There are real police states in this world. Two recent examples, the Taliban and Saddam’s Iraq, are now democracies thanks mostly to the President, and no thanks to liberals who tried everything in their power to stop him. No thanks to Amnesty International who insist that only mass email petitions will free people from torture, and actually doing something makes you worse than Saddam.

Fascism is a serious thing. For some idiot to glibly shoot his mouth off and call Bush a fascist devalues all the real suffering that goes on under REAL dictators.

> As the current administration is transforming the US into a police state…

You make me laugh, sir.”

You can disagree with the position and argue your case with facts, evidence and reasoning for why you think I’m wrong. That is a reasonable discourse. But, you support Bob’s personal attack on me. That is not reasonable discourse.

And by the way, I’m not some lone nut who has made up the idea that the US is turning in to the police state. Other reputable individuals also argue the case, including Former NSA intelligence agent Russell Tice.

As much as you might wish it were so, calling me a moron doesn’t make my arguments false. Perhaps you might wish to take a course in reason? It seems like a refresher course might be in order…

Funny you should make the comparison, but it turns out that there WAS a red under the bed. Defenders of Stalin in the ’50s poo-pooed the notion that the USSR was “evil” and had it out for us. Diehard sociialists to this day defend the traitorous Rosenbergs. The press back then covered up what they knew about the gulags and death camps in Russia. And it extended all the way into the ’90s when the USSR finally fell.

It sounds very similar to the left’s defense of the rights of islamofascists to wage war unmolested on the civilized world. Thank God neither Gore nor Kerry got into the White House, or they would be following your unreasonable absolutist advice. People who care more about the chances of having their embarrassing remarks recorded by faceless men in black than they do about the chance of a city being vaporized have no business deciding national defense policy.

>Why not bring the level of discourse up to the level of facts and rationality …

Oh, that’s rich coming from somebody who spouts:

> As the current administration is transforming the US into a police state…

You make me laugh, sir.

It is sad to see that you, too, have no facts or logical argument to back your position. When you have to fall to personal attacks, it only shows the weakness of your position.

My arguments stand unchallenged by you. There are some weakness in my arguments but also clear verifiable facts. You, on the other hand, can’t even distinguish one from the other.

Why not bring the level of discourse up to the level of facts and rationality rather than merely attacking someone who’s views challenge yours? It is up to all of us to bring up the level of political discourse from the bad-old-days of the Red Scare, I’m sorry you choose to stay behind and attack people rather than actual problems in government and policy.

Wow, bob, your clever evisceration of every argument I’ve made is utterly devastating. You have keenly found detailed flaws in all of my examples and cited evidence and argumentation for all of your positions that is so clearly convincing that I must bow in awe to your superior intellect.

While I have argued my views with respect for other people’s positions, I’m sorry to see that you can’t do the same. I can only conclude that your your personal insult is a substitute for the intellectual ability to form an actual argument.

By the way, I think Scote is a Karl Rove plant. He’s too good to be true.

AND

You know what’s most amazing about all this. The number of people who’ve suddenly converted into strict ideological libertarians now that the President is Republican. Wanna bet that that ideological purity evaporates as soon as the President is a Dem?

Wow, don’t think that could ever happen if we just keep this issue in front of the voters. Could anyone ever trust that liberals have what it takes to keep our country safe from terrorists after reading this?

My father was taken and held by agents of the US government for 4 years!!!! He was definitely a non-combatant!!!!!!! (okay, no more !!!!!!) He was held behind barbed wire the entire time in heavily guarded secret wilderness camps. At the end he was released without a hearing, without a conviction and without compensation. He never done nobody no wrong.

Oh wait a minute. It was 1942. He was a ‘non-combatant’ merchant sailor on a German ‘privately owned’ submarine supply boat just off the Spanish coast, carrying only sauerkraut and bier, none of those nasty torpedos, shells nor nuthin’. Or so he says, laughing his head off. Flying a Spanish flag too, as I recall. He was then 19, a devoted Nazi, Hitler youth, whole ball of wax. What kind of loon would have wanted him free? Or had any doubts about locking him up? Or hesitated 1 microsecond in eavesdropping on every word he exchanged with an American citizen?

Even so the poor misunderstood boy now realizes his civil rights were violated and he needs lawyers, tons of them. Bring on the plaintiffs’ bar. Sue everyone.

