Forum Home Forum Home > Topics not related to music > General discussions
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - U.S. Moving Toward Totalitarianism?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedU.S. Moving Toward Totalitarianism?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 567
Author
Message
Tony R View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: July 16 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 11985
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 04 2006 at 15:48
Originally posted by James Lee James Lee wrote:



the Cold War is a pretty obvious example of how weapons can be effective as symbols when they are not even used.

the problem with the Cold War analogy is that if the Soviet Union had launched a nuclear strike,it couldnt wipe its fingerprints off the launchers,hide the evidence and then disappear as if nothing had happened.
Being seduced by a beautiful piece of cratsmanship is one thing,but to advocate it as a lifestyle choice for the masses is a little bit difficult to stomach.


    
    

Edited by Tony R - June 04 2006 at 15:48
Back to Top
maani View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Founding Moderator

Joined: January 30 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2632
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 05 2006 at 11:38

Re the gun debate, I thought the lyrics from XTC's "Melt the Guns" might be apropos:

programmes of violence as entertainment brings the disease into your room

we know the germ that is man-made in metal is really the key to your own tomb

 

prevention is better than cure - bad apples affecting the pure

you'll come to your senses, i'm sure, then agree to...

 

melt the guns, melt the guns, melt the guns - and never more to fire them

melt the guns, melt the guns, melt the guns - and never more desire them

 

children will want them, mothers supply them, as long as your killers are heroes

and all the media will fiddle while rome burns, acting like modern time neros

 

prevention is better than cure - bad apples affecting the pure

you'll come to your senses, i'm sure, then agree to...

 

melt the guns, melt the guns, melt the guns - and never more to fire them

melt the guns, melt the guns, melt the guns - and never more desire them

 

i'm speaking to the justice league of america

the u.s. of a. - hey you, yes you, yes you in particular

when it comes to the judgment day and you're standing at the gates with your weaponry

you dare get down on one knee, clasp your hands in prayer, start quoting me

cause we say...we say...

 

our father, we've managed to contain the epidemic in one place now

let's hope they shoot themselves instead of others, help to sterilize the race now

we've trapped the cause of the plague in the land of the free and the home of the brave

and if we listen quietly we can hear them shooting from grave to grave

and if you listen quite quietly you can hear them shooting from grave to grave

grave to grave to grave to grave to... (melt the guns)

 

melt the guns, melt the guns, melt the guns - and never more to fire them

melt the guns, melt the guns, melt the guns - and never more desire them

melt the guns, melt the guns now...melt the guns, melt the guns now

(melt'em, melt'em, melt'em...)

Back to Top
James Lee View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: June 05 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 3525
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 05 2006 at 14:16
Originally posted by Tony R Tony R wrote:

Originally posted by James Lee James Lee wrote:



the Cold War is a pretty obvious example of how weapons can be effective as symbols when they are not even used.

the problem with the Cold War analogy is that if the Soviet Union had launched a nuclear strike,it couldnt wipe its fingerprints off the launchers,hide the evidence and then disappear as if nothing had happened.
Being seduced by a beautiful piece of cratsmanship is one thing,but to advocate it as a lifestyle choice for the masses is a little bit difficult to stomach.


Lifestyle choice? Like ipods, cilantro cooking, or metrosexuality? There's not enough room between my lines for you to read in that much. LOL

Regarding my advocacy...I dare you to find any statement resembling "more people should have guns" anywhere among my posts. It takes a certain amount of reason and discipline to be a responsible gun owner, and I'm not an optimist about those traits being overwhelmingly common in modern society.

I'm also not an optimist about the unflinching restraint and fairness of people in power. Either way you look at it, it's not a bad idea to know how to defend yourself.

(if a gun ban included everyone, immediately, including every criminal as well as the police and military of every nation, I might be able to get behind it...but trust only goes so far. I've played "give me yours first and then I'll give you mine" enough to know that some people are always going to screw you on the deal.)

Am I in favor of violence and suffering? Big no. I'm for peace and love and joy. And I think we can do a lot to bring more of those things into the world...without having to deny people their freedom to do it.

