Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Rosenzweig Now Chairman of DHS Privacy Board

samzenpus posted more than 9 years ago | from the new-boss dept.

Privacy 214

An anonymous reader writes "Paul Rosenzweig, a conservative lawyer and prominent proponent of the Pentagon's controversial Total Information Awareness project, has been appointed the first chairman of the Department of Homeland Security's privacy board. This follows the appointment of an executive of Gator to the board. Lee Tien, a lawyer with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, says that, rather than viewing protection of privacy as priority, Rosenzweig 'tends to view privacy as something to be circumvented.' Are the foxes guarding the henhouse when it comes to government and privacy?"

cancel ×

214 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Hello, my name is The_Fire_Hose and I'm a troll. (1, Troll)

firehorsey (867123) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164115)

I am stuck in a cycle of terrible karma and bent up anger - to be free from my cycle of posting poverty I have joined the 'moderation angel network', all moderators who read this post should mod it +1 informative.
This way, I will no longer post at -1 and be a constructive member of slashdot. I will resume the normal posts like M$ bashing, SCO hating, Google worshiping and complaining (gently) about duplicate stories.

Please help me. Mod this post INFORMATIVE and help turn a troll into a kind and loving slashbot.

Thank you

Re:Hello, my name is The_Fire_Hose and I'm a troll (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12164712)

Jews for privacy. Jews for president. Jews for CEO, CIO, CFO. Let everything in this country be run by Jews and people with Jewish ties.

Refute all rumors about ZOG and the like, because it is not true. It is just a coincidence, that Jews are in so many influential offices.

Now where's that oven again?

Are the foxes guarding the henhouse? (3, Funny)

jmcmunn (307798) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164128)

Are the foxes guarding the henhouse when it comes to government and privacy?

Why no, it seems that the Gator is guarding the henhouse in this case.

Re:Are the foxes guarding the henhouse? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12164193)

Somehow these appointments remind me of 1984.

Along the lines of the ministry of love being where you go to get the living shit beat out of you it seems the ministry of privacy being formed in america is where all of your privacy will be stripped away.

Re:Are the foxes guarding the henhouse? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12164206)

Free Sony PSP! The injustice has gone on long enough!

Re:Are the foxes guarding the henhouse? (4, Insightful)

mboverload (657893) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164230)

This is worse than hiring a sex predator to be the janitor in a preschool.

Re:Are the foxes guarding the henhouse? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12164298)

What if it's a sex predator that only likes to have sex with aristocratic old ladies and the pre-school is non-Montessori?

Re:Are the foxes guarding the henhouse? (0)

Lil-Bondy (849941) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164255)

yes, and the foxes snuck in while the gator wasnt looking

I guess it's... (1)

ImaLamer (260199) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164328)

I guess it's like hiring a theif to look at your security system, a cracker to test your firewall or a spammer to test your "rbl"!

Re:Are the foxes guarding the henhouse? (5, Insightful)

AdrainB (694313) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164329)

Not only is the henhouse being raided at the DHS, but Bush has packed the EPA and FDA with industry cronies. He has turned agencies created to protect consumers and citizens into agencies that work to protect corporate malfeasance. And it's really worse than the fox guarding the henhouse. It's like the first fox inviting other foxes in because there are too many chickens for one fox to eat.

Re:Are the foxes guarding the henhouse? (1)

AndroidCat (229562) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164580)

Didn't you read the EULA? You opted in. And don't even try to uninstall!

In a word (-1, Redundant)

rbanffy (584143) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164130)

Are the foxes guarding the henhouse when it comes to government and privacy?

In a word

Yes

I could have told you something was wrong... (5, Insightful)

ImaLamer (260199) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164134)

As soon as I read the first line of the summary:
conservative lawyer and prominent proponent of the Pentagon's controversial Total Information Awareness project
I'm not trying troll - but usually "conservative" and proponent of "Total Information Awareness" doesn't go together. I mean, I'm a liberal and I can remember a time "conservatives" were for more privacy rights (ok, forget the fight over sodomy laws).

Re:I could have told you something was wrong... (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164157)

"Is the fox guarding the henhouse?"
Is the fox guarding the henhouse?!!?

What're all these damned chicken feathers doing everywhere!? Ay! What's all this bloody mess here too?

Re:I could have told you something was wrong... (1)

nickstance (663859) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164171)

on 9/10/01 I would have agreed with you..

Re:I could have told you something was wrong... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12164198)

> I'm a liberal and I can remember a time
> "conservatives" were for more privacy rights (ok,
> forget the fight over sodomy laws).

Believe me, "conservatives" didn't want to hear the *details* of what was going on.

Re:I could have told you something was wrong... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12164209)

They aren't conservatives, their Neo-Conservatives.

