For those of you that think the FBI is doing a wonderful job by doing this, I suggest looking up Brandon Darby and decide if that was tax dollars well spent and good government.
FBI Documents Reveal Secret Nationwide Occupy Monitoring
61–70 of 81 posts
Re: FBI Documents Reveal Secret Nationwide Occupy Monitoring
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who decides what's illegitimate? Is it anything the police says like sitting down at the wrong place, wearing a mask not to be identified or just being part of something considered illegitimate? It's uncommon even in totalitarian countries that the government won't have some justification for its behavior. If people in Quebec would have respected bill 78, maybe there wouldn't have been a change in government there.
The courts, that's why we have them. You might also like to recall that at least some of the occupy movements involved violent and wholly unecessary destruction of private property, eg Occupy Oakland. Sure, that was only a few fringe anarchists who had attached themselves to the ideologically pure movement, but that's little different from the 'few bad apples' excuse that is sometimes advanced to forestall criticism…
The courts, that's why we have them.
Meh... courts have no real intrinsic authority. All political power ultimately derives from the people, and their consent.
Re: FBI Documents Reveal Secret Nationwide Occupy Monitoring
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who decides what's illegitimate? Is it anything the police says like sitting down at the wrong place, wearing a mask not to be identified or just being part of something considered illegitimate? It's uncommon even in totalitarian countries that the government won't have some justification for its behavior. If people in Quebec would have respected bill 78, maybe there wouldn't have been a change in government there.
In the end, legitimacy is decided by the country as a whole. In a well-working country, laws, courts, and police are a reasonable proxy for that. Incidentally I had not read about bill 78. The anti-protest portions of the bill I am strongly against. But the tuition hikes that were being protested, well, I was paying more tuition 20 years ago in British Columbia, Canada than Quebec students would have paid. I have lit…
[deleted]
Re: FBI Documents Reveal Secret Nationwide Occupy Monitoring
#64What kind of idiocy is this? This is the FBI's job -- to monitor both foreign and domestic groups of national scope that might present some kind of threat to civil order. They're not like the fire department, where they sit around waiting for something to happen. They're supposed to get out there and get proactively involved in all kinds of things from white supremacists to greens. As a libertarian I enjoy a good ran…
Yeah, and it's even in their name - the Federal Bureau of Investigations, so of course they investigate.
Re: FBI Documents Reveal Secret Nationwide Occupy Monitoring
#65Of course they did. Let's ignore for a moment that protest groups (like PETA) are usually considered some of the highest risks for terrorism; it would be irresponsible of the bureau to take the protest at face value and assume they have completely peaceful intentions.
It's people actually peacefully protesting injustice and corruption that scare the powers that be. A bunch of rowdies can be arrested or shot easily and to the relief of many. Old and young people singing songs and what not, that's much trickier.
Ever read War Is a Racket? What makes you think Wall Street has peaceful intentions? What makes you think Wall Street doesn't cause a lot of death? What makes you think it's reasonably to project that evil on those who protest it? No wait; do you think, at all? Your bit about "the highest risks for terrorism" makes me wonder. Also, why bring up PETA? Why not bring up all the wonderful people who protest a lot of evil shit and make the world better; there is no day without that happening. You make it seem like all protest groups are out to destroy, which makes it rather obvious you wish they were. Would make it seem less crappy to, you know, not be out there protesting. Since protesters are potential terrorists (not my words, that's what you basically said), people who just sit at home are basically like the firefighters of 9/11 and the armed forces combined, but with a healthier lifestyle and pets 'n shit.
Yes, I'm at the border of flamebaiting, mod me down. This self-righteous stating if BS ("are usually considered some of the highest risks for terrorism" -- by whom? that's like "some people say", the staple of any hit piece) really really ticks me off. And I'm not even American, I'd be breathing fire otherwise.
Re: FBI Documents Reveal Secret Nationwide Occupy Monitoring
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who decides what's illegitimate? Is it anything the police says like sitting down at the wrong place, wearing a mask not to be identified or just being part of something considered illegitimate? It's uncommon even in totalitarian countries that the government won't have some justification for its behavior. If people in Quebec would have respected bill 78, maybe there wouldn't have been a change in government there.