(and maani...not to get personal, please don't take this the wrong way...but didn't XTC write another song about not believing in god? Wink)
Back to Top
maani View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Founding Moderator

Joined: January 30 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2632
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 05 2006 at 14:41

James:

Hmmm...apparently, you were just as fooled as everyone else.  Andy Partridge wrote "Dear God" with his tongue firmly in his cheek - or, at least, more as part of an "internal struggle" than as an out-and-out anti-believer.  (He is nominally a Christian, after all...).

It is normal - even for good Christians - to ask, in times of crisis, "Where are you, God?"  Or to wonder why "bad things happen to good people."  That was the underlying "message."  It was never meant to be completely "dismissive" of faith, belief, religion, God, Jesus or Christianity.

Peace.

Back to Top
maani View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Founding Moderator

Joined: January 30 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2632
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 05 2006 at 15:57
James:
 
Another apropos XTC lyric just came to mind:
 
Scarecrow People
 
Hope you enjoyed your flight,
In one of our new straw aeroplanes,
You’ll find things here are just like what you’re used to.
There’s lots of waste and razor wire,
And no one gives a damn about the land,
We just stand around and stare like you folks do.

For we ain’t got no brains,
And we ain’t got no hearts,
It’s just that wild old wind that tears us all apart.
We’re the scarecrow people,
Have we got lots in common with you.
And if you don’t start living well,
You’re all gonna wind up scarecrow people too.

Hope you enjoyed your meal,
It’s only gas and chemicals,
We thought that you’d prefer something not nature made.
Now while you’re here can you advise us,
On a war we’d like to start,
Against some scarecrows over there, a different shade?

For we ain’t got no brains,
And we ain’t got no hearts,
It’s just that wild old wind that tears us all apart.
We’re the scarecrow people,
Have we got lots in common with you.
And if you don’t start living well,
You’re all gonna wind up scarecrow people too.

We don’t have no tears here,
No one hopes or cares or fears here,
For the old, the sick, the poor and them what taint you.
We thought we’d base our civilization upon yours,
’cause you’re the smartest animals on earth, now ain’t you?

We don’t have no love here,
There’s no need to rise above here,
No one wants to write a book or try to paint thee.
We thought we’d base our civilization upon yours,
’cause we’re all dead from our necks up, now ain’t we?

And we ain’t got no brains,
And we ain’t got no hearts,
It’s just that wild old wind that tears us all apart.
We’re the scarecrow people,
Have we got lots in common with you.
And if you don’t start living well,
You’re all gonna wind up scarecrow people too.

And I ain’t got no brains,
And I ain’t got no heart,
It’s just them other humans tear my soul apart.
I’m a scarecrow person,
Have I got quite some message for you.
For if we don’t start learning well,
We’re all gonna wind up scarecrow people too!
Back to Top
VanderGraafKommandöh View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 04 2005
Location: Malaria
Status: Offline
Points: 89372
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 05 2006 at 16:08
I'm actually more worried about knives... a lot harder to govern.  I was watching a program on television earlier about the current Knives amnesty and they were saying , that over here in England, stabbings occur more often that we're lead to be believe, because they simply get reported less.  Because gun crime is rarer over here in the UK, it gets reported more often.

I am not sure what to suggest with knives, as they're principally designed to kill people.  Kitchen knives could easily kill a person, or at least severely injure them.
Back to Top
James Lee View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: June 05 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 3525
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 05 2006 at 16:19
Originally posted by maani maani wrote:

James:

Hmmm...apparently, you were just as fooled as everyone else.  Andy Partridge wrote "Dear God" with his tongue firmly in his cheek - or, at least, more as part of an "internal struggle" than as an out-and-out anti-believer.  (He is nominally a Christian, after all...).

It is normal - even for good Christians - to ask, in times of crisis, "Where are you, God?"  Or to wonder why "bad things happen to good people."  That was the underlying "message."  It was never meant to be completely "dismissive" of faith, belief, religion, God, Jesus or Christianity.