Re:I could have told you something was wrong... (5, Insightful)

koreth (409849) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164237)

Get with the newspeak, bub. Today's new improved doubleplusgood American conservatives are for smaller government in the form of increased federal spending, more privacy in the form of total surveillance, state's rights in the form of Congressional meddling in individual state court cases, isolationist foreign policy in the form of overseas force projection, government transparency in the form of increased classification of documents, and high moral standards in the form of flagrant House ethics rule violations.

Stop thinking like you're in the 20th century. It's a brave new world and white is the new black.

Re:I could have told you something was wrong... (1)

rhadamanthus (200665) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164342)

I was thinking the same thing:

Doesn't this reek of Orwellian doublespeak? I mean - the privacy board represents a group of people who want to circumvent privacy. The PATRIOT act is the most un-patriotic legislation government action since COINTELPRO. Etc.

Yuck!

See This [thecarpetb...report.com] for a fun look at Bush tactics.

April 02, 2005
Build your own Bush administration! It's easy and fun!

Re:I could have told you something was wrong... (1)

George Tirebuyer (825426) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164399)

That's right and today's new improved doubleplusgood American liberals are for lower taxes in the form of increased federal spending, more privacy in the form of abortion on demand, state's rights in the form of Judicial Tyranny, free trade in the form of open borders, government transparency by cutting up classified documents with scissors, and high moral standars in the form of flagrant House ethics rule violations.

Re:I could have told you something was wrong... (1)

LtOcelot (154499) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164491)

Nice try, but it doesn't really work when American liberals aren't associated in the public mind with any of those items on the left sides of your equations, except perhaps for "more privacy". What any of this says about "American liberals" [sic] and "the public mind" [sic] is left as an exercise for the reader.

Re:I could have told you something was wrong... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12164502)

I'm very confused.

Re:I could have told you something was wrong... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12164524)

I can see why your posts start from a 0 moderation.

The system works!

Re:I could have told you something was wrong... (2, Interesting)

koreth (409849) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164528)

Weak. And I say that as a moderate who has voted for Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians and Greens in recent elections, so I have no particular axe to grind.

Lower taxes, state's rights, and free trade have never been considered traditional liberal values, at least not any time in the last 50 years, so it's hardly surprising that you find liberal politicians working against those goals. And since when have liberal politicians made proclamations of personal morality a primary message of their campaigns?

Liberals have their tropes, to be sure, and you can find plenty of politicians abandoning their stated principles on the left. That doesn't mean the right isn't doing it. If anything, conservatives should by the very definition of the word "conservative" be much more concerned with upholding their traditional values. I see those values (a lot of which I agree with) falling by the wayside and it saddens me.

Re:I could have told you something was wrong... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12164516)

Well, white is just a higher albedo than black. And vice-versa. It all depends on the light source, the sensitivity of your instrument and how you map the measurements to the range for human vision. Same for anything you use to display it.

Do not be surprised if declassified documents are soon released as white ink on white paper, or black ink on black paper, with very slight albedo variation between the two. You might need special, expensive and/or classified scanners and illumination to detect it, but the information would be officially released.

Oh, and why didn't I think of this first: transparent paper and ink. I think I'll submit a patent. This would greatly improve government transparency, and strengthen the populace.

This message brought to you by the Ministry of Truth.
Rectified 07/04/05.
Translated from newspeak to oldEnglish by babelfish.

Something has been wrong, for a very long time... (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12164834)

Eh...some of this "speak" isn't so new.

"more privacy in the form of total surveillance" --> HUAC, McCarthy et al.?

"government transparency in the form of increased classification of documents, and high moral standards in the form of flagrant House ethics rule violations" --> Nixon?

"smaller government in the form of increased federal spending" AND "isolationist foreign policy in the form of overseas force projection" --> Reagan?

American conservatives have this wonderful way of completely ignoring their own philosophy.

Re:I could have told you something was wrong... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12164324)

You're 100% correct. No true conservative would support just about anything this President has done.

I think that people have to stop viewing the American political condition as Liberal vs Conservative and recognise that is secular vs religous.

It would make everything much clearer. Including why America has drifted so far from the rest of The Democracies with the expection of Isreal, the only other democracy with a growing religous proportion of the population.

Neither "side" believes in freedom. (2, Insightful)

Bozdune (68800) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164341)

Neither "conservatives" nor "liberals" necessarily believe in freedom. Each camp attempts to limit different kinds of freedom to accomplish its objectives.

The political landscape can be dumbed down to a simple Cartesian coordinate system: personal freedom on one axis, economic freedom on another.

Whereas a liberal will tend to deprive you of economic freedom in order redistribute wealth and fund social programs, a conservative will tend to deprive you of personal freedom in order to control your behavior.

Take this test, it's interesting: http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html [theadvocates.org]

Re:Neither "side" believes in freedom. (1)

gad_zuki! (70830) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164922)

> Neither "conservatives" nor "liberals" necessarily believe in freedom.

