Subject:
|
Re: A couple more articles on the civil liberties angle
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 20 Sep 2001 00:50:43 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
210 times
|
| |
|
|
> http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/09/18/1950255&mode=nocomment
This article asserts that intelligence to stop the attack was needed and
could have been obtained by the now highly desired relaxing of individual
rights of privacy. I guess following up on 6 years old intelligence leads
from the Phillipines would have been too easy?
This article also contains the following highlighted statement:
"The government has an obligation to protect them."
This statement is actually false. Many court decisions have acknowledged
that the government is only responsible for you when you are in custody (and
even then they try to squirm out of the obvious liability issues). But I
agree that they would like to have us all in a kind of perpetual custody.
We're so much easier to control that way...
-- Hop-Frog (admittedly a knee-jerk "give me my phone call" kind of guy)
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
2 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
