translation: 18,000 or 18,000,000. your information doesn't state whether they were obtained in a timely manner, not do the meager requests of 1979 even remotely compare the the incredible numbers requested on a daily basis today. From reading the other statements, i think that was their position.<BR/><BR/>"Check your facts" is good advice.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7260692.post-1138916641635195212006-02-02T13:44:00.000-08:002006-02-02T13:44:00.000-08:00For my money, the most important gift you can enco...For my money, the most important gift you can encourage in a child is critical thinking. If more people stopped to consider the source of what they are told/broadcast/read etc. As a proto-curmudgeon of the left I never thought I'd borrow a phrase from the Gipper, but his concept of "trust but verify" vis the Soviets works well for creating a well mannered but well informed citizenry. <BR/><BR/>That, and I'd have them read Harry Frankfurt's <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0691122946/002-9239205-5174452?v=glance&n=283155" REL="nofollow">"On Bullshit"</A> as soon as they are able...<BR/><BR/>And for all the sillies getting their knickers in a twist about the horrible ALCU rendered process of getting a wiretap via FISA court;<BR/>FACT: the President, NSA, etc can apply for a FISA wiretap warrant up to <EM>three days after</EM> surveillance begins if they deem it vital to proceed without prior judicial oversight.<BR/>FACT: Since its establishment in 1979 the FISA court has rejected <A HREF="http://www.epic.org/privacy/wiretap/stats/fisa_stats.html" REL="nofollow">four</A> warrant applications and approved 18,742.<BR/><BR/>But like I advocate above, don't take my word for it; go out and research it. Think how much better life would be if we subjected our own beliefs to the same rigors of investigation we demand from others.Wisdom Weaselhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18216020315074987565noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7260692.post-1138913342760279662006-02-02T12:49:00.000-08:002006-02-02T12:49:00.000-08:00katrina? Me either. Or Cindy Sheehan, or any indi...katrina? Me either. Or Cindy Sheehan, or any individual people in general. Those discussions go nowhere slowly.JL4https://www.blogger.com/profile/04259814674520014095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7260692.post-1138882487749360502006-02-02T04:14:00.000-08:002006-02-02T04:14:00.000-08:00Naw--don't worry about it. It gets political on o...Naw--don't worry about it. It gets political on occasion, because <I>life</I> gets political, on occasion.<BR/><BR/>Just be grateful you missed my Hurricane Katrina rage and incoherence. (I don't want to argue about it now, either.)Machttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01846076773328384778noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7260692.post-1138882091817855562006-02-02T04:08:00.000-08:002006-02-02T04:08:00.000-08:00Yeah I see that...I'm afraid I led us down this pa...Yeah I see that...I'm afraid I led us down this path.<BR/><BR/>Sorry 'bout dat.JL4https://www.blogger.com/profile/04259814674520014095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7260692.post-1138868109790054902006-02-02T00:15:00.000-08:002006-02-02T00:15:00.000-08:00Jean Marie--Ah, yes! It's time to send my annual ...Jean Marie--Ah, yes! It's time to send my annual donation to the ACLU, too--thanks for the reminder. :)<BR/><BR/>I think that trading due process for (perceived) increased security is a very poor trade, indeed. If the system is broke, we fix the system--I don't get to just decide, "Well, that's not going to apply to me, then--because I've decided what I'm doing is more important than our nation's laws."<BR/><BR/>JL4--This blog isn't usually this political, btw. *grin*Machttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01846076773328384778noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7260692.post-1138847875405844632006-02-01T18:37:00.000-08:002006-02-01T18:37:00.000-08:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.JL4https://www.blogger.com/profile/04259814674520014095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7260692.post-1138842704476433542006-02-01T17:11:00.000-08:002006-02-01T17:11:00.000-08:00Here I go, Mac! On the wiretapping issue. I unders...Here I go, Mac! On the wiretapping issue. I understand where you're coming from. I do. In an ideal world, yes. Pre 9/11, yes. Nowadays, no. We don't enjoy the luxury of the time required to obtain a warrant for a wiretap.<BR/><BR/>The wiretaps are specific, not generic. If they can stop an attack then they've accomplished their job. I may and probably do come from this as a first responder's point of view. I'm not terribly fond of the idea of having been fitted for a chemical suit. To begin with, it most likely won't do any good. So, if picking up a phone call prevents me from having to get dressed up in one of those stupid things to go help/save you-then I say, great idea and I'm all for it!<BR/><BR/>I'd also like to see the ACLU and child predators isolated on a tiny island very far away from civilization. You could also include predators in general w/ them. How about a blog around that!!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7260692.post-1138841750188548172006-02-01T16:55:00.000-08:002006-02-01T16:55:00.000-08:00JL4--you argue passionately, and you state your pe...JL4--you argue passionately, and you state your personal beliefs eloquently.