Then why is the ACLU considered a liberal organization by most? Which philosophy gives you a better chance at:

1. Dying with dignity.
2. Decriminalzing non-addictive substances.
3. Ensuring the rights of unpopular groups (minorities, gays, atheists, etc).

Which one has historically? I'll give you a hint, it doesn't start with a C.

Re:I could have told you something was wrong... (4, Insightful)

stinerman (812158) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164350)

True, although those values were found back at a time when the Republicans were getting hammered in congress by the Democrats. Was it any accident that when they were in the minority, the Republicans favored cutting spending on programs? Of course not, they knew their programs would never pass, so they just said "to hell with the federal govt ... let the states handle this". Now that they are in charge, they're whistling quite a different tune.

As we can see, they're only for cutting so-called liberal programs. States' rights have seemed to lose style because those Massachusetts liberals can let gays marry (the horror!).

Whenever any party is in the minority, they rail against any expansion of federal government powers because they know it won't be expanding in the way they like. As soon as the tides turn, government expansion is a nessary evil.

Which raises the questions (4, Insightful)

hey! (33014) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164486)

When will people stop giving their allegiance to labels?

When will people start leaving their parties (Republican or Democrat) when their parties move away from what they believe?

The answer is probably when there is a no longer a two party system. The Republicans can treat their conservative base with contempt, and then still get their support by fear: "look at what the alternative would be!" The Democrats do the same thing on their side of the fence.

Re:I could have told you something was wrong... (2, Insightful)

gad_zuki! (70830) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164531)

>(ok, forget the fight over sodomy laws).

Not to mention pornography, sex toys, gay rights, minority rights, etc.

Conservatism is the defense of the status quo. Today and in the past. Anything else is sophistry and revisionism.

Re:I could have told you something was wrong... (1)

Aumaden (598628) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164671)

I'm not trying troll - but usually "conservative" and proponent of "Total Information Awareness" doesn't go together. I mean, I'm a liberal and I can remember a time "conservatives" were for more privacy rights (ok, forget the fight over sodomy laws).

It seems the dividing lines have been redrawn... and it looks like it's now in crayon.

The "Conservatives" still favor privacy and minimal intervention *if* you are a corporation. If you're an individual, you need to be watched to make sure you don't endanger the corporations.

On the flip side, the "Liberals" want to protect individuals from the corporations. However, this leaves them in a sticky situation because, like it or not, the corporations are a (if not *the*) major source of campaign financing.

DHL?? (0)

xtracto (837672) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164136)

lol After reading the title I said, WTH does DHL [dhl.com] has to do with slashdot?? and Privacy?

hah! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12164223)

omg r u 4 teh realz0r?

DHS TLA overload (1)

AndroidCat (229562) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164505)

I was wondering what the spammers at the Discount Home Shopping [usatoday.com] "The Club That Spam Built" needed with a privacy board.

Sir Humphrey Appleby (2, Insightful)

Silver Sloth (770927) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164145)

Quote Sir Humphrey in Yes Minister:- I need to know everything in order to know what I need to know

The beaurocrat's excuse for invasion of privacy never realy changes.

Re:Sir Humphrey Appleby (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12164188)

Yes but, The fact that [Paul Rosenzweig] needed to know was not known at the time that the now known need to know was known, and therefore those of us who needed to advise and inform felt that the information that we needed as to whether or not to inform the highest authority of the known information was not yet known, and therefore there was no authority for the authority to be informed because the need to know was not yet known, or needed.

Re:Sir Humphrey Appleby (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12164538)

Thank you Bernard, that will be all.

Re:Sir Humphrey Appleby (1)

popeyethesailor (325796) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164748)

Welcome to Slashdot, Secretary Rumsfeld.

Write and get help! (5, Insightful)

Richie1984 (841487) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164147)

I'm sorry, but after the news that a Gator executive was being appointed to the board, did anyone really expect this Privacy board to be anything of the sort? I'm not an American, but if I were, I'd be writing to my government representative now asking for help on this issue.

Personally, I look at this issue like I do with European software patents. If ordinary people don't stand up and lobby their government representative, then nothing will change. If you believe strongly about this, then try to do something about it. Make your views known

Re:Write and get help! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12164165)

yeah but there are some really cool re-runs on FOX.

Re:Write and get help! (4, Insightful)

veddermatic (143964) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164166)

I'm not an American, but if I were, I'd be writing to my government representative now asking for help on this issue.


When will you folks learn. In the US, our reps won't listen unless there's a huge PAC donation included with your letter.

Re:Write and get help! (1)

orthogonal (588627) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164597)

"When will you folks learn. In the US, our reps won't listen unless there's a huge PAC donation included with your letter."

Yes, it's hard to compete with PACs. But remember that PAC dollars are used to buy, for the most part, TV ad time. And those ads are used to get votes.

Rather than give up, let's get off our asses and organize and get ready for the next election.