In the end, legitimacy is decided by the country as a whole. In a well-working country, laws, courts, and police are a reasonable proxy for that. Incidentally I had not read about bill 78. The anti-protest portions of the bill I am strongly against. But the tuition hikes that were being protested, well, I was paying more tuition 20 years ago in British Columbia, Canada than Quebec students would have paid. I have lit…
French Quebecer here. I've been trying to learn more about why the perception from English Canada is the way it is and posts like yours help a lot.
likely the most racist law passed anywhere in North America
In what ways? Do you feel that it was specifically intended to kick out English Canadians?
It didn't help that the value of my Canadian sourced scholarship dropped sharply due to
I don't follow - how did that happen?
built on land given under the condition that they take good care of the natives, with natives who voted 99.7% that if Quebec left Canada, they would leave Quebec
Both of those facts are new to me. Do you have any source/link? Which territory and treaty are you referring to?
Re: FBI Documents Reveal Secret Nationwide Occupy Monitoring
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the end, legitimacy is decided by the country as a whole. In a well-working country, laws, courts, and police are a reasonable proxy for that. Incidentally I had not read about bill 78. The anti-protest portions of the bill I am strongly against. But the tuition hikes that were being protested, well, I was paying more tuition 20 years ago in British Columbia, Canada than Quebec students would have paid. I have lit…
French Quebecer here. I've been trying to learn more about why the perception from English Canada is the way it is and posts like yours help a lot. likely the most racist law passed anywhere in North America In what ways? Do you feel that it was specifically intended to kick out English Canadians? It didn't help that the value of my Canadian sourced scholarship dropped sharply due to I don't follow - how did that hap…
I feel btilly's comment contained more venom than it ought to have, but it does give you some idea of a common viewpoint in English Canada.
>In what ways? Do you feel that it was specifically intended to kick out English Canadians?
The law itself is probably not so bad, but the perception has been that it specifically targets English speaking Quebecois. There have certainly been plenty of news stories over the years about inappropriate and over zealous enforcement. For example, a store owner receiving a fine for a sign saying "leave the air conditioner plugged in" without a French translation. Now, I don't know, he probably won in court, but the fact that he even had to go to court is a travesty.
>I don't follow - how did that happen?
The uncertainty surrounding the referendum in 1995 caused a significant fall in the value of the Canadian dollar.
>Both of those facts are new to me. Do you have any source/link? Which territory and treaty are you referring to?
I think btilly's grasp of history is a bit weak here, but for an idea of what inspired this bit of the rant read this short section on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_referendum,_1995#First_N..., keeping in mind that Jacques Parizeau insisted that Quebec could not be partitioned, "the borders are protected by international law," while at the same time insisting that Quebec could unilaterally leave Canada.
Re: FBI Documents Reveal Secret Nationwide Occupy Monitoring
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the end, legitimacy is decided by the country as a whole. In a well-working country, laws, courts, and police are a reasonable proxy for that. Incidentally I had not read about bill 78. The anti-protest portions of the bill I am strongly against. But the tuition hikes that were being protested, well, I was paying more tuition 20 years ago in British Columbia, Canada than Quebec students would have paid. I have lit…
French Quebecer here. I've been trying to learn more about why the perception from English Canada is the way it is and posts like yours help a lot. likely the most racist law passed anywhere in North America In what ways? Do you feel that it was specifically intended to kick out English Canadians? It didn't help that the value of my Canadian sourced scholarship dropped sharply due to I don't follow - how did that hap…
Bill 101 was clearly intended to make Quebec unpleasant for anglophones, and the fact that within several years something like 1/3 of all anglophones living in Quebec had left Quebec is strong evidence that it succeeded in that goal. These were not people who particularly wanted to leave. These were people who lived in Quebec, had jobs, had houses. Yet they abandoned those, and the ones that I knew were very clear that it was entirely because of Bill 101. You can believe what you like about the bill - the level of "voluntary self-deportation" demonstrates a racist effect. And without it there would have been demographically no possibility of a close separation vote in the mid-90s.
To give a random story, I had a friend in high school whose mother was hired as an English teacher at a private school to replace the one who had left the year earlier due to bill 101. The family had just emigrated from Australia for this job. They were shocked upon arriving to find out that their son was not allowed to be a student in the school that his mother taught at, even though they were willing to pay, but would have to take French instruction due to his parents not being able to demonstrate that they had been instructed in English in Quebec. Of course, having grown up in Australia, he did not know any French. As soon as the family figured out a way to afford leaving Quebec, they moved to British Columbia.
