Raise Your Hand If You're a Terrorist
-
Being somewhat cynical, as I am oft want to be, I see this more as a money gathering operation. That is to say that should anyone commit an act of terrorism, their assets can be claimed by the appropriate body and it not be used to pay for his family or further terrorism outrages. Be careful though, I suspect that 'Terrorism' has not been defined, and therefore if you were to drive too quickly, the charge may be laid that you were 'terrorising' other road users, and your home and other assets stripped and used to pay for the state. Just the accountant in me coming out again.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
I see it more as an attempt to reduce / remove "due process" when "something bad" happens. Together with a flexible definition of terrorism, that law has a great scare factor. Not yet a "flushing civil rights down the toilet", but at least moving them closer to the dump. I understand the motivation behind "anything is ok when it protects us". The same type of people is gnawing away liberty over here in the name of control-based safety. But civil rights are pointless when they don't apply to everyone.
Agh! Reality! My Archnemesis![^]
| FoldWithUs! | sighist | µLaunch - program launcher for server core and hyper-v server. -
Didn't they used to do that with Communists? I wonder if they asked Gorbechev "Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the Communist party?" when he visited in the late eighties...
If Barbie is so popular, why do you have to buy her friends? Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines. If at first you don't succeed, destroy all evidence that you tried.
OriginalGriff wrote:
Didn't they used to do that with Communists?
Because they think it is the same... :rolleyes:
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke
[My articles] -
"The Raw Story reports that terrorists who want to overthrow the United States government must now register with South Carolina's Secretary of State and declare their intentions — or face a $25,000 fine and up to 10 years in prison. The 'Subversive Activities Registration Act' passed last year in South Carolina and now officially on the books states that 'every member of a subversive organization, or an organization subject to foreign control, every foreign agent and every person who advocates, teaches, advises or practices the duty, necessity or propriety of controlling, conducting, seizing or overthrowing the government of the United States ... shall register with the Secretary of State.'" Since this only applies to terrorists that are part of a subversive organization, independent terrorists with no affiliation are free to conduct subversive activities without first registering. I wonder if this means that after conducting a terrorist act, they have to leave their credentials at the scene so that the authorities can be assured that the group has met all of the legal requirements necessary to operate in the state of South Carolina... Absurdity at it's finest...
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
...and every person who advocates, teaches, advises or practices the duty, necessity or propriety of controlling, conducting, seizing or overthrowing the government of the United States...
Freedom of Speech 1776 - 2010. RIP.
-
Dalek Dave wrote:
, I see this more as a money gathering operation.
Al Capone was convicted for income-tax evasion; so now, would-be terrorists could be convicted of not registering if there are not enough proofs that they did actually commit a terror act.
Watched code never compiles.
Well, to hold that they should have registered, you would have to prove that they were terrorists, by way of proving that they had comitted a terror act. Everyone has to register for, and pay, tax, not just gansters.
-
Well, with the Visa Waiver it makes sense. It's called "Waiver" because you waive your rights to appeal the decision of the immigration officer. Of course, that means noone will sign "yes" unless he needs some quirky kind of adventure. Signing "No, I'm not a terrorist", then blowing up an office building in Oklahoma wearing an "Anthrax" t-shirt while sneezing white powder into the wrong direction gives the US goverment the right to imemdiately expel you and never let you in again. So obviously, there is - or at least was - more of "due process" in expelling someone.
Agh! Reality! My Archnemesis![^]
| FoldWithUs! | sighist | µLaunch - program launcher for server core and hyper-v server.So, basically, they expel your for lying... :)
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke
[My articles] -
So, basically, they expel your for lying... :)
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke
[My articles] -
Yup, exactly. Which, stated as a policy, would raise diplomatic eyebrows.
Agh! Reality! My Archnemesis![^]
| FoldWithUs! | sighist | µLaunch - program launcher for server core and hyper-v server.peterchen wrote:
Yup, exactly. Which, stated as a policy, would raise diplomatic eyebrows.
I know: Mr.Berlusconi, for instance, would be kicked out even by the Rome's McDonalds. :rolleyes:
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke
[My articles] -
Didn't they used to do that with Communists? I wonder if they asked Gorbechev "Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the Communist party?" when he visited in the late eighties...
If Barbie is so popular, why do you have to buy her friends? Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines. If at first you don't succeed, destroy all evidence that you tried.
Gilbert Harding, (Old British TV Pundit), was attempting to enter the USA and was a presented with a form with many questions, one of which was the question: "Is it your intention to overthrow the government of the United States?" His reply: "Sole purpose of visit."
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
-
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
...and every person who advocates, teaches, advises or practices the duty, necessity or propriety of controlling, conducting, seizing or overthrowing the government of the United States...
Freedom of Speech 1776 - 2010. RIP.
Wjousts wrote:
seizing or overthrowing the government of the United States...