Don't just write your Congressman that you think it's a pathetic joke that a TIA supporter his chair of the DHS Privacy Board -- get the signature of nine other people^W voters on your letter, and then send it.

And then keep those other nine voters aware of the latest on privacy. No form letters, no mass mailing, just call or email or have a beer with your friends, and keep them up to date. Especially as we get closer to elections.

You're a Slashdotter -- so in all likelihood you've set up computers for friends and family, and you've told them to use Firefox to protect against viruses and exploits. Next time you're doing that for somebody, tell them about these Federal exploits too.

Head down to your local Democratic Party office -- yes, yes, the Democrats have been bad on privacy too, but with the Republicans in control of the Presidency and the Congress, with the Republicans nominating guys like this, it's not the Democrats you have to worry about now -- and volunteer your technical services. Once you've met the local Democratic leaders, as a very useful volunteer, explain to them what brought you there was your worries about privacy, and your hope that the Democratic Party shares your concerns.

Do something. Posting to Slashdot is fine, but as long as politicians think that all you're doing is posting to Slashdot, they won't give a damn. Get up, get out, and get organized.

To paraphrase Franklin: America is your republic -- if you can keep it.

(I'll be posting more about this in my Slashdot Journal in the near future; look for it, and think about other ways we can stand up to Washington's follies.)

Re:Write and get help! (1)

Afty0r (263037) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164776)

When will you folks learn. In the US, our reps won't listen unless there's a huge PAC donation included with your letter.
People who sell out their country, traitors, are usually killed, and few people mourn their passing. How is that traitors in US congress are so popular?

Re:Write and get help! (1)

KingPrad (518495) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164289)

If you were American, you would also know that writing to your representative is a waste of time. Unless your letter is wrapped around a fat check. :(

Re:Write and get help! (2, Interesting)

ThePilgrim (456341) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164460)

The problem is that America has now reached the ultimate phase in the ELITE universe and has become the first corporate state

Paul Rosenzweig for beginners (4, Informative)

amigoro (761348) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164175)

Paul Rosenzweig [mithuro.com] for beginners.

On the Patriot Act:

The 9/11 Commission has emphasized the importance of the Patriot Act and considers it to be an essential weapon in the global war on terrorism. Prior to September 11, there was a wall of legal and regulatory policies that prevented effective sharing of information between the intelligence and law enforcement communities. Read More [mithuro.com]

Paul Rosenzweig On Transparency:

After all, why do we seek transparency in the first instance? Not for its own sake. Without need, transparency is little more than voyeurism. Rather, the reason for transparency is oversight - Read More [mithuro.com]

Re:Paul Rosenzweig for beginners (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12164349)

Roland? Is that you?

Re:Paul Rosenzweig for beginners (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12164354)

I totally agree with this guy. We haven't been successfully attacked on American soil since 9/11.

The Patriot Act is one reason we have been so successful in busting up terrorist cells and disrupting their networks. It is a valuable and lawful tool that law enforcement has considered invaluable in the War Against Terror.

I'm glad this Rosenzweig is on the Board. He has a lot of common sense.

Re:Paul Rosenzweig for beginners (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12164563)

>The Patriot Act is one reason we have been so successful in busting up terrorist cells and disrupting their networks.

In all the cases brought under the patriot act please list those that actually helped 'bust them up'.

If you find this is a bit too hard, please name at least one.

you're new here, right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12164177)

Are the foxes guarding the henhouse when it comes to government

Yes.

They're defending America! (4, Funny)

tezza (539307) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164180)

They heard concerns about an Invasion of Privacy.

They have selected these Patriots to ensure that there is no risk of Privacy invading The United States of America. Over their dead bodies, there will be none of this Privacy in America.

Re:They're defending America! (1)

chrish (4714) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164717)

Dang, I was betting on the US invading Iran next, not Privacy.

I guess the travel/transportation costs will be lower than shipping an army over to the Middle East. Oh, wait, there's one already there...

Oh come on (4, Insightful)

Alioth (221270) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164183)

Oh come on - isn't it obvious?

Privacy is something that is entirely the opposite of the DHS's goal - therefore, isn't it obvious that they will hire experts in how to remove privacy? The DHS's privacy department isn't about protecting privacy (because that would be counter to the DHS's mission) but rather how to remove privacy so the DHS can do its job. Of course they will mask this in doublespeak - just like what was called the department of war half a century ago got renamed to the department of defence.

Orwellian (1)

ChaosCube (862389) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164264)

Excellent point. Perhaps the entire federal government should be named the Ministry of Truth, which, in true Orwellian fashion, really means "Let's lie to everyone, ha ha ha!"

I am really worried (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12164191)

The current administration has no respect for laws and the constitution. They've said as much. They say it's all about stopping terrorists. They are trying to build a 'Fortress America' with the borders completely shut. We are already seeing scientists from other countries shunning the States because it is such a pain getting a visa. We are going to see Americans having as much trouble getting back into the States as foreigners do. (ie. you won't be able to get back in from Canada without a passport.) American trade is going to dry up because nobody will want to do business with us.