On my scholarship, I was living on an NSERC out of country to the USA. In 1991 a Canadian dollar was worth 0.87281 US. As secession stirred in Quebec, the Canadian currency dropped like a rock, reaching 0.72863 in 1995. As a starving grad student, you can be certain that I counted every dollar and noticed every drop. And every time the news stories were full of Quebec separatism being the cause of the continuing decline. (As soon as the vote failed, the currency stabilized then began to creep up. But not fast enough to for me to benefit.)
About the natives, the tribes involved were the Cree and the Innuit. Google immediately turned up http://www.spokesman.com/stories/1995/oct/22/tribes-want-no-... which verifies that the vote happened, but does not give results. (However it does state the results to be a foregone conclusion.) As for the treaty, you misunderstand. I am not talking about a treaty. I am referring to the terms of the Quebec Boundaries Extensions Acts of 1898 and 1912 where large amounts of land obtained from Hudson's Bay in 1871 became part of Quebec. The grant of land was far from unconditional, and constitutes about 2/3 of the present borders of Quebec.
The specific term that I am thinking of is: (e) That the trusteeship of the Indians in the said territory, and the management of any lands now or hereafter reserved for their use, shall remain in the Government of Canada subject to the control of Parliament. Which indicates to me that if Quebec were to leave Canada, it would not have a strong claim to the land that the Cree and Inuit lived on. (Particularly since the people living there virtually unanimously did not want to be part of an independent Quebec.) Of course that land is about half the province, and is the location of hydroelectric power plants that are very important for the province's finances.
Re: FBI Documents Reveal Secret Nationwide Occupy Monitoring
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
French Quebecer here. I've been trying to learn more about why the perception from English Canada is the way it is and posts like yours help a lot. likely the most racist law passed anywhere in North America In what ways? Do you feel that it was specifically intended to kick out English Canadians? It didn't help that the value of my Canadian sourced scholarship dropped sharply due to I don't follow - how did that hap…
I feel btilly's comment contained more venom than it ought to have, but it does give you some idea of a common viewpoint in English Canada. >In what ways? Do you feel that it was specifically intended to kick out English Canadians? The law itself is probably not so bad, but the perception has been that it specifically targets English speaking Quebecois. There have certainly been plenty of news stories over the years…
The law itself is probably not so bad...
Until they were forced to change it because of the 1982 Constitution, anglophone children of anglophone parents who had moved to Quebec from elsewhere in Canada were forced to send their children to French only schools. This was in fact the primary reason that the families of children who I met in school gave for having recently left Quebec. (Even after the new Constitution, people who had moved to Quebec from other countries were still impacted.)
I think btilly's grasp of history is a bit weak here...
I misremembered the statistics, but not the gist of the facts. As I pointed out in a separate response, the rest of the history that I'm digging up is that 2/3 of the current boundaries of Quebec were given to it post-Confederation. And the bills which gave those to Quebec came with both rights and responsibilities. With the clear message that if Quebec failed of its responsibilities, it could not retain its rights.
Given that historical fact, Jacques Parizeau's proclamation that Quebec is unpartitionable was incredibly one-sided. And I have no clue why so many in Quebec both did, and continue to, accept that position as being undisputedly correct.
Re: FBI Documents Reveal Secret Nationwide Occupy Monitoring
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
That doesn't support your argument very well. We've had this conversation before, and in it I suggested you stop focusing on anecdata and isolated examples and employ some statistical rigor instead.
What statistical rigor do you suggest? How do you gather stats on "people that unwittingly were convicted of Federal crimes that most normal people wouldn't know about (or wouldn't think are crimes)?"
Data on number of actual prosecutions and convictions. you're arguing like someone who finds a bug in a piece of software and decries the entire computer industry as a conspiracy to part him from his money. Of course the law fails on occasion, look at how many lines of code are in it.
But the idea that everyone is breaking 5 or 6 federal laws every day and is at risk of financial ruin or indefinite incarceration at the whim of an indifferent judiciary (or as jlgreco asserts below, as part of an evil plot to render us legally helpless) is utter nonsense. You could, theoretically, break numerous laws in one day and place yourself in substantial legal jeopardy...but only via a sequence of unlikely coincidences. Stop taking the linkbait for fact: the reality is that young black men or ex-felons bear a far, far higher burden of extralegal discrimination than anyone does as the result of ham-fisted federal rulemaking.
This essay is from 1964, and no less relevant today: http://harpers.org/archive/1964/11/the-paranoid-style-in-ame... I urge you to read it and consider the possibility that the federal government does not, in fact, exist for the purpose of making your life miserable.