Peace.



Fooled? Maybe. I never considered the song as pure satire, it seemed like he was making honest points throughout. It's always good to have lyrics complex enough to show something more than a simple single view...

"I just tried to wrestle with the paradox of God and the last dying doubts of belief that had hung, bat like, in the dark corners of my head since childhood." - A. Partridge

...so therefore, on the basis of the other set of lyrics, Andy might be a troubled gun owner, too?  Uh, my guess is...probably not. LOL

But I can't for the life of me interpret the third set of lyrics. I keep thinking of Lou Reed's "Strawman".


Edited by James Lee - June 05 2006 at 16:33
Back to Top
VanderGraafKommandöh View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 04 2005
Location: Malaria
Status: Offline
Points: 89372
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 05 2006 at 16:34
I should speak with his daughter and see if she knows, James!
Back to Top
Tony R View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: July 16 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 11985
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 05 2006 at 18:11
Bush renews gay marriage ban call

Bush wants marriage defined as solely between a man and woman
President George W Bush has again urged the US Senate to pass a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage when it debates the issue this week.
Mr Bush said marriage between a man and a woman was the most fundamental institution of civilisation, and needed protection from "activist judges".

He said an amendment would ensure no court could undermine what he said were the views of the American people.

But correspondents say the measure is unlikely to obtain the backing needed.


where's Gdub when we need him?
Greg comments??
Back to Top
Garion81 View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: May 22 2004
Location: So Cal, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 4338
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 05 2006 at 19:01
^ Tony it ain't gonna happen either way for or against. Are you serious?  Our Congress has to agree on 2/3 majority to send it to 50 state legislatures for 3/4 majority? Not bloody likely.  Bush can say whatever he wants but his power is waning.  To be fair I could care less since I am not planning to marriage gay or straight anytime soon although i have a wonderful female partner. Did it once and don't feel the need to again.
 
The only people winning Gay Marriage approval are the divorce lawyers.  


"What are you going to do when that damn thing rusts?"
Back to Top
Empathy View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: June 30 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 1864
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 05 2006 at 19:26
Tony, it's more political manipulation. Bush once again is revving up the hot button issues for his conservative right-wing base, because the Republicans are worried they'll lose their majority in the House and Senate. I, for one, hope that their worries prove to be well-grounded.

5 years after 9-11-01, magically, border security is an issue. So Bush makes a proposition to send our already overtaxed National Guard resources to the Mexican border. But not to actually serve as support for the police. As CLERICAL aid! Makes perfect nonsense!

Meanwhile, there's more buzz about border issues just today... but it's the wrong border! I just saw on the news that Canadian authorities just made a number of arrests of a suspected Al Queda cell in Toronto (and they cut to a soundbite from New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg about how New York's (which borders the Ontario region of Canada) security budget was just cut by 40%). The 9-11-01 hijackers that departed from Boston that day came through the CANADIAN border, not the Mexican border.

The next hot button issue... flag burning!

What war? NSA wiretapping? Not important. FLAG Burning demans our attention!

Angry


Pure Brilliance:
Back to Top
maani View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Founding Moderator

Joined: January 30 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2632
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 05 2006 at 20:50
Tony:
 
Yup, "activist judges" are bad - except when they agree with neocon policies!
 
Empathy:
 
Ditto!!
 
Peace.
Back to Top
James Lee View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: June 05 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 3525
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 06 2006 at 16:52
Homosexual marriage may not be the sole target of Bush's proposal.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Utilities/printer_preview.asp?idArticle=12266&R=ECBD396FA

I feel I should mention that I don't agree with all of the conclusions the author makes, but it's one of the more thought-provoking articles I've read in some time.
Back to Top
maani View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Founding Moderator

Joined: January 30 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2632
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 12 2006 at 12:00
From The New York Times, Monday, June 12:
 
June 12, 2006
Op-Ed Columnist

Those Pesky Voters

I remember fielding telephone calls on Election Day 2004 from friends and colleagues anxious to talk about the exit polls, which seemed to show that John Kerry was beating George W. Bush and would be the next president.