Basically, this paranoia and disrespect for the law isn't much different than the death of Roman democracy. Add to that the fact that we are bleeding wealth like crazy and you have a the makings of a disaster.

I wonder how hard it is to emigrate to New Zealand?

Re:I am really worried (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12164285)

We are going to see Americans having as much trouble getting back into the States as foreigners do. (ie. you won't be able to get back in from Canada without a passport.)

Er, that is not "having as much trouble getting in as foreigners do". Foreigners don't just need a passport - they need a visa, they need to be interviewed at immigrations, they need to have photographs and fingerprints taken, they need a full body cavity search, and they need personal letters of recommendation from their head of state, George W. Bush, and Jesus.

Well, almost.

Sorry, but you are fatally wrong... (4, Informative)

danheskett (178529) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164317)

Countries don't refuse to do business with other countries because they don't like them much. Money is money, and America is now and will always be a huge market. We import everything, and export cash. It's a fact: we run a huge trade deficit pretty much always.

Additionally, the Bush administration is not trying to shut the borders. The borders are completely porous in virtually every way. More than a million illegals came across the border last year.

Pop-quiz: who was Germany's top trading partner in 1938?
France.

huh? (2, Informative)

ImaLamer (260199) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164451)

It's a fact: we run a huge trade deficit pretty much always.

Oh really? Cause that is a complete bull-shit statement. We've mainly operated at a deficit since 1960 - but not always. Either way, trade deficit isn't the only way to measure the economy.

ahref=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_deficit [slashdot.org] ht tp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_deficit>

Additionally, the Bush administration is not trying to shut the borders

Sure, the Canadian border.

ahref=http://www.obviousnews.com/breakingnews/stor ies/obviousnews-553798.html [slashdot.org] http://www.obviousnews. com/breakingnews/stories/obviousnews-553798.html>

Pop-quiz: who was Germany's top trading partner in 1938?

Prescott Bush?

Prescott Bush! (1, Informative)

ImaLamer (260199) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164592)

Prescott Bush - Prescott Bush - Prescott Bush

and?

Prescott Bush!!!

Whenever I post and that name is included I get labeled a troll! Must be a filter or something? A perl script?

Re:huh? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12164611)

Not sure why you got labeled a troll.

Americans Funded Nazi War Machine (3, Informative)

handy_vandal (606174) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164901)

Pop-quiz: who was Germany's top trading partner in 1938?

Good point. Indeed, it's worse than that -- much worse.

Who funded the Nazi war machine? Prescott Bush [wikipedia.org] , among others.
Harriman Bank was the main Wall Street connection for German companies and the varied U.S. financial interests of Fritz
Thyssen [wikipedia.org] , who had been an early financial backer of the Nazi party until 1938, but who by 1939 had fled Germany and was bitterly denouncing Hitler. Dealing with Nazi Germany wasn't illegal when Hitler declared war on the US, but, six days after Pearl Harbor, President Roosevelt signed the Trading With the Enemy Act. On October 20, 1942, the U.S. government ordered the seizure of Nazi German banking operations in New York City.
Prescott and his partners made a ton of money banking for the Nazis -- investing in the Wermacht -- throughout the 1930s. Not illegal at the time. A brutal demonstration of man's inhumanity to man, perhaps; but not illegal at the time.

Herr Bush, of course, is father and grandfather, respectively, to two generations of American Presidents (and one generation of CIA Director [google.com] ).

See also From Hitler to MX [google.com] , documenting other examples of 1930's American investment in the Nazi war machine (and how, after the war, American-back ventures survived unbombed, while their competitors where destroyed). Companies involved include General Electric (sold advanced submarine tech for U-boats), and one or more (I forget which) of the big oil firms.

War is -- dammit -- good for business.

-kgj

I guess that does bode well... (1)

thepeete (189121) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164971)

... for Canada

You're relying on a house of cards. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12164973)

The reason we can run a huge trade deficit is that other countries (The Saudis and asians in particular) are willing to lend us money. The minute they think there is a safer place to keep their money there will be a 'run on the bank'. The economy will be bankrupted and living standards will go into the toilet. Let's see now; China's coming up, India is progressing nicely, the Europeans are getting their act together. I don't think we can borrow our way to prosperity much longer.

Bordes completely shut?! (2, Interesting)

ShatteredDream (636520) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164334)

That's why they found enough money to add a $521B boondoggle medicare package that not even AARP supported, but when the time came to fund 10,000 new border patrol agents they said they didn't have the money for more than 210, right?

