Text 15156, 218 rader
Skriven 2008-05-11 09:44:22 av Robert Bashe (2:2448/44)
  Kommentar till text 15080 av Roy Witt (1:397/22)
Ärende: Unrest in France
========================
Roy Witt wrote to Robert Bashe on Saturday May 10 2008 at 11:06:

RB>>>> Roy, what do you want me to do? I don't damn the States out of
RB>>>> hand,

RW>>> Just out of ignorance.

RB>> Do you mean that if I were better informed, I _would_ damn the States
RB>> out of hand?

RW> No, you already do that.

Somehow I get the impression you're either not reading what I write, or you are
dead set on assuming ulterior motives to _any_ criticism whatever.

That said, I'm used to it... when I defended Bush and the Iraq invasion in the
German echos (at the time when it was by no means clear that thge intelligence
was indeed false) I got torn apart too. Your above comment just evens up the
score... now I'm persons non grata to _both_ sides ;-)

RB>>>> the President was a gung-ho fanatic,

RW>>> I think he did the right thing.

RB>> And I meanwhile think he did the one thing that would enable bin
RB>> Laden, al Quaida and the Taliban to regroup and strengthen.

RW> Oh yeah? Where is their strength?

Taliban? Read the newspapers. Now there's talk that Bush wants to send more
troops to Afghanistan to combat rising Taliban activity. Bin Laden and al
Quaida? Maybe you haven't heard of the Madrid and London attacks. And if they
are finished, why do so many in the States and elsewhere react with total panic
at the mere names? Why do foreigners get treated like criminals when the enter
the States - and in future _also_ when they leave? Is that a sign of confidence
- or of helpless weakness toward an invisible enemy?

RW> Or is hiding in the mountains between Afghanistan and Pakistan
RW> something to worry about?

The USA apparently thinks so.

RW> Keep your eye on Iran. That will be the next biggest threat to the
RW> world.

Possible. At the moment, I'm still withholding judgement on that, although I
agree that there are grounds for concern in that direction.

RB>>>> and the constitutional separation of powers is a myth.

RW>>> Is it? I see the separation everyday. Congress is always fighting
RW>>> with the White House, and vice versa.

RB>> And who loses? Congress.

RW> Congress hasn't acted on their own because they know they won't get
RW> re-elected if they do.

I notice you don't deny what I wrote.

RB>>>> Just look at Bush's blatent rejection of the idea that he cannot
RB>>>> order domestic wiretaps without judicual approval - and Congress'
RB>>>> kowtow to that view.

RW>>> The only people who have anything to worry about there are those who
RW>>> would conspire with the enemy. I'm for it.

Good! Now please post your last income tax return here, your credit card
numbers and details of your bank accounts. Since you have nothing to hide, that
shouldn't worry you at all. Or do you "conspire with the enemy"?

RB>> This kind of BS is also prevalent among those here in Germany who are
RB>> uninformed and unable to realize that _everyone_ has something to
RB>> hide.

RW> Sure...I have nothing to hide, so I don't feel intimidated by it.
RW> Others may have problems with it, but I don't think it's a big deal.

Hey, that's good! In that case, please also detail your sexual proclivities,
your movements over the last 6 months and what you did with the neighbor's
daughter behind the barn when you were 7 years old. That's not a "big deal", is
it? Oh yes, and don't forget your fingerprints, DNA patern, good mugshots and
passport number (if any).

RB>> The most regrettable part of it is that they generally only realize
RB>> their error too late, and then scream because they themselves are the
RB>> targets of government snooping.

RW> I could agree with you there, if I lived in Europe. Here, Congress has
RW> to agree and pass it into law permanately. Then it will have to pass
RW> under the noses of the USSC before anyone should be worried about it.

Like the secret wiretaps without judicial approval? Tell it to someone else,
Roy, maybe they'll believe it.

RW>>> You have democracy over there? Odd, I didn't think there was such a
RW>>> thing in countries who haven't got the 'people' running government.

RB>> And how long have you lived outside the States to venture such an
RB>> opinion?