As the afternoon faded into evening, reports started coming in that the Bush camp was dispirited, maybe even despondent, and that the Kerry crowd was set to celebrate. (In an article in the current issue of Rolling Stone, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. writes, “In London, Prime Minister Tony Blair went to bed contemplating his relationship with President-elect Kerry.”)

I was skeptical.

The election was bound to be close, and I knew that Kerry couldn’t win Florida. I had been monitoring the efforts to suppress Democratic votes there and had reported on the thuggish practice (by the Jeb Bush administration) of sending armed state police officers into the homes of elderly black voters in Orlando to “investigate” allegations of voter fraud.

As far as I was concerned, Florida was safe for the G.O.P. That left Ohio.

Republicans, and even a surprising number of Democrats, have been anxious to leave the 2004 Ohio election debacle behind. But Mr. Kennedy, in his long, heavily footnoted article (”Was the 2004 Election Stolen?”), leaves no doubt that the democratic process was trampled and left for dead in the Buckeye State. Mr. Kerry almost certainly would have won Ohio if all of his votes had been counted, and if all of the eligible voters who tried to vote for him had been allowed to cast their ballots.

Mr. Kennedy’s article echoed and expanded upon an article in Harper’s (”None Dare Call It Stolen,” by Mark Crispin Miller) that ran last summer. Both articles documented ugly, aggressive and frequently unconscionable efforts by G.O.P. stalwarts to disenfranchise Democrats in Ohio, especially those in urban and heavily black areas.

The point man for these efforts was the Ohio secretary of state, J. Kenneth Blackwell, a Republican who was both the chief election official in the state and co-chairman of the 2004 Bush-Cheney campaign in Ohio — just as Katherine Harris was the chief election official and co-chairwoman of the Bush-Cheney campaign in Florida in 2000.

No one has been able to prove that the election in Ohio was hijacked. But whenever it is closely scrutinized, the range of problems and dirty tricks that come to light is shocking. What’s not shocking, of course, is that every glitch and every foul-up in Ohio, every arbitrary new rule and regulation, somehow favored Mr. Bush.

For example, the shortages of voting machines and the long lines with waits of seven hours or more occurred mostly in urban areas and discouraged untold numbers of mostly Kerry voters.

Walter Mebane Jr., a professor of government at Cornell University, did a statistical analysis of the vote in Franklin County, which includes the city of Columbus. He told Mr. Kennedy, “The allocation of voting machines in Franklin County was clearly biased against voters in precincts with high proportions of African-Americans.”

Mr. Mebane told me that he compared the distribution of voting machines in Ohio’s 2004 presidential election with the distribution of machines for a primary election held the previous spring. For the primary, he said, “There was no sign of racial bias in the distribution of the machines.” But for the general election in November, “there was substantial bias, with fewer voting machines per voter in areas that were heavily African-American.”

Mr. Mebane said he was unable to determine whether the machines were “intentionally” allocated “to create these biases.”

Mr. Kennedy noted that this was just one of an endless sequence of difficulties confronting Democratic voters that stretched from the registration process to the post-election recount. Statistical analyses — not just of the distribution of voting machines, but of wildly anomalous voting patterns — have left nonpartisan experts shaking their heads.

The lesson out of Ohio (and Florida before it) is that the integrity of the election process needs to be more fiercely defended in the face of outrageous Republican assaults. Democrats, the media and ordinary voters need to fight back.

The right to vote is supposed to mean something in the United States. The idea of going to war overseas in the name of the democratic process while making a mockery of that process here at home is just too ludicrous.

Back to Top
James Lee View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: June 05 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 3525
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 15 2006 at 19:55
Okay, resurrecting this thread may be a bad idea. Confused

But to me, this new development is far more blatant and horrifying than any of the examples we've discussed previously.

Supreme Court gives police more power

The 5-to-4 ruling allows police to use evidence from a search where they didn't first announce their presence.

