Spying On Defectors - Not enough cops, join the fight agains

[marxistdisciple]

https://www.citizencorps.gov/tips.html

Found this interesting, got the website from IndyMedia.

[Michael De Panama]

Happy New Year!!

It's 1984.

[Capitalist Imperial]

What is wrong with asking American citizens to take an active role in defending against terrorism?

[vox]

"What is wrong with asking American citizens to take an active role in defending against terrorism?"

The FBI couldn't even handle the information it had before September 11 about suspected terrorists taking flying lessons, but somehow they're supposed to be able to handle thousands of dubious "tips?" Ha! Even from a practical standpoint it's silly.

However, more importantly, doesn't it strike you as just a little, well, East Germany? Did you approve of the Stasi, CI? I know you right-wingers are authoritarians who have no regard for the law (as you stated in another thread), but are you willing to go this far?

Indeed, one wonders what the training will be for this, for I've heard of none. And will there be an incentive program, making peopel want to participate? If I'm pissed at my neighbor, can I turn him in? If the cable guy sees a copy of Capital on my bookshelf, will I be turned in?

This isn't about security at all. Rather, it's about breeding paranoia and controlling dissent. Rather than a nation united, this will be a nation divided.

Indeed, there's already been a book written about this terrible phenomenon called Snitch Culture by Jim Redden. I suggest you take a look at it.

Of course, I'm sure you'll be too busy calling that toll-free number to turn in your mother.

vox

[marxistdisciple]

Exactly. And it isn't far off 1984 either.....

[Michael De Panama]

Quote: from Capitalist Imperial on 12:42 am on July 18, 2002
What is wrong with asking American citizens to take an active role in defending against terrorism?

Ammendment IV: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

[STALINSOLDIERS]

american is blind it cannot stop terrorism.......me if i was a terrorist i would blew something up or my self without no obe dying..

[Nateddi]

Exactly SS!

They are going bombing civilians in Afghanistan and than they say another attack is inevitable. LOL

[Hattori Hanzo]

hmmm, as long as rights arent violated

[Felicia]

hey stalinsoldiers, your avatar looks a lot like Vlad Tepes, who is it?

I don't like the idea of my neighbours spying on me, I prefer to do the spying ;) . It does seem a lot like 1984, watch out for your kids everyone, they may really be out to get you!

[Capitalist Imperial]

Quote: from vox on 1:09 am on July 18, 2002


Of course, I'm sure you'll be too busy calling that toll-free number to turn in your mother.

vox


Why, what do you know?

Damn! I knew it, she is a terrorist sympathizer!!

I think you are using a little bit of "comparative licence" in likening the Stasi to what really amounts to a mere "neighborhood watch" on a national scale.

[marxistdisciple]

You better be careful CI, your neighbours mike mistake you for a terrorist. What will they find when they go routing through your trash?

Do you think people might get worried if muslims start moving on to their streets now? Why not cause the nation even more paranoia....

What is ithe point? Do they really believe professional terrorists are stupid enough to put signs in their front gardens; "warning terrorist!"
Maybe terrorists will be revealed by the brand of washing powder they use, or the fact they drink copious amounts of kool aid?

It's just another attempt to add the already police-state like ridiculousness of the US. Soon the police won't have to do the work, your neighbour will turn you in for holding "far too left wing" values. Unfortunately the real terrorists will escape in wave of mass paranoid hysteria.

Terororists are everywhere! Be vigilent!

[Capitalist Imperial]

Quote: from marxistdisciple on 12:03 am on July 19, 2002
You better be careful CI, your neighbours mike mistake you for a terrorist. What will they find when they go routing through your trash?

Do you think people might get worried if muslims start moving on to their streets now? Why not cause the nation even more paranoia....

What is ithe point? Do they really believe professional terrorists are stupid enough to put signs in their front gardens; "warning terrorist!"
Maybe terrorists will be revealed by the brand of washing powder they use, or the fact they drink copious amounts of kool aid?

It's just another attempt to add the already police-state like ridiculousness of the US. Soon the police won't have to do the work, your neighbour will turn you in for holding "far too left wing" values. Unfortunately the real terrorists will escape in wave of mass paranoid hysteria.

Terororists are everywhere! Be vigilent!


What you are suggesting amounts to a slippery-slope fallacy of grand proportions

[Michael De Panama]

Why don't they just get it over with and start planting telescreens in every corner of the nation?

[vox]

Michael,

They don't need to. As Gabriel Ash points out in The Rats Are Coming (http://www.yellowtimes.org/article.php?sid=495&mode=thread&order=0):

"Snitching creates a culture in which every encounter between two citizens is mediated by authority: Big Brother is always in the room with you. And even if it isn't, you have to behave as if it is. The ubiquity of authority is the essence of totalitarianism."