Freedom of speech is occasionally a difficult needle to thread. I'm a strong proponent of this right (no matter how often my friends wish I'd just sit down and shut up) but like any freedom there are lines that you do not cross. For example, we have freedom of speech, but we also have libel laws that protect us, both as companies and individuals, from malicious and injurious slander. With that in mind, there's a substantial difference between exercising our right to assembly in order to protest that with which we disagree (i.e. working within the system) and advocating the overthrow of the government through which those rights were secured. As for the topic in question, above and beyond how silly it appears on the surface it's really just a way of tacking on extra penalties to those convicted of terrorist activities. Obviously no terrorist is going to comply but since this law is now on the books, it can be used in sentancing. And by the way, if you want to overthrow the government of the United States of America, you're given frequent opportunities to do so. They're called elections. :)
Christopher Duncan www.PracticalUSA.com Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes Copywriting Services
-
But that would be an individual unless there is an orgianisation of bad drivers.
Join the cool kids - Come fold with us[^]
I'm guessing most building firms would qualify!
-
Well, to hold that they should have registered, you would have to prove that they were terrorists, by way of proving that they had comitted a terror act. Everyone has to register for, and pay, tax, not just gansters.
In the UK the government has tried to put anti-terror rules in the civil law so that they don't have to provide the increased burden of proof that would be expected in a criminal trial. I don't know how the system works in the US but in the UK the difference is between "beyond reasonable doubt" and "on the balance of probabilities" or something similar. Maybe this is the trick these guys are using?
-
"The Raw Story reports that terrorists who want to overthrow the United States government must now register with South Carolina's Secretary of State and declare their intentions — or face a $25,000 fine and up to 10 years in prison. The 'Subversive Activities Registration Act' passed last year in South Carolina and now officially on the books states that 'every member of a subversive organization, or an organization subject to foreign control, every foreign agent and every person who advocates, teaches, advises or practices the duty, necessity or propriety of controlling, conducting, seizing or overthrowing the government of the United States ... shall register with the Secretary of State.'" Since this only applies to terrorists that are part of a subversive organization, independent terrorists with no affiliation are free to conduct subversive activities without first registering. I wonder if this means that after conducting a terrorist act, they have to leave their credentials at the scene so that the authorities can be assured that the group has met all of the legal requirements necessary to operate in the state of South Carolina... Absurdity at it's finest...
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001 -
Wjousts wrote:
seizing or overthrowing the government of the United States...
Freedom of speech is occasionally a difficult needle to thread. I'm a strong proponent of this right (no matter how often my friends wish I'd just sit down and shut up) but like any freedom there are lines that you do not cross. For example, we have freedom of speech, but we also have libel laws that protect us, both as companies and individuals, from malicious and injurious slander. With that in mind, there's a substantial difference between exercising our right to assembly in order to protest that with which we disagree (i.e. working within the system) and advocating the overthrow of the government through which those rights were secured. As for the topic in question, above and beyond how silly it appears on the surface it's really just a way of tacking on extra penalties to those convicted of terrorist activities. Obviously no terrorist is going to comply but since this law is now on the books, it can be used in sentancing. And by the way, if you want to overthrow the government of the United States of America, you're given frequent opportunities to do so. They're called elections. :)
Christopher Duncan www.PracticalUSA.com Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes Copywriting Services
Well, you decided to quote the worst part, but the point is that the definition is so broad that basically anybody who appears to be causing trouble could be labeled as advocating the overthrow of the government including the moronic "tea party", elements of which have routinely made statements to the effect of seizing the government and throwing out the democratically elected president as well as Glenn Beck, Rush, O'Reilly, etc... Actually, on second thoughts, maybe it's not a bad idea.
-
Well, you decided to quote the worst part, but the point is that the definition is so broad that basically anybody who appears to be causing trouble could be labeled as advocating the overthrow of the government including the moronic "tea party", elements of which have routinely made statements to the effect of seizing the government and throwing out the democratically elected president as well as Glenn Beck, Rush, O'Reilly, etc... Actually, on second thoughts, maybe it's not a bad idea.
I have very, very little faith in the actions of professional politicians, aka our elected officials, other than to be self serving. I do, however, have a great deal of faith in the system itself, which was set up by a bunch of paranoid British traitors to prevent any one group from obtaining absolute power. :) Consequently, while I don't disagree with your sentiments about the tendency to interpret a law as broadly as seems convenient at the given moment, even the bad guys get their day in court, let alone the good guys who may be unjustly accused. In today's society, where even the most insipid babblings are carried by bloggers and major media outlets alike, any real attempt to overreach would be blasted across the headlines and thus garner major public opposition. And this results in the only true control we have over our elected officials: they want to keep their jobs and have no difficulty backpedaling when their job security is threatened. It's not a perfect system, but it does have its moments. :-D
Christopher Duncan www.PracticalUSA.com Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes Copywriting Services
-
"The Raw Story reports that terrorists who want to overthrow the United States government must now register with South Carolina's Secretary of State and declare their intentions — or face a $25,000 fine and up to 10 years in prison. The 'Subversive Activities Registration Act' passed last year in South Carolina and now officially on the books states that 'every member of a subversive organization, or an organization subject to foreign control, every foreign agent and every person who advocates, teaches, advises or practices the duty, necessity or propriety of controlling, conducting, seizing or overthrowing the government of the United States ... shall register with the Secretary of State.'" Since this only applies to terrorists that are part of a subversive organization, independent terrorists with no affiliation are free to conduct subversive activities without first registering. I wonder if this means that after conducting a terrorist act, they have to leave their credentials at the scene so that the authorities can be assured that the group has met all of the legal requirements necessary to operate in the state of South Carolina... Absurdity at it's finest...