By Warren Richey | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
WASHINGTON Police who burst into a private building without first knocking and announcing their presence can use evidence they discover in a criminal case.

In a boost to aggressive police tactics and a setback to the privacy rights of business and home owners, the US Supreme Court has rejected the legal principle that evidence obtained in violation of the so-called knock-and-announce rule must be excluded from use at a trial.

Instead, the high court said in a 5-to-4 decision announced Thursday that such evidence can be used at trial. The social costs of excluding evidence because of a violation of the knock-and-announce rule are considerable, the high court said.

"Resort to the massive remedy of suppressing evidence of guilt is unjustified," writes Justice Antonin Scalia for the majority. He was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, and Justices Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito.

The decision marks a rejection - in the context of knock-and-announce - of a basic safeguard in the criminal justice system established in the 1960s by the high court under then Chief Justice Earl Warren. That court adopted the approach that violations of certain procedural requirements by law enforcement officials could carry the heavy penalty of exclusion of evidence from use at a trial.

The process created an incentive for police officers to not only know the law, but to scrupulously follow it while carrying out their criminal investigations.

"The court destroys the strongest legal incentive to comply with the Constitution's knock-and-announce requirement," Justice Stephen Breyer writes in a dissent, joined by three other justices.

He says he could find no legal precedent supporting the high court's ruling in any of the Fourth Amendment privacy cases decided since 1914. "It represents a significant departure from the court's precedents," Justice Breyer writes. "And it weakens, perhaps destroys, much of the practical value of the Constitution's knock-and-announce protection."

The decision is "very disturbing," says David Moran, a law professor at Wayne State University Law School who argued the case at the Supreme Court. "It seems to rethink the entire exclusionary rule, which is the only thing that has caused the police for the past 50 years to generally comply with the Fourth Amendment."

The decision comes in a case called Hudson v. Michigan. It stems from an August 1998 search by seven Detroit police officers of the home of Booker Hudson. The police obtained a warrant to search for weapons and drugs at Mr. Hudson's home. When they arrived at the front door, an officer shouted: "Police, search warrant." They paused for three to five seconds before one of the officers turned the doorknob and entered the home through the unlocked front door. They did not knock, nor did they wait to see if anyone would answer the door in response to their shout, according to briefs filed in the case.

Police rushed into the house and saw Hudson seated in a chair in the living room. Five other men and women were running throughout the house, the briefs say. In the search that followed, police discovered in the chair in which Hudson had been sitting crack cocaine in plastic bags and a loaded revolver. In Hudson's pockets, police found five rocks of cocaine and $225 in cash.

Hudson was charged with possession with intent to deliver cocaine and possession of a firearm while committing a crime. He was convicted and sentenced to 18 months probation.

On appeal, his lawyer argued that the gun and drugs should have been suppressed because of the improper tactics used by police during the search. The state appeals court upheld the conviction and the Michigan Supreme Court declined to hear the case.

In affirming the conviction, the US Supreme Court said that applying the exclusionary rule to knock-and-announce violations is not "worth a lot" as a deterrent. Instead, it creates an incentive for criminal defendants to attack police conduct, Scalia writes.

"The cost of entering this lottery would be small, but the jackpot enormous; suppression of all evidence, amounting in many cases to a get-out-of-jail-free card," Scalia writes.

Linda Feldmann contributed to this report.




Edited by James Lee - June 15 2006 at 19:56
Back to Top
maani View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Founding Moderator

Joined: January 30 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2632
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 15 2006 at 21:00
For those in the NYC area, there will be a presentation called "9/11 and the American Police State" on Sunday, June 18th at 6:30 pm at St. Marks Church on Second Avenue and 10th Street.  The presentation will be given by Rev. Frank Morales, an acquaintance and colleague of mine.  Along with Rev. Morales' presentation will be a screening of "Urban Warrior," a documentary that "investigates the growing collaboration between the U.S. military and domestic law enforcement."
 
Donation is $5.
 
[Full Disclosure: The event is sponsored by NY 9/11 Truth, an organization to which I have belonged for almost two years.]
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 567

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.164 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.