BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.

07 Dec 02 - 12:37 PM (#843073)
Subject: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Amos

From the alt.2600 website, a story that once could only have been told in Moscow or Berlin:

---

PHOTOGRAPHER ARRESTED FOR TAKING PICTURES OF VICE PRESIDENT'S HOTEL
Posted 5 Dec 2002 06:03:48 UTC

"An amateur photographer named Mike Maginnis was arrested on Tuesday in his home city of Denver - for simply taking pictures of buildings in an area where Vice President Cheney was residing. Maginnis told his story on Wednesday's edition of Off The Hook.

---

This lengthy copy-paste non-music story can be read here (click)
-Joe Offer-

---

Aren't we glad we passed the Patriot act to keep ourselves safe?

A

---

07 Dec 02 - 12:45 PM (#843078)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Áine

The Brave New World You Ordered Is Here -- Mmmmmm, that sure would make a damn fine song title, don't ya know?!!?

Any takers?????

And as for the 'Patriot' Act, well:

Cuir síoda ar ghabhar agus is gabhar is gcónaí é

Put silk on a goat and it is still a goat.

-- Áine

---

07 Dec 02 - 01:10 PM (#843089)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: GUEST,Ard Mhacha

It happened to me in the early 1970s in the dear old sick partitioned counties of Ireland.
I was confronted by a Brit Army foot patrol, who demanded to know what I was doing with a camera, no joking this was the question I was asked, after a heated argument with the Serg in charge, I was taken to the Army Barracks for questioning.
I needn`t go into detail but I was "lifted" around 3pm and wasn`t released until 11.30pm.
Trying to convince the goons that I was entitled to photograph the scenery in our local Park was nigh impossible, this was a regular occurence in our little world if you had the misfortune to come from a Nationalist area.
And this item from Amos brings it all back, but in the land of the free?.The Chimps goons have really got the jitters. Ard Mhacha.

---

07 Dec 02 - 02:13 PM (#843133)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Ebbie

I don't know anything further about Maginnis than what is given in the above account but it does seem just a little too pat. "raghead collaborator" and "dirty pinko faggot" indeed. The story sounds somewhat enhanced. Pinko? Different generation.

OTOH, if it's true, we're in for scary times...

---

07 Dec 02 - 04:06 PM (#843180)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Amos

I actually got called a pinko faggot bastard, although none of the terms apply, by a North Philly cop one night, just before he backhanded me across the mouth. It was music-related, but they calledit "disorderly house", and I never did figure out what they meant by that. So maybe its a tradition in certain professions!

A

---

07 Dec 02 - 06:20 PM (#843227)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Jeep man

Might be a good time to re-read 1984 by George Orwell. Jim

---

07 Dec 02 - 06:26 PM (#843228)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Bobert

Yo Pinko Faggot Bastard, alias Amos (jus funnin'... Couldn't help myself... ):

Ahh, forgot what I wanted to say? Hmmmmmm? Oh yeah, has anyone noticed that less and less attention is being paid to Al Queda and more and more on other folks, like Saddam and like American citizens. It scares me when I hear of battles in Afganistan betwen warloards and it scares me to hear that the Taliban is making inroads in mnay areas of Afganistan.

Meanwhile, Junior' is focused on Saddam like a dog on a bone and Johnny Ashcroft on any US citizen who doesn't like his boss. Big deal, Johnny, get over it. Bill Clinton didn't go out and threaten to have Ken Starr or Rush Limbaugh arrested.

If things continue going this way, then I'll be thre first to admit that Osama may as well declare victory because he has gotten America to declare war on itself.

Bobert

---

07 Dec 02 - 08:14 PM (#843265)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: dick greenhaus

If you can find a copy, try Sinclair Lewis' "It Can't Happen Here"

Happy Berzilius Windrip!

---

07 Dec 02 - 08:36 PM (#843273)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Bobert

Didn't he write "Everyman"?

Man, my mind is like last year's birds nest.

Bobert

---

07 Dec 02 - 08:54 PM (#843279)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: CraigS

When I was young, nearly thirty years ago now, there was great resentment in the city of Nottingham because Frank Sinatra's goons reserved one of the lifts (elevators) in the hotel he was staying in, and wouldn't let anyone use it!

As to 1984, there is a great book called "We" by Yevgeny Zamyatin, which is just as important, but sadly neglected. Considering that Zamyatin was writing contemporaneously with Orwell, within Stalin's Russia, and in his second language (English), "We" is slightly more than a masterpiece.

---

07 Dec 02 - 09:11 PM (#843287)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Haruo

I never knew Zamyatin wrote We in English.

Bobert, I don't know about "Everyman", Lewis's best-known novels were Babbitt, Arrowsmith, Main Street, and Elmer Gantry, as I recollect.

Much of what's going on in the name of freedom aka security is indeed the sort of stuff that we (USA kids) were taught was what made our system better than the Russians'. I remember when the conductor threatened to confiscate our Super-8 movie camera on the Trans-Siberian Railway (this was in 1968, the Brezhnev era). But he relented, and from then on we only filmed the other side of the view, the part we could see from our compartment, instead of filming from the corridor windows. Sheesh.

Haruo

---

07 Dec 02 - 09:25 PM (#843292)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: GUEST

"Babbitt", that's it... Babbitt was the "everyman" of his day, Haruo. He was like one of the "epsilons" (bad spelling) but like a long time ago. (Hmmmmm, Bobert, pull this one out of yer Wes Ginny butt...) Okay, I'm guessing like around 1907? And like Babbitt was like this hampster in Boss Hog's exercise wheel.

How close, Haruo? (Be kind, it is not at all easy to live with my mind... ask me how I know!)