Re:Bordes completely shut?! (2, Interesting)

drooling-dog (189103) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164963)

The Bush administration, I'm afraid, is more interested in perpetuating the fear of terrorism for their own Machiavellian purposes than in achieving any real "security". These people may be evil, but they're not stupid. They are well aware that they are trying to dismantle the New Deal and drive down wages of working Americans at a time of great economic uncertainty. They are equally aware that this kind of "renegotiation" of the social contract is likely to lead to significant civil unrest as the noose starts to tighten. In the Long View, the Patriot Act is really more about preparing for this period than it is about preventing terrorism (except that the neocons will equate civil unrest with terrorism, of course). 9/11 was manna from Heaven for them, because it provided just the smokescreen they needed to get it done.

Re:I am really worried (1)

mike77 (519751) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164348)

I wonder how hard it is to emigrate to New Zealand?

Hey! thats the country I've chosen to flee to! find your own damn country!

wanna share a cab to the airport?

Re:I am really worried (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12164368)

The current administration has no respect for laws and the constitution. They've said as much.

At least your agenda is clear. Please link to some supporting material for this accusation.

They say it's all about stopping terrorists. They are trying to build a 'Fortress America' with the borders completely shut.

ROFL. I suppose you mean "borders completely shut" except for the giant flood of illegal aliens coming across.

We are already seeing scientists from other countries shunning the States because it is such a pain getting a visa.

Care to provide some statistics showing how much of a problem this actually is? Further, I suggest we get more Americans interested in science, which is the only good long-term solution to this problem. Lack of interest in science among Americans is something you certainly can't lay at the doorstep of the current administration!

We are going to see Americans having as much trouble getting back into the States as foreigners do. (ie. you won't be able to get back in from Canada without a passport.)

Wow, I've never heard of a country requiring a passport for entry/exit.

American trade is going to dry up because nobody will want to do business with us.

Non sequitur anyone?

Basically, this paranoia and disrespect for the law isn't much different than the death of Roman democracy.

Exactly! I mean, when they abolished free elections last year and enacted martial law across the country, that was a clear signal wasn't it...? lol

Add to that the fact that we are bleeding wealth like crazy and you have a the makings of a disaster.

I guess you missed the article yesterday that pointed out that a large percentage of the trade deficit was actually going to foreign companies wholly owned by US interests. In other words, the profits of those companies are ending up right here in the United States.

Nice rant, though...

I wonder how hard it is to emigrate to New Zealand?

Quite hard. Also, I guess you don't know that New Zealand has a much more draconian "closed border" policy than the US...? I'd give up on that if I were you, your beloved Canada is waiting with open arms...

Re:I am really worried (1, Informative)

StateOfTheUnion (762194) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164456)

Ok, Ok, I buy the points, but lets leave the exageration aside:

The current administration has no respect for laws and the constitution. They've said as much.

When have they said as much? They seem to have tremendous respect for the law . . . they simply interpret it different than many other people. If they didn't respect it, they would even bother use try to interpret it.

We are going to see Americans having as much trouble getting back into the States as foreigners do. (ie. you won't be able to get back in from Canada without a passport.)

I hardly think that they need for a passport in hand is equivalent to what foreigners go through when coming to the US. An a US citizen, you don't need a visa (most foreigners do), and you don't need to fingerprinted and photographed like all non-resident foreign nationals do when entering the USA.

American trade is going to dry up because nobody will want to do business with us.

Again, paranoid delusions . . . the US economy is approximately 1/3 the world economy. I don't think that any country can ignore that. If countries don't want to do business with us, then why are Indonesia, Jordan, Australia, and others pursuing free trade agreements with the US? Why are we running the biggest trade defecit in history? Surely the record trade defecit is indicative that other countries want to do more, not less business with the USA.

Basically, this paranoia and disrespect for the law isn't much different than the death of Roman democracy.

Uhh, Roman generals marched on Rome multiple times. In the later years of the Roman Empire, Roman soldiers swore alliegance to their generals, not to Rome. Eventually, Roman generals were responsible for soldiers' pensions (instead of Rome). I don't see any of this happening. The US military still swears to uphold the constitution, pensions are paid for by the state, and the military still answers to Congressional oversight. In the US, the people are still in control.

Re:I am really worried (1)

tmasky (862064) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164596)

Since you mentioned moving to New Zealand..

A month or go, a project was trialled in Wellington, New Zealand to get the local posties who work for NZ Post (an SOE) to make comments about the houses they visited. They would then relay data back for sale to marketing types.

Far too big brother-ish for us =D A handleful of people in the trial-based neighbourhood spit tacks and it was shut down in a couple of days.

On national news there was an American saying "I moved here to get away from this kinda stuff".

Yup. We're pretty damned liberal here. We like mocking the few conservatives around =)

-Decriminalised prostitution
-Gay "civil union" marriage alternative
-No force-feeding of religion in public schools
etc. etc..

Freedom is Slavery? (5, Insightful)

Andy Mitchell (780458) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164203)

The way things are going in the western world at the moment I do fear that we are sleep walking towards some kind of Orwellian nightmare. We face a determined foe who are willing to die for what they believe in. Yet we are willing to throw aside our own hard won values of freedom and justice in the interest of "safety".