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001It is an encroachment of civil liberties and a step in the direction of tyranny. In all honesty, subversive organizations are necessary for the continuing freedom of the American Way of Life.
Need custom software developed? I do custom programming based primarily on MS tools with an emphasis on C# development and consulting. A man said to the universe: "Sir I exist!" "However," replied the universe, "The fact has not created in me A sense of obligation." --Stephen Crane
-
peterchen wrote:
Yup, exactly. Which, stated as a policy, would raise diplomatic eyebrows.
I know: Mr.Berlusconi, for instance, would be kicked out even by the Rome's McDonalds. :rolleyes:
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke
[My articles] -
Well, you decided to quote the worst part, but the point is that the definition is so broad that basically anybody who appears to be causing trouble could be labeled as advocating the overthrow of the government including the moronic "tea party", elements of which have routinely made statements to the effect of seizing the government and throwing out the democratically elected president as well as Glenn Beck, Rush, O'Reilly, etc... Actually, on second thoughts, maybe it's not a bad idea.
Wjousts wrote:
that the definition is so broad that basically anybody who appears to be causing trouble could be labeled as advocating the overthrow of the government including the moronic "tea party"
Not so. There is a difference between advocating change of policy/change of politicians and advocating the overthrow of the government. 'Change of policy' includes stop spending our great-grand-children's income, get out of Iraq 'Change of politicians' is kick Bush/Obama out of office 'Overthrow of the government' may be a method to implement that change, but it implies changing the way of government, outside of the methods provided by our way of government. For instance, it is legal to try to pass a constitutional amendment that installs a president for life, it is not legal to attempt to stay in the presidency past the inauguration of your successor, as so many claimed Bush would try to do.
Opacity, the new Transparency.
-
It is an encroachment of civil liberties and a step in the direction of tyranny. In all honesty, subversive organizations are necessary for the continuing freedom of the American Way of Life.
Need custom software developed? I do custom programming based primarily on MS tools with an emphasis on C# development and consulting. A man said to the universe: "Sir I exist!" "However," replied the universe, "The fact has not created in me A sense of obligation." --Stephen Crane
That is not true, as there is a difference between 'opposition' and 'subversion'. Opposition says 'get out of Vietnam', subversion sets a bomb off in the Pentagon. Opposition includes civil disobedience, subversion, civil unrest. Which brings up a pet peeve - people who engage in civil disobedience and then get mad for having been arrested.
Opacity, the new Transparency.
-
That is not true, as there is a difference between 'opposition' and 'subversion'. Opposition says 'get out of Vietnam', subversion sets a bomb off in the Pentagon. Opposition includes civil disobedience, subversion, civil unrest. Which brings up a pet peeve - people who engage in civil disobedience and then get mad for having been arrested.
Opacity, the new Transparency.
RichardM1 wrote:
Which brings up a pet peeve - people who engage in civil disobedience and then get mad for having been arrested.
You're not the only one. I know someone who did that sort of thing back in the late 60s/70s. For "fun" whenever he or his friends were arrested they claimed membership in the SLA[^] or weathermen[^] to make the cops waste money them for a week and the FBI to waste a week or so of time figuring out they were being lied to. Now I've been told Momey's Amex card is standard equipment to allow posting bail as soon as you arrive at the police station. For some reason the current generation of student protesters are taken a lot less seriously than their parents were. :rolleyes:
3x12=36 2x12=24 1x12=12 0x12=18
-
RichardM1 wrote:
Which brings up a pet peeve - people who engage in civil disobedience and then get mad for having been arrested.
You're not the only one. I know someone who did that sort of thing back in the late 60s/70s. For "fun" whenever he or his friends were arrested they claimed membership in the SLA[^] or weathermen[^] to make the cops waste money them for a week and the FBI to waste a week or so of time figuring out they were being lied to. Now I've been told Momey's Amex card is standard equipment to allow posting bail as soon as you arrive at the police station. For some reason the current generation of student protesters are taken a lot less seriously than their parents were. :rolleyes:
3x12=36 2x12=24 1x12=12 0x12=18
Dan Neely wrote:
For some reason the current generation of student protesters are taken a lot less seriously than their parents were.
Since their parents did it, they aren't freaked. By '82, it'd gone from 'unheard of' to 'rite of passage'. I had friends arrested at the Pentagon, just to be cool. In today's war, only volunteers serve, so the cost of violent protest is too high. Viva La Revolución :rolleyes:
Opacity, the new Transparency. My computer wants a happy; it has C: drive