<BR/><BR/>Fair enough. *grin* I already <I>said</I> I'm not interested in telling anyone how to think.<BR/><BR/>Hell--I support wiretapping, too, but I want due process behind that act. I guess I just distrust the government on a deeper level than do you.<BR/><BR/>My apologies for inadvertantly offending you with the Clinton question.<BR/><BR/>December, I hear ya. I really don't want anyone telling kids it's perfectly okay to have sex at 15--in fact I'm deeply uncomfortable with the over-sexualized media images we see of children, especially little girls.<BR/><BR/>Hmm. I might have to go do some poking around. Perhaps there's a blog post in that thought.Machttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01846076773328384778noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7260692.post-1138835414075234002006-02-01T15:10:00.000-08:002006-02-01T15:10:00.000-08:00Jl4...darn it., I never seem to be able to finish ...Jl4...darn it., I never seem to be able to finish a thought.<BR/><BR/>Remember the 3 basic tenants we've always been taught since we were kids?...life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.<BR/><BR/>If the government wiretaps some jerk-weed and stops him from blowing up a mall that I and my kids were going to be in at the planned attack time...I'd say that the government did a pretty good job DEFENDING my liberties. Yes, in the process they took away the liberties of the bomber, but he didn't deserve any in mind - and you'll never convince me otherwise. People are trying to hurt us. Ya gotta do what ya gotta do sometimes, and as my mom always said: "Dems da Berries"<BR/><BR/>Just an adjunct point for emphasis ;-). Be cool.JL4https://www.blogger.com/profile/04259814674520014095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7260692.post-1138834491753701722006-02-01T14:54:00.000-08:002006-02-01T14:54:00.000-08:00Mac...no it doesn't bother me to be 100% honest wi...Mac...no it doesn't bother me to be 100% honest with yu. Private citizens who are being just that - citizens in good standing - have never been the target. Yes, there have been some celebrated examples of the FBI looking into John Lennon because Nixon was a paranoid bozo, and I know they watched over Malcom X 45 years ago - and we could debate the reasons that was a mistake for eons...but to speak to the first part...again, no. It does not bother me that the federal governament could find out about a child predator and tap his phone to keep him from harming a child...and that applies to any other situation where potential harm could occur. There is no time; there are no monetary resources; and there is no impetus for anyone in the surveillance infrastructure to spend time on anything but people that we SHOULD be keeping an eye on.<BR/><BR/>As for the President Clinton question, since you don't know me, I'll resist the urge to be as offended by that question as I've ever been about any question in my entire life. <BR/><BR/>Having said that, OF COURSE I would have - and still do - support the wiretapping of some a**hole that is going to take anyone's life, especially if it's a misguided soul who thinks killing a doctor or medical staff personnel in the ***name of life*** is some sort of justice. It is of course a gross mischaracterization of humanity by the perpetrator, and should be treated as any other murder case would be. Yes, wire tap him to stop it..yes, yes, yes.<BR/><BR/>Does that fairly much explain my position? You may not agree - nor are you obliged to - but that's my stance. Anything done to protect you, me, or anyone else who is being a solid citizen is AFFIRMING AND DEFENDING OUR CIVIL LIBERTIES, not taking away from them. Seriously. <BR/><BR/>**Capital letters for emphasis only...I'm not yelling or whatever it is some people say uppercase spelling is.***<BR/><BR/>That's my answer...honest and from the heartJL4https://www.blogger.com/profile/04259814674520014095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7260692.post-1138831419989165642006-02-01T14:03:00.000-08:002006-02-01T14:03:00.000-08:00JL4--I think that's a fair request for the purpose...JL4--I think that's a fair request for the purposes of this space, actually; and I didn't take it as mean-spirited.<BR/><BR/>The general expansion of power of the federal government over the private communication of citizens really doesn't concern you? Especially as that expansion happened without discussion, legislation, or any of the other legal machinery in place to provide for such situations?<BR/><BR/>Here's a question--if it was Clinton's White House, declaring that it could wiretap citizen's phones without warrants for the purpose of preventing abortion-clinic bombings, would you feel the same way?Machttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01846076773328384778noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7260692.post-1138804863188028982006-02-01T06:41:00.000-08:002006-02-01T06:41:00.000-08:00One more thing and I'll let this go. This is goin...One more thing and I'll let this go. This is going to sound mean spirted, but it's not. <BR/><BR/>I would appreciate it greatly if anyone who uses the term "our civil liberties" would kindly change that to "MY civil liberties".<BR/><BR/>I don't feel my CL's have been attacked, threatened, or destroyed in the slightest. When anyone says "our", that means they are taking it upon themselves to speak for me, and in this particular case that means they are being agonizingly presumptuous. Nuff said.