My own perhaps paranoid theory is that most of these loony leftoid scares are watched carefullyby the Democrat leftist bar ‘trying them on for size’. If they ever find one that fits and resonates with Joe Average, they won’t want criminal sanctions against wrongdoers, they will want their usual blackmail blood money.

“The Republican party used to be the party of individual rights, smaller government, and fiscal responsibility.”

Most of us still are, despite what you may read in certain media outlets. Why, that’s quite a wide brush you’re painting with sir. Please try to stick with the argument in hand, which was summed up beautifully with Point 1 (and unfortunately, Point 4) of AFP’s post above.

Scote wrote:

“However, NSA technology for intercepts is **mass** spying, automatically listening for key words in huge masses of traffic, so the NSA may be spying on **anyone** who mentions those phrases in an international call, not just specific people.”

Has nothing to do with cookies.

Scote wrote:

“No, this is truly an issue of how government entities are ignoring Federal law under the Bush administration. The Federal privacy laws (such as they are) are, in this case, designed to prevent the assimilation of data by the Fed. The NSA specifically violated a Federal Law.”

and then

“The original guidelines were issued by the OMB in 2000.”

and in the same post

“It is a sad day when the misdeeds of the current Administration are so outrageous that merely reporting the demonstrable facts passes for hyperbole.”

Okay, so wait, when I checked this thread a few days ago the story was about COOKIES. At least, I thought it was. But now I notice that hey, Scote was on the whole ‘wiretapping’ story all the way back at the top.

And hyperbole? Dude, some IT admin missed a setting when configuring a server to give to the government and some other IT guy admin missed checking it when it came in. The technical equivalent of forgetting to shut the bathroom light off after getting ready for work in the morning. Scote opens up the field by announcing that this is breaking of a Federal Law when he himself admits later it was the equivalent of missing a memo.

And it was fixed. And no one’s been tortured or had their phone tapped as a result.

Scote also wrote:

I love a healthy discussion. I’m glad to see the level of discourse is fairly moderate, yet I am somewhat surprised that my position has been so consistently knocked down. One might say that it is because I’m wrong (as many will no doubt second the motion), or it could be that there truly is an amazing indifference to the violations that have been going on under the Bush Administration.

I love it!! Scote, you’re a master. We’re almost all here to say, “This is not news.” That’s the part that makes you wrong, buddy, not whether or not there are violations going on under the Bush Administration. Every once in a while, THAT’S NOT THE POINT. The point is, A COOKIE SETTING THAT WAS FIXED IS NOT NEWS.

Now, this was fun and all, but I’m going to jump over to the “GIF counters” thread and find out if any tinfoil hats there want to link it to Bush eating babies for breakfast in three posts or less.

There are those who are optimistic and think that government is looking out for their safety. These people tend to overlook, justify or minimize secret policing.

Then there are those who are pessimistic and think that government can’t be trusted beyond a fairly narrow limit on secret surveillance. In my view the pessimists seem to be right more often then not, judging from history.

I’ve written a short essay on this, using only historical examples. Some people may not think they apply to the current era, but learning from history is about all we have to go on.

Surveillance vs Liberty

This, Scote, is itself a meme. And a awfully tired one, too.

Cosmo, do I really need to spend the next 5 minutes googling up 25 quotes from Bush administration member and Fox media people, calling anti-Bush and anti-War people traitors? And now, people who don’t like their contitutional rights violated, they’re anti-national security?

Meme? No, more like the standard line of attack.

The funny thing is, according to people in your world, 60%+ of the population are traitors. Get a clue.

You are now, and have been for a while, on EVERY poll item, a member of the vast minority.

Iraq? Social Security “reform?” Torture? Domestic spying? Losers, all of them. The nation has woken up. Unfortunately, a year too late.

1. The NSA web guys need to be more sensitive when they upgrade their CMS packages.

2. It’s actually a ton more scary the degree to which private companies can track you online; so if you’re concerned, be proactive and block that stuff as best you can.

3. Countries other than the US (I just got pinged by foreign government addresses while writing this post) don’t follow the same protocols or have the same restrictions as they do here, so see #2 above.

4. Weblogs remembering your name or collecting usage stats are one step away from TOTALITARIAN POLICE STATES!! SITE METER IS TEH HITLERZ!!!

Scote writes: “It is extremely sad that the Administration has been so successful in propagating the meme that questioning the Administration is treason, aids the enemy, means you don’t support the troops.”