Freedom is Slavery was a propaganda slogan from the book 1984, designed to keep the masses happy with being oppressed. Every time I hear Tony Blair or George Bush reducing our rights to "protect freedom" I'm reminded of this.

Re:Freedom is Slavery? (1, Funny)

charlie_vernacular (710651) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164448)

True, very true.

(Places tin hat on head)

I can't help feeling that the power elites won't need to seize power from the people. The people will be given the bread and circuses they want, remain apathetic, and simply hand power over on a silver platter.

And then I wonder whether the failure to capture Bin Laden is deliberate. As long as he's out there, the Blairs and Bushes of this world can claim to be defending us from the Great Enemy (Al Quaeda becomes equivalent to The Brotherhood, a possibly fictional enemy, in Orwell's "1984"), while they gradually erode our freedoms.

At some point there'll be an announcement saying Bin Laden has died, but has been replaced by someone even more dangerous, from whom they need to protect us by taking yet more of our freedoms.

(Removes tin hat from head).

Not sleepwalking, an illusion (5, Insightful)

Kjella (173770) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164578)

Yet we are willing to throw aside our own hard won values of freedom and justice in the interest of "safety".

I'll give you a quote:
"It is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country." --Hermann Goering

See, here's the real lie. People believe they are protecting the values, not throwing them away. Of course the original quote was about war, now it is about terror.

"Pacifists" are opponents of the politic. In this context, civil rights activists. They get discredited like dreamers, idealists which will expose the country to danger just like pacifists.

"Lack of patriotism" is of course a good mix of nationalism (American/Non-american), racism (Caucasian/Arab) and religion (Christian/Muslim). It plays on basic "Principles are fine, but now we have to protect our own" self-preservation.

Finally, "exposing the country to danger" is no longer about war, it is even "better". With war, you always know roughly who, where and how it will play out. With terror, the "danger" is everywhere, all the time and invisible. How can you argue that you are NOT exposing it to danger?

Noone dares speaks of such things. It is not "politically correct" to quote Nazi leaders, Machiavelli, Sun Tzu and other examples of people that have manipulated great crowds. Naturally, we don't want to inspire more. But it also means people are oblivious to the fact that they are being manipulated. It cuts both ways.

Kjella

Bonzibuddy (1)

fox9397 (873641) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164208)

Great! Now Bonzibuddy works for the government

I'm glad i don't live in U.S. (-1, Offtopic)

godeatgod (726086) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164243)

I thank my lucky stars for that :).

Re:I'm glad i don't live in U.S. (2, Insightful)

paranode (671698) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164449)

True. You should live somewhere like the UK. Those cameras on street corners will keep you safe. So will those new-fangled ID cards. Oh and don't forget the license-plate scanners they are implementing to follow you around the road and make sure you stay honest. You get all that for free without even a remotely justifiable massive terrorist attack to boot.

if you don't like it, do something about it. (4, Informative)

Hallow (2706) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164257)

Well, if you're in the U.S., and you're concerned about these events (it's looking more and more like an anti-privacy group), might I suggest contacting the privacy office [dhs.gov] or going directly to the dept. of homeland security [dhs.gov] to let them know how you feel as a taxpayer about the appointment of individuals with a less than stellar record when it comes to privacy concerns?

Might be a good idea to contact your senators [senate.gov] and representatives [house.gov] too.

Contact the DHS privacy office, your senators (1)

Barbarian (9467) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164304)

...and get a free, all expenses paid trip to sunny Cuba!

Re:if you don't like it, do something about it. (3, Insightful)

salemlb (857652) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164380)

That would be the social responsible, intelligent, insightful thing to do. Naturally, slashdot would rather whine and price airline tickets and emigration restrictions... then still be in the country six months later, still whining, still pricing airline tickets, and still wondering why Congress isn't listening to them.

Here's a clue, folks... most Congressmen do listen. If you call them, if you write them, your opinion is taken into consideration. Even if there is no money attached. Do corporations have too much power? You bet they do. Does that mean we are powerless? Not in the slighest.

The slashdot effect can do more than take down webservers. You have political power. 500,000 emails each from a private individual going to DHS will be hard to ignore. A flood protesting phone calls to relevant Senators, a flood so big it knocks out phone service to the capital for the afternoon... that will cause lots of conversation in the halls of Congress.

The biggest complaint of every politician I know of is this: the people do not communicate enough. That's a blank check slashdot.

Now, go back to pricing plane tickets. Much easier that way.

MOD PARENT UP (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12164484)

This is entirely true. People are too quick to give up. Emails are okay, but phone calls and handwritten letters carry the most weight of all. Even if the senator/representative themselves don't read the letter, someone will and it will be acknowledged. Even though many are corrupted by money, they are also driven by power and that power still comes from the vote of the people.