<BR/><BR/>Thank you for your blog. I DO like it. Have a good day.JL4https://www.blogger.com/profile/04259814674520014095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7260692.post-1138803965519575192006-02-01T06:26:00.000-08:002006-02-01T06:26:00.000-08:00Mac...we could go on for hours, but I don't have h...Mac...we could go on for hours, but I don't have hours. You said,<BR/><BR/>Let's talk about domestic surveillance, since you brought it up. You offer a false "either-or" syllogism: Either we wiretap, willy-nilly, no due process; OR September 11 will happen again.<BR/><BR/>Ok. Firstly we don't evesdrop willy-nilly. Think about this for a second. How many different forms of electronic communications means do we have? The Internet and it's many types of ways to talk; telphones, faxes, etc. There are literally billions and billions of converstaions passed in this country every day. It's a logistical impossibility for us to monitor anything with serious intent if we do it willy-nilly. Therefore, I'm fairly certain there are specific groups and people targeted. No one is listening to me talk to my wife on my cell phone telling her how lousy or good a day I've had. If however I'm a major drug runner, weapons trafficker, child pornographer, or supsected terrorist, and I'm known to be such...they're probably keeping an eye on me.<BR/><BR/>Secondly, it's NOT an easy process to get a warrant, even if your the President. The Foreign Intelligence Survellance Act(FISA) has caused a backlog of nearly 2 and a half months PER REQUEST for a warrant. Now I do agree FISA is a necessary thing, don;t get me wrong.<BR/><BR/>I'm just saying it's not an "easy thing" any more, mostly because of the enormous numbers of requests.JL4https://www.blogger.com/profile/04259814674520014095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7260692.post-1138795941764022682006-02-01T04:12:00.000-08:002006-02-01T04:12:00.000-08:00JL4--good to hear it. I'll look forward to your re...JL4--good to hear it. I'll look forward to your return. My apologies for sounding so testy, I was rather tired, myself.Machttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01846076773328384778noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7260692.post-1138795025332717552006-02-01T03:57:00.000-08:002006-02-01T03:57:00.000-08:00Nahhhh, I was tired, henceforth hmmm. No brow-bea...Nahhhh, I was tired, henceforth hmmm. No brow-beating from me. I'll try and find some time later today and speak to your comments.JL4https://www.blogger.com/profile/04259814674520014095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7260692.post-1138774379551036192006-01-31T22:12:00.000-08:002006-01-31T22:12:00.000-08:00To communicate...To communicate...Ms Mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04919373115938586775noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7260692.post-1138770692143584262006-01-31T21:11:00.000-08:002006-01-31T21:11:00.000-08:00JL4--don't mistake me. I'm glad you're here. You...JL4--don't mistake me. I'm glad you're here. You're welcome to participate. <BR/><BR/>Don't think for a moment your ideas won't be challenged, though. I'm interested in real discussion, not in being browbeat on my own blog by platitudes and dogma that you can't actually defend.<BR/><BR/>Let's talk about domestic surveillance, since you brought it up. You offer a false "either-or" syllogism: Either we wiretap, willy-nilly, no due process; OR September 11 will happen again.<BR/><BR/>That's poor logic. There is, of course, a third option: wiretapping with warrants--easily obtained from a federal judge, with a phone call.<BR/><BR/>Don't try to bully or scare me into just agreeing with what is both illegal and is a basic attack on our civil liberties. Even the Republicans are far from agreed, on this issue.Machttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01846076773328384778noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7260692.post-1138764940404589582006-01-31T19:35:00.000-08:002006-01-31T19:35:00.000-08:00hmmmm. Ok.hmmmm. Ok.JL4https://www.blogger.com/profile/04259814674520014095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7260692.post-1138758517548212412006-01-31T17:48:00.000-08:002006-01-31T17:48:00.000-08:00jl4 said: When was the last time you witnessed a 1...jl4 said: <I>When was the last time you witnessed a 14 year old holding the door for someone? Tough one isn't it? How about the use of words like "sir","ma'am", "please" and "thank you"?? Do we hear this as much as we should?<BR/><BR/>I think not. "You have to" comes up a lot. Or “You can’t make me” How about "I have the right"? I'll bet you there aren't 20 teens out of every 100 that could tell you the difference between a 'right' and a 'privilege', and give you a good example of each. Why do I think this? Because we continue to muddy the waters. Information is power, and a lack of information empowers others.</I><BR/><BR/>I want to defend todays teens, for a few moments. Partly, because I know a number of intelligent, smart, wonderful--and yes, respectful--people, who happen to fall into that difficult age range between 13 and 20.<BR/><BR/>Part of what you perceive as a lack of respect is actually simply due to changing social customs and manners, I suspect. It's not that kids are especially disrespectful--it's that we teach them different sets of manners.<BR/><BR/>Frankly, though, I'd much rather teach my child look someone in the eye, and question a statement they clearly see to be fallacious, than teach them to open doors and say "yes, Ma'am."