RW> That's an opinion voiced by your friends there who believe it's called
RW> freedom. They don't know real freedom, as they have no experience with
RW> it. It's like the subject above where the government snoops into your
RW> private life. They think they have freedom, but they really don't.

Unfortunately, the same applies to you. I know what freedom is, as it existed
in the States in the 40s and 50s.

RW>>> I'm still as free as I was on September 10, 2001...

RB>> That's what you think.

RW> That's what I know.

As long as you live in a small town in Texas and never have any contact with
the outside world except for the Internet, you may be right. At least
subjectively.

RW>>> What I see is an improvement in illegal immigration laws. If you
RW>>> want to come here and work, fine, but when the job is done, go home.

RB>> Too late, Roy. If the States had wanted that, it would have had to
RB>> start a couple of hundred years ago.

RW> You're not living here, so you have no idea what is wanted here.

Not very good in history, are you? I remembewr the Chinese laborers who were
imported to help in the California gold fields in the 1850s and 1860s. Ever
hear of Chinatown in San Fransisco? Their decendents are there.

RB>> And of course, it would not have developed as it did for lack of
RB>> population.

RW> right, it developed as it did because the government didn't allow the
RW> border patrol enougn money or manpower to enforce the law. Not to
RW> mention the people who want those illegals here to pick their fruit.

You're thinking of the 20th century.

RW> I'm looking all about and all I see is freedom. There's no gestapo
RW> roaming the streets harrassing anyone.

Stuff like that is never out in the open. Lokk at how long it took for the
secret, unauthorized wiretaps to become public.

RB>> As a matter of fact, I _am_ a German citizen, naturalized after some
RB>> 35 years here. At the time, I was sad that I had to give up my
RB>> American citizenship to become naturalized, but meanwhile that
RB>> sadness has faded considerably.

RW> Great. Don't worry about America, she's in good hands.

Yeah, we've noticed that in the last 8 years.

RB>> I think once you get past the border, the intrusive, demeaning and
RB>> downright insulting "security" checks (do they really think foreign
RB>> visitors are going to bomb a taxi from the airport to the city??),

RW> You can never tell. That's done in other countries...

Since when?

RW> The more security the better.

OK, then amend the Constitution to prohibit private citizens from acquiring
firearms and you've gained a great deal of "security" - oh, I forgot... you
only mean "security" against foreigners. Like the guy who bombed the federal
building in Oklahoma city... Timothy McVeigh, doubtless an al Quaida member
from Scotland.

RB>> But I don't expect you to understand that, as you've apparently never
RB>> ben outside the States (except maybe on a visitors' card to Mexico),

RW> There isn't a visitor's card required to enter Mexico.

There was when I was there. And you couldn't get out of the country without
one.

RW> There is a passport required to go deep into Mexico, but that can be
RW> waivered if you have enough cash.

And that was no requirement when I was there.

RW> Crossing the border into Mexico only requires a ride or walk across
RW> the border. I havn't been near the border of Mexico in a few years,
RW> but entering probably hasn't changed a one bit.

I'd be willing to bet it has.

RW> I hear that it may have changed, a photo ID issued by the US
RW> government may be required now. No big deal. In the near future, State
RW> photo IDs will have the HLS logo on them and it'll be just as easy to
RW> cross as it was in the past.

HLS... is that something like the Gestapo? And right as rain, that's a damned
leading question, but one that is starting to seem justified based on
developments.

RB>> if you had visited a country behind the Iron Curtain, you might have
RB>> some idea how foreigners now view American immigration procedures.
RB>> The only difference was that the Iron Curtain countries never took
RB>> your fingerprints.

RW> Too bad you gave up your US citizen papers. You could now get a
RW> passcard and wouldn't need to go through all that.

Passcard? Without a passport _you_ can't enter the EU. But at least you still
don't get treated like a criminal for wanting to do so. No fingerprinting, no
mugshots, no interrogations. But just wait... our politicians are
enthusiastically following the developments in the States, and may well
institute such things for Americans in the future - if they have the backbone
to weather the complaints by American tourists, which I doubt.

Cheers, Bob

--- GoldED+/W32 1.1.5-0613
 * Origin: Jabberwocky System - 02363-56073 ISDN/V34 (2:2448/44)