CI,

The Stasi used a lot of citizen informants, many people spying on spouses and such, hence the comparison. In fact, after the files were opened up to the public, many people couldn't believe that their spouses had been informing on them for years and years.

vox

[death b4 dishonour]

"What is wrong with asking American citizens to take an active role in defending against terrorism?"

Whats wrong with it, is that it will become a witch hunt, with every arab/muslim being accused

[Guest]

Whats wrong with it, is that it will become a witch hunt, with every arab/muslim being accused

this has already happened on the Nazist Fox News show one of the anchormen said we should profile people going to and from mosques. and pat robertson's son on that delightful piece of shit the 700 KKKlub siad that all muslims are terrorists and that the christian fundamentalists have no bad polices.

[truthaddict11]

i said that last post i forgot to sign in

[Xvall]

Quote: from Michael De Panama on 1:20 am on July 19, 2002
Why don't they just get it over with and start planting telescreens in every corner of the nation?


I'm sorry Micheal. All the funding for building telescreens in everyones homes was instead used for an anti-pretzel campaign after the recent assasination attempt on bush.

[Felicia]

Quote: from Michael De Panama on 9:20 pm on July 18, 2002
Why don't they just get it over with and start planting telescreens in every corner of the nation?

You have a television don't you? ;)

[marxistdisciple]

LOL drake I wouldn't be surprised

Everyone likes to know what people do now...my supermarket offers me a discount card. All you have to do is scan it at the checkout and you get dividend. In return they get to know your name and address, your age, your income braket, and compare that with kind of shopping you buy.

Telescreens may sound silly, but the biggest crime prevention measure in Britian at the moment is CCTv. has anyone noticed the abundance of cameras? They can watch most all of the major areas of my city now, and track people they think look suspiscious - i saw it on a documentary. They were criticised as figures show that good street lighting actually reduces crime more.

Every time you sign up for a new service, you have to tick a box so that your details DON'T get sent to other companies. they then put these details in databases, and can conveiently market new products to you. It's all getting a little bit too efficicient I'm afraid. It seems to make perfect sense in a business way, but it's clearly bad for consumers. Anyone remember the mottos of the party? WAR IS PEACE (well we already know the war on terrorism will go on "indefinately")

[Stormin Norman]

Here is the post I was trying to add when I realized I had been banned from certain forums. In Politics someone had asked if it was common practice to photograph demostrators. Take it in context.

This happens in the U.S. too. It is a poor excuse for law enforcement. Treat everyone as if they are guilty; put everyone under the microscope in order secure peace. If you think that the government does not develop profiles on people you should think twice. Often times, in America, this is done through third parties that are paid to develop 'marketing' profiles on people. Examples include, index finger printing of checks, the use of grocery cards to track purchasing habits, credit reporting agencies, cookies on web browsers, and cameras in virtually every public area. Not to mention the use of drug testing or blood indexes at birth. The ability to link these profiles with deoxyribonucleic acid is the most ominous threat to the world's citizens. This is happening the world over. These sorts of systems are being employed and represent a desensitizing of the public.
Generations from now the idea of freedom will be gone. Replacing it will be the idea that sexual liberation and the ability to take drugs account for freedom. This is why some people think that Europe enjoys more freedoms. They allow their people to engage in such activities to convince them that they are free and distract them from the enormous tax burden and repressive laws they live under. "Hey look at how free we are. We have softcore porn on the public airwaves. We get free cable TV. They let us smoke pot."
It is very easy to pacify the masses. How many of you would give up a right or two for free health care? What about housing provided by the government? How much is it worth to you to have the government provide all of life's basic necessities? Maybe they could even provide you with a mate that satisfies all of your desires. No one will ever get sick and die. You won't have to worry about a job either. One will be provided for you. Point is with the 'benefits package' provided by government come certain concessions. Do you really want to count on the government to supply you with such things? Nothing in life is free.
There has never been a more ignorant statement than, "I don't mind if the government takes my picture or reads my e-mail. I have nothing to hide. As long as they use it to catch the bad guys. I have nothing to hide." It will only be a matter of time before you do. How long before they start eliminating people who write statements like me or visit leftist websites? Will such people feel this way when the things that interest and motivate them come under scrutiny?
I know that I am using the old slippery slope argument. Never has it been truer. History of such abuses backs up the assertion. Remember the secret police and the Gestapo. Imagine what would happen if you raised this to the nth power. That is the world made possible by people willing to accept such surveillance in our technological age.