(Sometimes I remind myself of Jim Ignotoski on Taxi when he sits down at a piano and plays a beautiful classical piece and looks up and says, "Danged , I must have played this at one time or another")

Nevermind, doesn't change the fact that in Johnny Ashcroft's America there won't *BE* any freedom for anyone who doesn't think and act just like Johnny Ashcroft.

Yeah, welcome to Huxleyburg...

Bobert

---

07 Dec 02 - 10:15 PM (#843312)
Subject: Babbitt (you can read it online)
From: Haruo

1922.

By the way, I started a thread about my Siberian experiences alluded to above: Haruo's Siberian Adventures with links to four webpages full of them on my personal website, La Lilandejo.

Haruo

---

07 Dec 02 - 10:30 PM (#843318)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: GUEST,Bobert

1922? Danged, that was gonna be my second guess! I mean fir "Babbitt"! 1922? Really? I thought it was earlier but then again.... thought is the *operative* word here...

Yeah, don't mind if I do wander into "Harou's Siberian Adventure". I mean afetr waking to about Zero Degrees and going to an auction and satnding around with a bunch of other folk wondering why they were satnding 'round in ZERO degrees, I can relate.

I think...

On to Haruo's story.....

Brrrrrr. Sound real cold.....

Bobet

---

08 Dec 02 - 12:02 AM (#843350)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: katlaughing

Down an otherwise ordinary street in Groton, CT, if one stops their car or walks along, they can read signs which have been attached to high wire fences for many, many years, threatening any and all who may have cameras and dare to point them at the facilities behind the fences, that of General Dynamics, maker of nuclear submarines. Used to give me the willies just to drive past. On down that same road, one can see and smell a fine white powder in the air, while looking at large, multi-storied buildings, some with windows, some without...another biggie just down from GD...Pfizer Pharmaceuticals.

Havne't heard anything about the original story of this thread. Has anyone found any other corroboration?

It doesn't have to happen unless we sit on our arses and let it happen. Keep speaking out in 3D life, too!!!

---

08 Dec 02 - 12:53 AM (#843361)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Amos

Givin' em hell is yore finest quality, MIss Kat, and here's hoping you keep on rarin' up!

A

---

08 Dec 02 - 04:04 PM (#843427)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Rustic Rebel

I hope you have old copies of these books, you might be under terrorist suspicion if you go and buy them new. Now since the government can track down what you are even reading by pulling records from bookstores.
So what is civil liberties? What civil liberties. Here is an interesting site that still speaks their voice(before they get shut down too)Conspiracy planet
Peace, Rustic

---

08 Dec 02 - 04:31 PM (#843442)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Amos

A friend just loaned me THE BUSH DYSLEXICON.    This one book should be required reading on both sides of the House, It is chilling and infuriating, and worries the hell out of me. Except when I just laugh to keep from crying.

I recommend it!


A

---

08 Dec 02 - 05:05 PM (#843463)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Don Firth

Amos, I just read a few excerpts on the Amazon website. Being something of a student of history, it raises all sorts of shudders.
When small men cast long shadows, the sun is going down.
--Venita Cravens

It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
--Voltaire

Don Firth

---

08 Dec 02 - 05:23 PM (#843477)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Amos

The reason the friend brought it over was that he couldn't bear finsihing thebook -- it was making him feel too homicidal! :>)

A

---

08 Dec 02 - 06:14 PM (#843514)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Gareth

Mmmm ! Any catters read Heinliens Short Novel "If this goes on !" ???

More to the point no photography signs are fairley common. One example is at RAF ( as it was then) Manston in Kent - The main Canterbury Ramsgate Road runs parreallel with the Runway. "No Stopping, No Photography allowed" - This was interesing as by that time the SAR flight had gone and the sole Ministry of Defence involvement was the RAF firefighting school, and two "Chipmunks" basic trainers for the Air Cadets.

Gareth

---

08 Dec 02 - 09:51 PM (#843611)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: katlaughing

Well done, Kevin!!

---

08 Dec 02 - 10:57 PM (#843642)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Áine

Maith thú, a Chaoimhín! And on the contrary, it is an excellent song. I am so pleased that you took up my challenge. Amos' way with a title was just an opportunity too good to pass up. May I please have your permission to include it in the Mudcat Songbook?

Cudos for your creativity, Áine

---

08 Dec 02 - 11:32 PM (#843669)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Amos

I want .2 (two-tenths) per cent of the proceeds, now, Kevin!! LOL!! Nicely turned indeed!! I salute you!


A

---

09 Dec 02 - 03:42 AM (#843723)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: BlueJay

Rustic- Thanks for the link to Conspiracy planet. Very chilling stuff. I am glad that there is at least one member of Congress, Dennis Kucinich, (D-Ohio), with the courage to speak out against the
Patriot Act abomination. I have never heard of him, but my fear is he was probably defeated by some Ashcroft clone.

I'm not an anti-terrorism expert. I thought we paid people well for that job. But there has to be a better way to go about it than cancelling most of our Bill of rights, (except the part about guns).
Sorry, I am not willing to surrender my rights in the name of fighting terrorism. Wasn't it Ben Franklin who said, "Those who give up rights for security deserve neither"?


I don't think that the thousands who died on 9-11 would want to be remembered as the catalyst for ordinary citizens losing their rights under the Constitution. Now that I've said this, I suppose I am immediately suspect, and I could be hauled away tomorrow, for an indefinite time without legal counsel. God Bless America. All others, up against the wall. BlueJay

---

09 Dec 02 - 04:41 AM (#843733)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Haruo

One thing you can say for Jim McDermott (my congressman) is, he came right out and said that Bush et al. are (his words) "terrorizing the American people", using Al-Qaeda's terror as a pretext. McDermott accuses Bush of plotting to be emperor (Seattle Times, Oct. 7, 2002).

And one thing you can say for us pocket borough denizens here in the Seventh District of Washington State is last month we sent him back to Congress with a 74% majority.

