Re: a little something worth noting . . .

On Fri, Apr 18 2003 at 08:25:23am -0400, dep wrote:
> begin  Roberto H. Alsina's  quote:
> 
> | > look at the archives of this list for the items posted by
> | > andreas. andreas walks a free man.
> |
> | Yet you suggest that because of his opinion, and because he handled
> | money, he is fit to be investigated by the government.
> 
> in my estimation, yes. there is no doubt that others who hold his 
> opinion and have access to money have done a great deal of herm here, 
> and there is strong evidence that more harm is planned.

Bollocks. Arrest without trial, based on suspicion is bad. In Cuba, and in 
the US.

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2003/04/18/patriot_act/index.html

Having handled money and expressed an opinion is not basis for arrest,
it is not really even basis for investigation, unless you accept the
government has the right to observe everyone's activities as much as
they please. Else, free speech is not free, because it makes you a target.

> | "yes, by all means express your opinion, if it isn't the party
> | line, the IRS will meet you tomorrow".
> 
> who mentioned the irs? 

I did. It's one of the easy ways the government has to see if they can nail
someone against who they failed to collect proper evidence. Capone, for 
instance.

> 
> | Sadly that free speech is a
> | right that is good to have as long as it is not exercised is a
> | common view among some US citizens.
> 
> the first amendment, as the second, has limitations; indeed, those 
> placed on the second are far more severe than any that have been 
> proposed, let alone exercised, on the first.

So what? Two wrongs don't make a right. Even if that was wrong, of course.

> | Yes, you have free speech. But
> | speaking against the war is treason. Yes, you have free speech, but
> | that will get you in trouble.
> 
> no one has been charged with treason,

Not yet. Of course some have been arrested without any charges at all,
so maybe they will be. Or maybe they won't bother.

> nor has anyone been troubled by 
> the government for exercising an anti-war opinion. it is when there 
> is reason to suspect that the speech will be followed by action that 
> problems arise.

You can't accuse someone of thought crimes. YOu need to wait for him to
at least plan to do some action.

> | Really, I think Franklin was onto something when he described the
> | American eagle as "a bird of bad moral character".
> 
> your ornithological opinion has been noted and shall be given, i'm 
> sure, its due.

Dude, read. I didn't say that. Benjamin Franklin did.

> | Were the rest of the world as free as the US claims itself to be,
> | sure. Would the rest of the world as free as the US has asked it to
> | be by its support of corrupt, immoral and dictatorial governments,
> | it wouldn't be any freer, and if anything, less free.
> |
> | Were the rest of the world to start imprisoning their own citizens
> | without trial, I am sure the US would call that a "problem with
> | freedom". Yet when the US does it, we should all "care about the
> | freedom in our own countries" right dep?
> 
> those from other nations are of course free ot remain there, whereupon 
> there is no problem. it is when there is cause to suspect that they 
> intend to do harm to the u.s., from within or without, as harm is 
> defined by the u.s. and not by some bozo in a cave someplace, that 
> the problem arises. 

Hail Caesar! And completely unrelated to what it pretends to answer.
Fact: citizens arrested without trial in the US.
Fact: citizens arrested without trial in Cuba.
Fact: citizens arrested without trial in Iraq.

Which one of the three is not a fact?

And yes, I know trials in Cuba are a sham.

> | But of course, freedom requires a full stomach. IF the US of A
> | would act its word of "free trade", instead of being a
> | protectionist behemoth, the poorer (and not by coincidence) less
> | free parts of the world would be richer, and (not by accident)
> | freer.
> 
> i presume you are talking about the steel tariffs.

I am not, since in any case, Argentina is exepmt from them.
I am speaking about agropecuary subsidies.

> if so, i agree 
> wityh you. if, however, you are talking about the canadian softwood 
> issue, canada is the country that has engaged in a trade war in which 
> american imports have been harmed. still, we would be more than happy 
> to provide all the viagra they can use in resolving their softwood 
> issue.

Stupid answer, that one.

 ("\''/").__..-''"`-. .         Roberto Alsina
 `9_ 9  )   `-. (    ).`-._.`)  [email protected]
 (_Y_.)' ._   ) `._`.  " -.-'   KDE Developer (MFCH)
  _..`-'_..-_/ /-'_.'           
(l)-'' ((i).' ((!.'             Buenos Aires - Argentina

Imminentizing the eschaton since 1971. (Yes, that's an i)

Kde-cafe mailing list - [email protected]
http://ofb.biz/lists/listinfo.cgi/kde-cafe

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed on this mailinglist are the personal
opinions of the author and do not represent OfB.biz: Open for Business, KDE or the author's employer.