This, Scote, is itself a meme. And a awfully tired one, too.

Scote write: “I never claimed the NSA cookies violation was significant on its own but only in a larger context.”

So after all the screetching about dire threats to the Republic, all you can come up with is ‘what-it-all-means-in-the-larger-context’ dissembling? Fake but accurate, eh? Points to a larger truth, does it? Fortunately, rules of evidence are a bit more demanding.

Scote writes: “. . . accidental or not, it calls attention to a wide swath of civil liberties violations by the current Administration . . .”

Allegations do not constitute a violation of law. Back to Gaius’ question. Cite the law. Then bring the charges. Then prove them.

Scote writes: “they can detain people secretly and forever without trial and without court review–even US citizens”

This been the case in other wars we’ve fought. If you’d like to change the rules, fine.

Scote writes: “It would seem that there is no amount of evidence that you would deem sufficient to cause you to believe the Administration has acted unlawfully.”

Except for evidence present before a legitimate court or congressional hearing. Again, Scote, you’re bringing the charges. The burden of proof is on you. That’s the way it works here in the new American police state.

“Well, that is a legitimate question. Though I note you don’t bother to try and disprove any of my contentions.”

I did not have to disprove any of your contentions. I asked you to cite a reference. Very simple, actually.

You did so. Thank you.

You also negated your own contentions in the process. From your own post:

“agencies are prohibited from using persistent cookies or any other means (e.g., web beacons) to track visitors’ activity on the Internet except as provided in subsection (b) below”

The setting of the cookie does not provide proof that the relevant section of your own citation was violated. Where is the proof that the cookie was used to track activity? THe mere setting of the cookie does not prove tracking, please see the above, more technical comments about that subject.

And frankly, stating – repeatedly – that a statute was violated then later acknowledging that no statute violation occurred negates your entire string of logic. Knowingly using a mis-statement of fact as the springboard of a discussion completely negates all that follows it. (Spare me any “BUSH LIED statements, please.)

As for this particular statement: “Speaking of “repeating memes,” that seems to be what you are doing. It is extremely sad that the Administration has been so successful in propagating the meme that questioning the Administration is treason, aids the enemy, means you don’t support the troops. “, please show me exactly where I stated ANY of your complaints.

I just can’t find anything I typed that says that you committed treason, aided the enemy or that you didn’t support the troops. So stop projecting onto me.

You ARE repeating things I have read elsewhere today, virtually word-for-word. That would be a meme. So would the “never asked the American People to support….” be a meme. Your later qualification “general public” does not negate your earlier blanket statement.

Your ready use of hysterical, unfounded blanket charges and cries of “Police State” are ridiculous. As others have said, if this was a Police State you WOULD already be silenced. Instead you get to post whatever you want anywhere you feel like it. (on a site that -gasp – sets COOKIES on your browser. How do you think it remembers your login ID?)

Incidently, it is the belief of my son and a LOT of his fellow soldiers that the general public has no reason – or right – to see flag-draped coffins. It is disrespectful to take pictures of what is a solemn, VERY private agony for the families. This particular meme is ghoulish and beneath the dignity of anyone who repeats it. (Yeah, that last sentence was a jab, Scote).

Disclaimer – I am not a particular fan of GWB, and I never did get that VRWC card I sent for. Dang, I guess I wouldn’t belong to any club that would have me as a member anyway.

Come on, Scote. Has anyone here accused you of this, during this discussion? If not, why bring it up?”

The rest of the quote was “the Administration has been so successful in propagating the meme that questioning the Administration is treason, aids the enemy, means you don’t support the troops.” The position was slightly more inclusive than your synopsis.

As to accusations of treason in this thread, no. But I have had people do so in previous threads on this site. But, there has been the assumption that my criticism of the Administration was anti-troop.

For instance, Just a Grunt wrote, “You didn’t give a rats ass about us then, excuse us for finding your motivation a bit suspect now.”

And Giaus Arbo assumes that I’m against the troops, writing “On Tuesday, my son reports to deploy for his second tour in Iraq.

So, I get to sweat out another year waiting for him to get home safely. I guess that’s not a sacrifice to you. Oh, and his entire family, new fiance and all her folks must not count either.”

Granted, the level of discourse has been fairly reasonable but I do think it is a fair contention that many people (especially the Administration) try paint Bush Critics as anti troop and that such attacks are generally false and often malicious.