BTW, nice ballade, McGrath!

Haruo

---

09 Dec 02 - 07:02 AM (#843763)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Dave Bryant

At least you can sing in a bar without a PEL license. If the new law goes ahead over here in England, even one person sing without amplification will need the premises to have an Entertainment License. A publican has even been warned because his clientele sang "Happy Birthday" to a regular !

---

09 Dec 02 - 09:08 AM (#843807)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: GUEST,Taliesn

While it feels more like we're "Partying Like it's 1984" ,
"The Brave New World You Ordered's Here" really strikes a chord on the old intuitive tuning fork. Haven't found a suitable melody yet to shameless substitute words to yet , but this clever line is a-hauntin' me enough to've inspired me take to the next step.

First melody that came to mind that had the right pitch & "feeling" as a potential vessel , for my ear anyway , was Creedence Clearwater's anthem "Fortunate Son". Bob Seeger's version is every bit as stand-up. Sprinsteen's delivery would be no less.
It's just that kind of song.
we shall see.

---

09 Dec 02 - 12:03 PM (#843901)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Don Firth

Jim McDermott is one of the very few people who: 1) is in a position to know what's really going on; and 2) has the guts to tell it like it is. Proud to say that I was one of the 74%.

Don Firth

---

09 Dec 02 - 12:11 PM (#843903)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: DougR

Yep, no doubt about it. The sky is definitely falling.

DougR

---

09 Dec 02 - 02:19 PM (#843979)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: McGrath of Harlow

No, the sky's not falling. But there are people in high places who know that if you can make people believe it is, you can get them to pay you to build them and to lock them into them. And keep their attention off other matters.

That ballade of mine - I tried singing it just now, and the tune came out somewhere in between The Parting Glass and Boolavogue. Either would do if anyone feels like giving it a go. (And right enough, Amos - once you've got a good line like that to work to, the rest is carpentry.)

---

09 Dec 02 - 04:48 PM (#844066)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Amos

DougR;

Blind yourself to the trend, and you get to climb all the way uphill after it dumps you in a canyon. I think the notion that an American citizen can be harassed as described in the above tale is chilling. You seem to consider it a normal day in our war against the nounless condition. Having been through as mucvh of history as you have, do you not find it unsettling? OR do the principles involved have no weight int he face of (apparent) rampant necessity?

A

---

09 Dec 02 - 05:24 PM (#844083)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Don Firth

Well, Doug, when you get thumped on the head by a great big chunk of sky, don't complain that nobody ever warned you.

Don Firth

---

09 Dec 02 - 05:45 PM (#844095)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: McGrath of Harlow

But the idea is that when the sky falls the people will be locked up safely in their underground cages.

Bob Dylan always used to have a way of coming up with the fitting quote:

I will not go down under the ground
"Cause somebody tells me that death's comin' 'round
An' I will not carry myself down to die
When I go to my grave my head will be high,
Let me die in my footsteps
Before I go down under the ground.

This site has the rest of the words - and a RealAudio sound file of the man singing it too, except it didn't work for me. (The vandals took the handles, I imagine.)

---

09 Dec 02 - 09:00 PM (#844227)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: DougR

Amos: you present an article from a Internet magazine that has a policy of :"submit an article to 2600 that you think we would like to print, and if we print it, we will send you a free shirt, or if we print two of your articles we will give you a free email address," does not seem to me to be anything to get too excited about.

They present no proof from the police, secret service or any other agency mentioned in the "story" that this event really really took place.

I don't find it particularly unsual, because of the current terrorist climate, that extraordinary security measures are taken to protect the Vice President. What the photographer was doing was exactly what a terrorist might do if there was a plot to kill the Vice President, isn't it?

There must be thousands of these Internet publications with an axe of some kind to grind. Are you saying they are all credible? We should believe articles contained in them because they favor or promote our own cause, or POV? Or should we just accept them because they are on the Internet?

Has the Denver Post reported this story? Anyone know?

DougR

---

09 Dec 02 - 09:47 PM (#844250)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: McGrath of Harlow

So it didn't happen in the first place - but if it did, it was only reasonable behaviour on the part of the authorities?

The Denver Post has a story about the chaos caused in Denver by police precautions - no mention of this incident as such but "thousands were caught in the frustrating morning slowdown that included at least one minor accident." That sounds like it could well be tactful reporting of this one.

Anyway, whether it happened or not, it's OK for the police to do this kind of thing then?

I assume that the Moscow police in the old days would have had the same kind of explanation for confiscating cameras and rouging up the imprudent photographers, and so forth - after all there have always been plenty of people who didn't like the Soviet government that much. But I always had the impression that the democratic West didn't buy those kind of explanations. But clearly it's a completely different situation now.

---

09 Dec 02 - 09:53 PM (#844253)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Amos

A number of independent web sites have reported the incident, DougR, although they may just be cross-copying a fraudulent story.   I would welcome hearing this was the case, believe me! Having experienced police brutality on skimpier grounds, I doubt it is invented, though.

Brownshirts, Russians, strongarmers for Il Duce, and other obsessive paranoids have pulled this kind of crap for decades, but when it happens in our streets, it gets awfully reminiscent of the heavy handed Hessian antics of one George of Hanover. Remember him? I think he belonged to your party.


A

---

09 Dec 02 - 10:07 PM (#844259)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Bobert

And now we hear that Cheney's neigbors are compalining becasue of the round the clock jack hammering and banging that is going on at Cheney's house. The response to the complaints: "Turn your radio up, man! Don't ya' know what happened on 9/11?"

That seems to be the pat answer for any question that any ordinary working class citizen might ask of a government who says their mission is to preserve democracy and freedom.

Forget it.

Osama won, we just don't know it yet...