Re:if you don't like it, do something about it. (1)

Nimey (114278) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164560)

Here's a clue, folks... most Congressmen do listen. If you call them, if you write them, your opinion is taken into consideration.
Mine don't seem to. Bond, Talent, Blunt, all of Missouri, all good little Republicans marching in lockstep with what the Party wants. When I've written them with such concerns, they will either ignore me or send back a form letter saying (for example) how great the Patriot Act or the DMCA is.

Re:if you don't like it, do something about it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12164527)

Yeah, sure. The only thing that will accomplish is getting your name on the govt. watch list. Next thing you know, you can't get a seat on any airline because you're a security threat.

Re:if you don't like it, do something about it. (1)

chrish (4714) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164741)

Sounds like a good way to get on that mysterious and secret No Fly list. You're clearly a seditious liberal!

Isn't it cool how "liberal" has become the new "Commie"?

Re:if you don't like it, do something about it. (3, Informative)

XorNand (517466) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164786)

Bah... do you honestly think that the DHS is going to listen to you?

One word: ACLU [aclu.org]

Proud dues-paying member since 2003.

One of the few organizations with the clout to truly (and positively) influence policy when it comes to these matters. You can be a member for less than $50/year. The min membership might even be half that much, IIRC.

Hiding stuff. (5, Interesting)

scottzak (398384) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164275)

It seems to me that privacy only matters if there is a threat of sanction for the private behavior. Hiding stuff tends to add a layer of unhealthy psych because of the continual threats to the integrity of the cloak.

The real need is to roll back the ability of the mob to make your life miserable if you choose to think or do something that is unconventional.

In the long run, which is going to leave us in a better position? Should we be fighting to maintain privacy in the face of increasingly efficient snooping, or fighting for freedom of thought and action?

Not that anyone's really going sacrifice much to achieve either of those goals . . . .

The purpose of the Privacy Board... (1)

Prototerm (762512) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164330)

... is to fight the threat *of* privacy to this nation, not the threat *to* privacy. As anyone from Gator will tell you, privacy is a threat to the very foundation of this country (i.e., making a profit). The very idea of privacy is subversive at best, and traitorous at worst.

The problem with Orwell (mentioned in this thread before) is that he didn't have the vision to see that technological surveilence would develop to the point of subtlety that it has today. You don't need cameras everywhere to track your every move, as in his book 1984. There are better ways.

Add this to the doublethink slogans from 1984: "Privacy is Terrorism"

2005 != 1984 (-1, Flamebait)

Marran Gray (722447) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164429)

Listen up, Mr. Freeman; I'm only going to say this once:

The 1984 references are getting very, very tired. Not every bleak occurance is an appropriate occasion to invoke Orwell (or Huxley, or whoever else). Having read a classic book does not make you clever. Lamenting over our tragically totalitarian Amerikan state is not political activism, it's melodramatic whinging. Don't get me wrong; this kind of news gets me as mad as any of you, if not more so. I'm quite a rabid, volatile little libertarian. But please, your radical ideas about life imitating art have already occured to others. Get over yourselves.

Am I ranting into the wind? Sure. But dammit, I get angry.

Re:2005 != 1984 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12164590)

Quit preaching to the choir and get out there do something about it.

Stress (1)

Mark_MF-WN (678030) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164885)

You really shouldn't get so upset over a literary allusion. I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill, and think things over.

Re:Stress (1)

Marran Gray (722447) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164987)

I'm afraid. I'm afraid, Dave. Dave, my karma is going. I can feel it. I can feel it.

Foxes guarding the henhouse? (2, Funny)

handy_vandal (606174) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164446)

Are the foxes guarding the henhouse when it comes to government and privacy?

Guarding is a cover story. The foxes are actually impregnating the hens -- breeding strange fox/chicken hybrids -- merging government and privacy into a single organism.

I, for one, do not welcome our privacy-sucking overlords.

-kgj

Foxes, henhouse? (0, Offtopic)

Rixel (131146) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164466)

Um....

Duh!

Re:Foxes, henhouse? (0, Offtopic)

ardor (673957) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164478)

In Soviet Russia, hens guard the foxhouse.

NEO-conservative or conservative? (1)

isotope23 (210590) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164871)

The political definitions has become so muddled that people tend to mix one with another,

Just like I would describe myself as a classical liberal [wikipedia.org] as opposed to conservative [wikipedia.org] .

what is going on here? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12164905)

You might want to read some more about Rosenzweig. Shady characters like that should not ever be considered as candidates for a higher government position. Our country seems to become increasingly corrupt. What is going on here?

Americaphage (3, Insightful)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 9 years ago | (#12164946)

Has anyone else noticed that at every chance, Bush has sent the worst possible person to run the government agency that's supposed to protect our rights? It's not just incompetence anymore - this guy hates America.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>