[marxistdisciple]

Yeah that's exactly what I was saying. It's bad, it's totalitarian.

The same way as saying we should attack countries before they attack us. what did they call it...premptive strikes? If it's premptive then it is the same as charging someone for a crime before they commit it, monitoring people before they have done anything wrong, it may seem a terribly easy way to catch people, but that's what they did in 1984 too. Pretty soon insurance companies would possibly be able to use genetic information to assess health insurance. They want to do it, civil liberties organisations won't let them.

The thing is stormin, that is consistently the case, people are always holding back companies from doing things they want. Companies would gladly have us live in a totalatarian corporate controlled state if it suited their business interests. What stands between them is the government, and the civil liberties groups/liberals. They are constantly trying to protect the country from companies who want to push the limits a little too far.

The only problem is, when companies become so powerful that they have influence on the government itself. If you think it is bad that government regulates companies, you are gravely mistaken. That is entirely necessary. Without it we end up with more enrons and worldcoms, and much worse.

CI posted somewhere else that they occur because of regulation. Who is he kidding? Bush was in bed with enron for a long time before the scandals came along. The problem was lack of regulation! They weren't exactly being that scrupilous were they, to let them get away with such bad accounting figures? the trend seems to be to make sure indiduals are regulated, but corporations get freedoms. Doesn't make much sense to me. And individual dumping toxic wate into the sea would be prosecuted, but companies do it all the time. An individual bribing a senator would be trialed, but companies do it and get away with it. the indivualism you capitalists say is inherrant in the system is overruled by corporate collectivism - i.e. lots of money=lots of power.

As for your pre-conceptions about europe you obviously don't know what you are talking about. Have you actually been to europe? It's a continent you know. We have different laws in differnt countries, and different attitutes. Here in the UK we a constantly torn between european and american influence, and unfortunately keep following the Americans down the hole they are digging. The europeans at least let the economy and laws benefit people above companies.

Your argument on drugs is slightly bizarre too. According to figures in holland, hard drug use went down about 30% since decriminalising cannabis. Who cares if people smoke pot? Does it kill people? no. does it cause violent altercations like alcohol? no. So what exactly is the problem? There are bad things about every drug, and trust me, legally available ones have much worse effects than pot. Maybe in the future people won't need drugs because they won't need a way to escape from the disgusting world we live in. That's my hope.

I get so depressed by every day life though, I feel I need to have a drink once in awhile just to detach me from the stress and the stupid ratrace, day in and out.
Maybe we should wonder WHY people want to take drugs in the first place instead of just removing their escapism. It's like banning soap operas because people watch them to get away from real life. (Well perhaps less extreme than that :)

"How many of you would give up a right or two for free health care? What about housing provided by the government? How much is it worth to you to have the government provide all of life's basic necessities? "

We didn't give up rights to get free healthcare. It's just free. We pay for it with National Insurance, which is just that, a national scheme of insurace, proportional to income. That's a good thing. What would you prefer? A system where poor people get the help they deserve, so they can at least have some sembelance of life, or a system like in the US were charity begins at home and people who are walking around with less than a dollar can be arrested as a vagrant. I know which I'd choose. So having these kind of rights must damage the economy right? Wrong. Britain is a G8 country, doesn't seem to have affected our economy.

What exactly is your gripe with welfare? Would you rather a) You give people who are really poor a little money so they can actually live or B) Let them die on the street, they're scum.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Quote: from Michael De Panama on 6:32 pm on July 18, 2002

Quote: from Capitalist Imperial on 12:42 am on July 18, 2002
What is wrong with asking American citizens to take an active role in defending against terrorism?

Ammendment IV: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


I doubt that a general tip from a citizen will generate a search and seizure that would violate the 4th amendment

[Stormin Norman]

No, but it is eerily reminiscient of Salem. Did you know that they built their town so that all the houses faced each other, so they could keep a keen eye on one another?

[Capitalist Imperial]

I've seen several references to "big brother" and "1984" on this thread

I think yhat you people are merely contributing to and supporting a grand slippery-slope fallacy.

Bottom-line: If you do nothing wrong, you have nothing to worry about.

[Stormin Norman]

CI,

You have been detected visiting leftist websites. That makes you a subversive element. Punishable by death.

If we grant them the power, who will police the use or abuse of such systems. Does it not create the very apparatus needed to commit politicide? Besides the Tips program was killed by Congress the other day. Excellent example of the system of checks and balances at work. You see. This is how freedom can be saved. Give the framers a hand.

[marxistdisciple]

That's the usual line :)

In 1984 if you did nothing wrong you had nothing to worry about either.