Bobert

---

09 Dec 02 - 10:18 PM (#844262)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: McGrath of Harlow

Just noticed that rather charming typo in that last post of mine, where I refer to the Soviet police as "rouging up" photographers. Maybe it's that kind of misunderstanding that lies behind expressions such as "dirty pinko faggot" reported by Maginnis...

---

09 Dec 02 - 10:35 PM (#844271)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Amos

LOL!! "Ooooo! You old PINKO!!!"

A

---

10 Dec 02 - 02:07 AM (#844340)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: DougR

McGrath: Give me a break. Where in my post did I say police brutality is acceptable. Geeze. You expect us to chastise the police and Secret Service about a "possible" occurance? Get real.

Amos: Present some evidence that the story is credible, and I'll join you in opposing the handling of the situation by the police and the Secret Service. I would need to know more about exactly what was being photographed, and how the citizen handled the situation before I will get to grossed out about his being questioned.

DougR

---

10 Dec 02 - 03:37 AM (#844354)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Amos

DOugR:

A rational answer but don't   go getting doubletongued on me, even if you are a Republican!!! It wasn't the questions that were offensive, improper and unprincipled. It was the use of force, the denial of ordinary rights, and the theft of private property I was objecting to.

A

---

10 Dec 02 - 04:52 AM (#844372)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Teribus

I think what is lacking in the presentation of this thread is a little perspective, it has, from what I have read of the links posted, only been viewed from one side so far. From Amos's initial post I found the opening two paragraphs interesting:

"An amateur photographer named Mike Maginnis was arrested on Tuesday in his home city of Denver - for simply taking pictures of buildings in an area where Vice President Cheney was residing. Maginnis told his story on Wednesday's edition of Off The Hook.

Maginnis's morning commute took him past the Adams Mark Hotel on Court Place. Maginnis, who says he always carried his camera wherever he went, snapped about 30 pictures of the hotel and the surrounding area - which included Denver police, Army rangers, and rooftop snipers. Maginnis, who works in information technology, frequently photographs such subjects as corporate buildings and communications equipment."

This, of course is perfectly normal behaviour, on your way to and from work every day you bump into people snapping away at various corporate buildings and communications equipment - after the wife, family and the dog, they are the most commonly photographed items on this planet - get real!!. The only thing wrong was that Mr Maginnis's timing in indulging in his interest was a bit off. No doubt given their briefing, regarding the Vice-Presidents visit, the Denver Police would find it suspicious and would want to check the circumstances out ("..30 pictures of the hotel and the surrounding area - which included Denver police, Army rangers, and rooftop snipers.")

No mention of the incident in the link supplied by McGoH. Which describes what must be a fairly common occurence in any town or city being visited by VIP's ( When Bill Clinton visited Oslo - he shut down the entire city centre for damn near a whole day).

"at least one minor accident" - how many minor accidents occur during rush hour in Denver normally - I can't believe that in the normal course of events that there are none.

Handling of the situation could well have been better, but one point clearly illustrated is that the people responsible for the Vice-President's safety were alert and were on the ball. The Denver newspaper article promises to keep it's readers posted of future developments - I don't think we will hear any more about it - sounds more like a slow news day and what has been reported is a "storm in a teacup" - "Brave New World" indeed - absolutely ludicrous.

---

10 Dec 02 - 05:25 AM (#844386)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Áine

Dear Teribus,

Although I agree with those who believe this incident is reflective of the way our civil rights are slowly being diminished by overzealous politicians, I was impressed with the style of your comments above. However, the effect of your argument was completely lost when I reached this phrase -- "storm in a teacup". The phrase you were looking for was tempest in a teacup (it's the alliteration that produces the effective auditory response, even when it is only read). I hate to be pedantic; however, it upsets me when an articulate person (no matter which side of an argument they represent) makes such a jarring error.

Even a hoary and hackneyed cliché deserves to be quoted correctly. Argue on, 'Catters.

Jumping off my soapbox now and running for cover, Áine

---

10 Dec 02 - 05:49 AM (#844390)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Teribus

Thanks for the correction Áìne, I have never heard the phrase in the form you supplied - where does it actually come from? Rest assured I will use the correct form in future.

---

10 Dec 02 - 06:24 AM (#844400)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Áine

Dear Teribus,

I know I may be causing this thread to drift; however, since I made such a 'tempest in a teacup' about this phrase, I thought I'd let you know what I'd found in a cursory search of the web concerning the source of the phrase itself. ;-)

I haven't found a source for a direct quote. I did find, however, this bit of information concerning a possible explanation for the use of 'storm' in the phrase, instead of 'tempest':

AmE (American English) and BrE (British English) sometimes have slightly different idioms, such as: BrE a home from home, leave well alone, a storm in a teacup, blow one's own trumpet, sweep under the carpet, AmE a home away from home, leave well enough alone, a tempest in a teacup/teapot, blow one's own horn, sweep under the rug. The use of prepositions is often different: for example, Americans live on a street while Britons live in a street; they cater to people where Britons cater for them; they do something on the weekend where Britons do it at the weekend; are of two minds about something while Britons are in two minds; have a new lease on life where Britons have a new lease of life. American students are in a course and British students on a course. Americans can leave Monday while Britons must leave on Monday. Source: Xrefer

This would suggest a mere difference of lexicon. Therefore, I humbly apologize for my insistence of the usage of 'tempest'. However, I still prefer that word in place of 'storm', because of the alliterative effect. Much more musical to the ears, don't you think?

There, I have now returned this thread to a semblance of musical relativity. ;-)

All the best, Áine

---

10 Dec 02 - 08:45 AM (#844456)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Bobert

Oh, geeze, Amos. Yir thread has just *gone left*, and I ain't talkin' politically, pal.

But, hey, I like a *grammatical food fight* as *good* as the next hillbilly.

I'm jus funnin', ya'll. No need to tear the barrelhouse down...