<BR/><BR/>I'd rather my hypothetical child learn courage and clear thinking, than some artificial set of manners that passes for respect.Machttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01846076773328384778noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7260692.post-1138736416386060202006-01-31T11:40:00.000-08:002006-01-31T11:40:00.000-08:00Unfortunately, fear leads to anger which further a...Unfortunately, fear leads to anger which further alienates discussion and continues to keep the "camps" at odds. Walking the line is a delicate balance. It calls for acceptance and compromise. It cannot occur w/o discussion. Listening is an acquired skill as is an open mind. Familiarity is safe; change brings about fear.<BR/><BR/>Common ground must be reached, or that negatively affects future generations.<BR/><BR/>I'm not sure if I'm right or left anymore. And I'm not sure how important it is. I do know I'm re-evaluating some of my beliefs and why I've held them. I do not want to ever see abortion used as birth control. Of that I'm certain.<BR/><BR/>I do not want the government telling me what I'm to believe in spiritually. If I feel like singing God Bless America in the town square, I want the freedom to do that. I want my town, or any town to have the Nativity scene at Christmas.<BR/><BR/>I want kids to say the pledge of allegiance w/ God in it at school. I want teachers (who are qualified) to teach on various subjects in our colleges. How else are young adults supposed to decide what does/doesn't fit them?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7260692.post-1138727322184724532006-01-31T09:08:00.000-08:002006-01-31T09:08:00.000-08:00What is the most important thing to teach our chil...What is the most important thing to teach our children?<BR/><BR/>Important question to say the least. What to teach them? Hmmmm. <BR/><BR/>Okay...I'll give this one a smack. The most important thing to teach our children is the value of respect and the far reaching consequences of not having the ability to not only show respect it...genuine respect that comes from the heart.<BR/><BR/>When was the last time you witnessed a 14 year old holding the door for someone? Tough one isn't it? How about the use of words like "sir","ma'am", "please" and "thank you"?? Do we hear this as much as we should? <BR/><BR/>I think not. "You have to" comes up a lot. Or “You can’t make me” How about "I have the right"? I'll bet you there aren't 20 teens out of every 100 that could tell you the difference between a 'right' and a 'privilege', and give you a good example of each. Why do I think this? Because we continue to muddy the waters. Information is power, and a lack of information empowers others.<BR/><BR/>My take on this is because of the "freedom of education" as you call it. Rebelliousness - in whatever form it takes or eventually morphs into - is still rebelliousness. It was tried in the 60's, and look what it produced - the greediest, most self-centered generation we've ever had. Funny how things tend to come full circle isn't it? Those who criticized "The Man" now ARE the man. Of course you'll never convince those guilty what I just said is true. They weren't interested in constructive dialog in 1968 any more than they are now. Back then peace signs and a fat joint interested them. Today, money interests them; the "new" way of being subversive (a member of the media, Hollywood, legalese, a professorship at a university to name a few ways) interests them; and criticism without substantive solution interests them.<BR/><BR/>Allow me to further explain...<BR/><BR/>The current topic of the day is electronic surveillance. I'm sure it angers you that we could even think as a nation to do such an abomination, let alone actually carry it out. The conundrum is what the end result will be if we don't... September 2001, the sequel. I hear the complaining, but I'm not hearing the alternative solution...at least not something that would actually work.<BR/><BR/>Reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in school is allegedly a violation of the civil rights and liberties of others who would prefer not to. The thought of just sitting there and shutting up apparently never occurred to them, nor evidently is the possibility that THEY might be treading on the rights of those who actually LIKE to say the Pledge. I find it offensive that some are always in search of the solution to "problems" that never were problems before. Like - what should we teach our children?<BR/>How 'bout math and science? Reading and 'rithmetic? A healthy respect for the possibility that there just might be a higher being or force commanding this whole thing? Oh wait I forgot...first things first. We have to teach them that standing for the National Anthem at the Super Bowl is offensive to the guy in row 13, seat A.<BR/> <BR/>What should we teach our children? <BR/><BR/>My final take would be this...what should we NOT teach our children?JL4https://www.blogger.com/profile/04259814674520014095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7260692.post-1138695244706210392006-01-31T00:14:00.000-08:002006-01-31T00:14:00.000-08:00Oh--and a belated but warm welcome to you new face...Oh--and a belated but warm welcome to you new faces. I'm really glad you're here, and I'm <I>really</I> glad you're participating in the discussion.<BR/><BR/>Thank you.Machttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01846076773328384778noreply@blogger.com