However in the current climate, speaking out against the "war on terrorism" is deemed anti-american. The difference is the punishment is not as severe. I don't think america will ever get to a 1984 state. In fact I think it would more likely end up in a huxley like internal structure (a la Brave New World) with the external politics of 1984. (i.e. the constant war in order to sustain the economy) However, there are other traits that already bear similarity. For instance, spying on fellow citizans is a prominant feature, also writing history books in a way favourable to americans is another trait of the US. Creating a xenophobic atmosphere - accusing countries as a whole of being evil, thus creating an outward hatred - as opposed to an inward one toward government. All of these are concepts which are true in a fictional book, and share similarities. Tell me, what better way to keep yourself in power as a government, than to villify external nations? Starting wars with other nations allows the country as whole to conveniently miss problems going on internally, to direct their hatred externally. That is one of the major concepts of Orwell.

Some people believe it was written about the USSR, some believe it was written about Capitalism. I believe it has routes in both systems, but generally, it's totalistarian....it's what happens when the government takes too much control centrally, and away from the citezans. It's what happens when the need for human right is overshadowed by "national security." It's what happens when the vision of democracy is twisted into some malformed, strange idea that is nothing like it's true meaning.

That is what worries people CI, it may be the slippery slope theory, but when you start to see more and more of the fundamental elements of a totalitarian society it starts to worry you. Our children will be brought up in a society that blames other countries for it's own faults, and tries to stop people speaking out against the status quo. Just like in 1984 the children will learn how the modern world is. It will continue, in the same way as all systems do.

What we ought to be doing is starting more dialogue, and more cooperation, instead of the tide of war that has constantly engulfed the world. Just like I said earlier, in 1984, WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH. See any of those concepts in the modern world?

[vox]

"Bottom-line: If you do nothing wrong, you have nothing to worry about."

Two points:

1) I raised this issue earlier--in a world where anyone might be a "spy," all human interaction is mediated by the authority of the government. That's a pretty significant thing, don'tcha think?

2) This isn't really about whether anyone has done something wrong or not. Rather, this is about increasing the ability of the gov't to invade or lives. Though right-wingers often like to confuse the issue, the two are not the same thing at all.

To say this is like a Neighborhood Watch program is to mischaracterize it entirely, for a NW program worries about things like newspapers stacking up in someone's driveway or kids drinking in the street at two in the morning. This, of course, is not the kind of info that TIPS is after. Indeed, the "suspicious" activity hasn't been defined, has it? It's left up to the individual, the only guideline being that the program is about "terrorism."

Since the gov't agencies charged with protecting us couldn't handle the information they had before, one wonders how all this new info will be handled. Of course, the Department of Fatherland, oops, Homeland Security is supposed to have more armed agents than any other gov't department (how many people here knew that?) and also it's to operate in complete secrecy, so perhaps it will follow up on all of the TIPS.

But then, let's not forget that we're dealing with right-wingers, and they are for bigger government, as anyone who pays attention knows.

vox

[Capitalist Imperial]

Quote: from Capitalist Imperial on 5:28 pm on July 21, 2002
I've seen several references to "big brother" and "1984" on this thread

I think yhat you people are merely contributing to and supporting a grand slippery-slope fallacy.

Bottom-line: If you do nothing wrong, you have nothing to worry about.


Actually, upon further consideration, this quote was made in haste, and I would like to strike it. My arguement was dogmatic and lacked principle.


Though I think some of the "eventually" scenarios predicted here in this thread may be a litte extreme and sort of dooms-dayish from a privacy standpoint

[I Will Deny You]

Quote: from Capitalist Imperial on 7:24 pm on July 21, 2002
I think some of the "eventually" scenarios predicted here in this thread may be a litte extreme and sort of dooms-dayish from a privacy standpointEver heard of COINTELPRO?

I bet that a disproportionate amount of these tips will be about people who appear Middle Eastern. Now I'm not one of those idiots who will tell you that your grandmother is just as likely to be a hijacker as Mohammed Atta was, but even after Johnnie Walker and Jose Padilla the fear of Arabs is far too great. This is just an excuse from the government to let paranoia run wild. That man who smells like falafel and wears a turban really is worth worrying about!

I think I have a better solution. The only real threat from the US was Padilla. Sure, Walker is an American, but he was simply a footsoldier and it doesn't seem that he hurt any Americans at all. So why not put informants in the prisons? We've already got some, but they're concentrated on drugs. The government really should have more informants in the prisons. Where else could you find such a high concentration of newly-spiritual young males who are pissed off at the government, who, in addition, are pesky minorities? Certainly not in any area that's got a neighborhood watch.

At any rate, I'm sure that some of these tips the government receives will be convenient excuses to look after political activists.

Lindsay