Still curious about what they heck is going on over at D.C.'s house though with the 24/7 jack-hammers and pounding?

Bobert

---

10 Dec 02 - 08:55 AM (#844464)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Peg

I have always heard it said "tempest in a teapot."

---

10 Dec 02 - 09:21 AM (#844477)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: TIA

I believe it has been traditionally stated as "A tempest in a teapot", but the original may have actually involved "storm" and "saucepan". I believe it originates with the author Athenaeus (c. 200 AD) who said (in reference to an actual storm) something like "I have seen a more formidable storm in a boiling saucepan." It's been shortened up and alliterated (and much improved) since. I would cite an actual reference for this information, but I'm afraid it has been classified in the interest of national security (don't you remember 9/11 ?!?!).

---

10 Dec 02 - 09:28 AM (#844488)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Amos

As for the description being ludicrous, Teribus, I will simply disagree with you. One incident does not make a brave new world, for certain. But the use of terrorism as an excuse for effectively terrorizing citizens with police tactics usually associated with the USSR is certainly symptomatic.

A

---

10 Dec 02 - 09:43 AM (#844506)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: TIA

In the Arab world, many (if not most) believe that Israel orchestrated 9/11 because they had the most to gain. If you follow that logic (not saying I do), GWB orchestrated it. He has played it for immense political advantage, used it to drive real economic problems out of the public eye, used it to restructure government jobs and contracting so that it can be his personal payback machine (not saying he's used it yet...just set it up), and used it as an umbrella to keep sunshine off the activities of his government. No, the sky isn't falling, but GWB has knocked away the constitutional supports, and is telling us to just trust him to hold it up.

---

10 Dec 02 - 09:54 AM (#844518)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Wolfgang

Update (in the same magazine)

Wolfgang

---

10 Dec 02 - 09:57 AM (#844523)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Teribus

Amos - In the days you are referring to in the USSR Mr. Maginnis would just have disappeared along with his camera. Same would have happenned in other places and at other times - or in Baghdad today.

The point I was trying to make was to view the incident with some sort of perspective - and that means looking at it from both sides.

One side of it that I can see, that you obviously can't, or won't, is that of a beat patrolman turning up on shift and being told that today you are part of a force responsible for the safety of the Vice-President of the United States of America. A weighty responsibility under any circumstances, but more than slightly heightened in the present climate. I do not know what the exact exchange was between the Policeman and Mr. Maginnis, or what sort of attitudes were struck by the parties involved - so far only one side has gone public on it. You may be perfectly content to judge the incident on such a balance, as it happens to suit your particular point of view - Thankfully it certainly would not lay well with others.


Thanks TIA:

"I believe it originates with the author Athenaeus (c. 200 AD) who said (in reference to an actual storm) something like "I have seen a more formidable storm in a boiling saucepan." It's been shortened up and alliterated (and much improved) since."

The one we used in the navy in reference to actual storms was, "Storm? Rough? I've seen more ripples on my tot!!"

---

10 Dec 02 - 10:02 AM (#844531)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Wolfgang

As a service for those who do not read long articles, here are a few snippets to use:

(1) For those inclined to disbelieve the story: no one has come forward as a witness to Maginnis's arrest across from the Adams Mark Hotel...Maginnis has intentionally not spoken to other news media. .... There are a number of news organizations attempting to contact Maginnis through us but he has requested that his privacy not be invaded any further.

For those inclined to believe the story: We were unable to find any holes or inconsistencies in the story as Maginnis told it when interviewed on our radio program....We contacted both the Denver Police and the Secret Service to find out if the story was true. They both took our information and neither of them ever got back to us. Their silence has been deafening and it's perhaps the most significant statement they could have made.

Wolfgang

---

10 Dec 02 - 10:41 AM (#844536)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: GUEST

Re: Dick's suggestion about "It Can't Happen Here" I started a thread about the book recently, which I just refreshed.

---

10 Dec 02 - 10:45 AM (#844540)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: GUEST

And for those with a serious interest in the issues surrounding civil rights in the post-9/11 era, here is a link to Village Voice columnist Nat Hentoff's article briefly examining the Orwellian nature of the Bush administration's new Total Information Awareness System, being run by convicted (but later overturned) Reagan Iran Contra criminal John Poindexter:

http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0250/hentoff.php

At the bottom of the page are links to other stories in this vein.

---

10 Dec 02 - 11:37 AM (#844589)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Haruo

Thanks for the update and snippets, Wolfgang.

As for Teribus and Áine, you're both a bit right, though Áine'd be righter had Teribus written teapot instead of teacup. Google reports 2,210 pages containing "tempest in a teacup" (Áine's idiom) versus 7,600 containing "storm in a teacup" (Teribus's). However, in one of those on-the-other-hands that make linguistics such a charmingly inexact science, especially when applied to one's mother tongue, it also indexes 9,150 instances of "tempest in a teapot", my own default phrase, versus a mere 84 cases of "storm in a teapot", at least half of them apparently from non-native writers of English.

Haruo

---

10 Dec 02 - 11:52 AM (#844605)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: McGrath of Harlow

"Storm in a teacup" is how I've normally heard it. Of cpourse since Athennaeus was writing in Latin I assume, the dustinction between storm and tempest doesn't really apply. (And they didn't have tecups or teapots in his day, henc retye saucepan.

Incidentally, witches were supposed to be able to brew up storms in their kitchens, using saucapmns or teacups or whatever. There's a reference to this in Macbeth, I seem to remember.

As for the business with the camera, I think people should avoid getting hung up on the actual incident itself - it's emblematic of a wider process, a creeping regimentation of how we live. (And if it had happened in Soviet Russia, outside Stalin's time anyway, the chances are that it would have been much the same as the incident described by Maginnis - the idea that people automatically got disappeared for trivial reasons doesn't actually reflect the way things were most of the time. Oppressive, but in a drab way.)

---

10 Dec 02 - 11:56 AM (#844611)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Wolfgang

Athenaeus did write in Greek actually, but the argument remains valid.
In (transl.) German: 'storm in a glass of water'

Wolfgang

---

10 Dec 02 - 12:03 PM (#844625)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: DougR

It's a bit difficult to know which to reply to: "Sky is falling" or "Tempest."

I guess I'll stick to the subject of the thread though.

Wolfgang: Thanks for posting the update. No new evidence that the story is true, is the most interesting point in the update to me. The balance is intended, I believe, to justify them printing a story they had not completely researched. They probably know that there is an audience for such alarming tales whether or not they are true anyway. This time they just got caught at it. Otherwise they would not have gone to such lengths to try to explain why they went with the story.

If the offended "Party" wanted to preserve his privacy, and not be interviewed by the mainstream press, why did he submit the story to 2600 in the first place?

DougR

DougR

---

10 Dec 02 - 12:13 PM (#844643)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Haruo

That's weird. When my last post but one hadn't appeared fifteen minutes after I sent it, I rewrote it from scratch and reposted, and now they're both there. I'd actually prefer that the second one be kept and the first removed, if Joe Clones don't mind...

Haruo

no problem, thanks for making it clear -joeclone-

---

10 Dec 02 - 12:44 PM (#844665)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: NicoleC

Doug has a good point -- someone who wants to go to the news usually does. Of course, Mr. Macginnis might have decided that he was afraid, or he may even have been threatened. Since neither the purported victim nor the law enforcement agencies are talking, there's no way to tell if it's true or not.

It does have value as an allegory, though. Teribus seems to feel that law enforcement is justified in doing anything they want if they are suspicious of, well, anything. I personally think that's why we have the 6th Amendment, "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." And the 7th, "...nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

But folks, property siezures aren't new. Under civil law, the police or the DEA can sieze your property and charge *IT* with a crime -- meaning they can impound it even if you aren't guilty of any crime. Under the law, the burden of proof is on the citizen to prove the property isn't guilty, including associated legal costs. Good luck -- the courts get 20% of the seized property, and constitutional protections don't apply to property. Originally designed to seize drug assets, the law is so poorly written it's ripe for rampant misuse. 80% of property seized is taken from people who are never formally charged with a crime. The property is not returned.

Think it doesn't happen? A quick search on Google will turn up hundreds of examples. But a better place to start might be the law library at Forfeiture Endangers American Rights

---

10 Dec 02 - 12:57 PM (#844676)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Amos

Nicole:

THe voice of reason and clarity, as usual.

Thanks.


A

---

10 Dec 02 - 01:07 PM (#844683)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Haruo

But officer, I didn't run over those pedestrians. My car did it. I demand you arrest my car.

Haruo

---

10 Dec 02 - 04:11 PM (#844826)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: DougR

Amos: will you stop trying to make points with Nicole? Geeze! *G*

Haru: that's funny.

DougR

---

10 Dec 02 - 04:21 PM (#844840)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Amos

DougR --

You got it bassackwards pal -- she's making points with me! And doing a first-rate job!

A

---

10 Dec 02 - 04:34 PM (#844852)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: NicoleC

Now, boys, there's no need to fight over lil' ol' me! ;)

---

10 Dec 02 - 04:54 PM (#844869)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Amos

G'wan, sweetie, ya gotta love it!! LOL!!!

A

---

10 Dec 02 - 06:23 PM (#844943)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: NicoleC

You bet I do! :p

---

10 Dec 02 - 11:04 PM (#845084)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: DougR

No contest, Nicole. Amos, admittedly is 55. I admit that I am 72. Even if I were younger, and in the race, we would just keep each other up all night arguing about who is right, and who is wrong. :>)

DougR

---

10 Dec 02 - 11:26 PM (#845092)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: NicoleC

Doug, your strange fixation on reality is interfering with my post-getting-dumped indulgences, okay? ;D

---

10 Dec 02 - 11:35 PM (#845097)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Amos

Dumped? Who?? I'll MOIDER da bum!!! Pyuutttttemuppp!! PyuttttemUPPP!!!

:>)

A

---

11 Dec 02 - 11:06 AM (#845183)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: MikeofNorthumbria

Perhaps a word of caution about the reliability of news reports in the media might be relevant.

I've only once been an eye (and ear)-witness to an event which was written up in a national newspaper the following day. What the paper reported bore no relation to what I saw and heard. This might have been due to a difference in perception, but I don't think so - the event took place in a fairly enclosed space, and I was there throughout it. However, the (erroneous) account of said event happened to chime perfectly with the political orientation of that particular newspaper. Ho hum!

And I've only once been stopped on the street by a TV crew doing random vox-pop interviews. On that occasion, the man in charge of the show told me exactly what he wanted me to say before the camera rolled. He was not pleased when I refused to say it, because it happened to be untrue.   Presumably he went on stopping people until he found somebody willing to say what he wanted. Double ho hum!

These experiences (and similar ones reported by friends whom I trust) make me wary of news stories like the one which sparked off this thread. I believe that vigilance in the defence of our civil liberties is a good thing. But I also believe the protection of public figures from assassination is a good thing (even if the public figures in question are not particularly nice, there are better ways of making the point).

When all the evidence is presented, the jury can decide - till then, let us not rush to judgement.

Wassail!

---

11 Dec 02 - 11:23 AM (#845195)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Amos

Couldn't agree more, Mike. There's an interesting study on the impact of media orientation and culture on the Bush administration in the recent book "The Bush Dyslexicon", and it makes it terribly clear that the Fourth Estate is a shareholder support activity, first and foremost, and reports news only secondarily. I didn't used to be that cynical about the media but it has gotten patently clear that their business is running slants, and molding opinions for hire.

A

---

11 Dec 02 - 01:41 PM (#845316)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: McGrath of Harlow

Precisely - there is no reason to believe that stories in newspapers represent what actually happened; equally, just because a story isn't reported that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

To judge the truth of stories you have to dig a bit deeper, take into account the things that could distort reporting and so forth. Reporters start off anyway wanting to get it right. The distortion is imposed from higher up - the people in charge want to give stories the right kind of spin that will appeal to the people who need to be ingratiated, and won't offend the people who musn't be offended. That can even mean the readers, though they are pretty low in the pecking order, below the owners and the advertisers.

This story seems intrinsically plausible. Anybody whose ever been on the wrong side of the police in that kind of situation knows that.
Whether it happened exactly that way, who can tell? Worse things happen every day, that's true enough.

---

11 Dec 02 - 01:53 PM (#845324)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: katlaughing

While I would prefer an unconnected collaboration of this story, its very absence in the local papers seems to speak volumes, on one hand. On the other, it could mean nothing happened. Doesn't mean it didn't, though and that we should be vigilant when as the Shrub and cronies try to put our rights through the woodchipper.

---

11 Dec 02 - 02:03 PM (#845339)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: DougR

I don't get it, Amos. You agree with Mike's excellent post, yet you were the one who began this thread! :>)

DougR

---

11 Dec 02 - 02:14 PM (#845352)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Amos

Well, DougR, I was differentiating between alt.2600 online and the massive praise-for-hire that curdles most public intelligence in the media. I assumed from the context that the guy had reported what happened to him -- he was speaking plainly enough, and I have no reason to suppose he would make the story up. Because a little perimeter site like alt.2600 has no large influence, it is harder to imagine them degrading into influence peddling the way Murdoch's cronies did during the fiasco of the last Residential election.

A

---

11 Dec 02 - 07:46 PM (#845607)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Amos

According to this story in the Denver Post the whole story posed by Maginnis is false.

In addition the same denial was made by:

Lt. Steven W. Carter #80041
Denver Police Dept.
Office of the Chief of Police
[phone] Work

in response to an enquiry made by a Bill Ries-Knight who reported it to the Politech list. Interestingly, he said, "I make no comment except that the Officer wanted to verify my Identity before investigating, I provided my real name and cell phone number. He responded in his reply with my office address and phone number as listed with my domain registrar, but not the home address."

Regards,
Bill Ries-Knight

Regards,

Amos

---

11 Dec 02 - 09:34 PM (#845676)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: DougR

Thanks for posting that Denver Post story, Amos.

DougR

---

11 Dec 02 - 09:42 PM (#845684)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Mark Clark

I have nothing to support the veracity of Maginnis' story but, after reading the story Amos linked, if Maginnis' story were true, the official denial is exactly what one would expect.

If the story really originated with a call-in radio show then I'd need a lot of hard evidence in order to lend it any credence.

      - Mark

---

12 Dec 02 - 04:59 AM (#845811)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Teribus

NicoleC, where in anything I have posted to this thread do you get grounds for your stated opinion that:

"Teribus seems to feel that law enforcement is justified in doing anything they want if they are suspicious of, well, anything." ?

When confronted with the physical presence of the "Law" in the normal course of events, i.e. law abiding citizen going about their daily routine and stopped by a Police Officer and asked about what they are doing. There are a number of ways that the citizen can respond:
- Be polite and co-operative on the assumption that the police officer is only doing his job and does have a reason for asking his questions.
- Be unco-operative, evasive and question his right to stop and question you.
- Refuse to answer any questions and remain silent.
- Be totally outraged and belligerent.

Depending upon which of the above, or which various shades of the above, are adopted, will clearly govern the Police Officer's reaction.

Example: A friend of mine travels a great deal by car, so does his wife. When pulled over for speeding, he is apologetic and polite - he normally gets off with a warning and some advice about observing speed limits. His wife on the other hand, berates them for holding her up and complains about the waste in tax-payers money of the police harassing innocent members of the public when they should be out there catching real criminals - she gets done every time.

Interesting follow ups from both Wolfgang and Amos - one thing that does strike me as odd - In the initial story Mr. Maginnis, worker in the IT industry, had an interest in photographing corporate buildings and communications equipment, hence his interest in the Hotel, and his assertion that he was going about upon his own lawful occasions. The composition of his thirty odd photographs were, we hear from the media articles, of Denver Police, Army Rangers and roof-top snipers.

Now the camera according to Mr. Maginnis was confiscated on the spot, the police deny that the incident ever took place (according to the article posted by Amos), therefore the only source of information with regard to what the photographs were of must be from Mr. Maginnis himself, which is slightly at odds with where his photographic interests lie.

IMO, given the circumstances, I believe that the Police Officer (if there ever was one) was perfectly correct in asking Mr. Maginnis what he was doing - what the reaction was to that approach we only have Mr. Maginnis's version - the police are denying that the incident ever took place.

What would be the reaction, and where would popular vote go, had Mr. Maginnis claim to have been abducted by aliens for the stated period - at present we have only heard one side of an incident that may, or may not have happened - haven't we?

---

12 Dec 02 - 09:37 AM (#845855)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: ard mhacha

And for another version of twisting the news go over to the Ard Mhacha Abu thread. Ard Mhacha.

---

12 Dec 02 - 12:05 PM (#845965)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: katlaughing

Teribus, I've only seen the one original article and the one Amos linked. Where did you see or read more of this, including exactly what hsi pictures consisted of?

Just a note, people, it is NOT the Denver Post. Amos linked to the Rocky Mountain News, which is not known for its veracity, at times.:-)

Mark got it right; that kind of law enforcement denial is exactly what one would expect, based on the original report.

kat

---

12 Dec 02 - 12:10 PM (#845968)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Amos

Apologies for confusing the two papers.

Talk about self-referential loops -- if the story WERE false, what kind of denial would you expect?

Good coverups are always plausible -- therefore any plausible statement must be a good coverup? Hmmmmmm.... Lessons from modern media! :>)

A

---

12 Dec 02 - 12:23 PM (#845980)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: NicoleC

Teribus,

Comments like this: "Handling of the situation could well have been better, but one point clearly illustrated is that the people responsible for the Vice-President's safety were alert and were on the ball."

and this: "One side of it that I can see, that you obviously can't, or won't, is that of a beat patrolman turning up on shift and being told that today you are part of a force responsible for the safety of the Vice-President of the United States of America. A weighty responsibility under any circumstances, but more than slightly heightened in the present climate. "

Let's assume for the moment the event happen as Maginnis tells it. Is the police officer justified in questioning his activties? Definately. Under the circumstances, they would even be justified in temporarily holding his film until the VP left town.

Under what circumstances, if any, would they be justified in siezing his personal property (the camera) and questioning him for 6 hours without legal counsel present when he hasn't committed a crime?

You know, if you are taking a picture of a microwave tower on top of a public building, you are very likely to get the snipers on top of the building too. Both accounts of the picture's contents may be correct.

---

12 Dec 02 - 12:32 PM (#845990)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: McGrath of Harlow

So an unconvincing public statement is actually more plausible...This thing gets pretty complicated.

Maybe this explains why Americans seem to think Bush sounds honest, when this side of the water pretty well everyone thinks he sounds like the kind of guy from whom you would never buy a used. It's just that you are one step further along down this road, and what we see as shiftiness comes across domestically as an indication that he hasn't been polished up for sale.(But then I imagine the spin-merchants are one stage further on, and that unpolished effect is intentional, because they reckon right now it sells best...)

---

12 Dec 02 - 12:41 PM (#845999)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Amos

McGrath:

Easy on those generalizations, sir!! There are a few of us Americans left who have two brain cells left to rub together, and as a result believe the Bushwah's antics AND the treatment of them by the media to be highly discountable, slanted,meretricious, manipulative, short on substance and long on premeditated bias.

A

---

12 Dec 02 - 12:43 PM (#846001)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Songster Bob

What I want to know is why Chaney has a house in Denver. The US Government provides a fine house on the grounds of the Naval Observatory in Washington, DC. If Chaney were travelling, you'd expect security where he was staying, yes, but what's with the jack-hammers and construction? Sounds like more than temporary to me, and a waste of the taxpayers' money.

Remember the Republicans' motto: It's your money -- you should get to keep it. So they spend if like the Democrats never were able to!

Bob

---

12 Dec 02 - 01:02 PM (#846027)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: DougR

McGrath: it's complicated because some of us are making it complicated. So far it's just a unsubstantiated story that has received far more attention than it deserves IMHO.

DougR

---

12 Dec 02 - 01:46 PM (#846073)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Amos

Doug:

It is interesting that the current culture of suspicion and apprehension -- largely generated by the executive influence of G. "Bring the Government Closer to the People" W. Bush -- makes the Maginnis story so much more credible and likely than it would have seemed under Brass Balls Bill Clinton, or even Smart Al Gore, the guy who won the last Presidential vote. Not to be confused with the guy whose father bought the Supremes. Not the Supremes who recorded "My Guy" -- the ones who recorded "We Did It Our Way".

A

---

12 Dec 02 - 03:22 PM (#846138)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: NicoleC

P.S. Teribus - BTW, I apologize for the assumption if it's wrong. It did seem to me to be your point of view.

---

12 Dec 02 - 03:53 PM (#846157)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Bobert

Nicole; You ought to know by now that when it comes to slickiness, the T-Bird makes ol' Billy Bob Clinton look like a boy scout. He or she is very good with carefully crafted inferences. But I'm not really telling you anything you haven't all ready figured out.

And Amos makes a good point here. Situations, be they real or hypothetical in their nature, where innocent people are harassed for doing quite innocent things by the *athorities* under this current administration, are, *unfortunately* believable. Autocratic John Ashcroft running the Justice Department makes everyone who doesn't agree with him or his boss suspicious. Well, taken a step further, just being thought of as a suspect is kind of like being assumed guilty until proven otherwise. Hmmmmmmmm? Look out, democracy!

Bobert

---

12 Dec 02 - 07:34 PM (#846322)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: DougR

You may be right, Amos and Bobert, but look who is getting excited about it. "Those who always see a half empty glass instead of a half full one." Not everyone is suspicious of their shadow regardless of who is president or AG.

DougR

---

12 Dec 02 - 07:46 PM (#846329)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: McGrath of Harlow

Half full or half emptied of what, that is surely the really relevant question? I mean, is it good stuff or rotgut, or out and out poison.

All this has nothing to do with politics in the sense of what governments and people should or shouldn't do, it's about power and privilege and paranoia. The actual political beliefs of the privileged and paranoid powerful involved has very litle to do with it.

---

12 Dec 02 - 07:47 PM (#846330)
Subject: RE: BS: The Brave New World You Ordered's Here.
From: Amos

DougR:

I have always been a deeply optimistic individual.

And even now, I can see the postive side to the "firm" control being exercised on our gummint. It is just that is greatly outweighed by the outrages that have been perpetrated to date by Bushwah's "terrorist democracy" vision. His ruthlessness is not informed by principle -- to the contrary it overwhelms principle so often that it deserves the label "unpriuncipled" or "amoral". In business circles, this is of course natural.

But I just want you to understand very clearly that I am almost irrepressibly optimistic about things in general, as almost anyone who knows me well will testify. So it is just possible that there is some other reason for getting excited. To quote my favorite Bobertism, "Hmmmmm?????"!


A

---