[B5JMS] ATTN JMS: Nightwatch/Home Guard in America?

b5jms-admin at cs.columbia.edu b5jms-admin at cs.columbia.edu
Wed Aug 21 04:24:57 EDT 2002

From: velovich at aol.com (V-Man)
Date: 18 Aug 2002 19:39:42 GMT
Lines: 74

>There was an excellent
>analysis of the full impact of the Patriot Act posted over at:

   I asked you, once, to show me what you objected to.  You never did.  Why?  I
pointed out, last winter, that most of the Patriot Act was nothing more than a
moderning of EXISTING laws.  Where was your outrage when Carter signed those
laws into effect?

  Most of the surveillance laws in this act refer to the necessity court
orders.  You keep leaving this out.  You *SEEM* to be ignoring this fact.  Why?

>the so-called Patriot Act

  EVERY bill has a name.  Most are given numbers for reference, but many are
given a word, phrase, or even a sentance.  This one is actually an ACRONYM. 
You should know what that is.

  So it's not a "so-called" Patriot Act, it IS called the Patriot Act.

   It's interesting how whenever a point is raised that is at odds to your
opinions, you simply ignore that point as if it were never made.
  You may disagree with me, you may think I am incorrectly interpreting what
I've read.
  But by ignoring these points, you are attempting to marginalise them by
exercising your influence here.  Many fans of any genre will, when they
hear/read the opinions of the creator or other significant person of that
genre, accept these ideas at face value.  Is that what you are relying on to
counter my arguments?

>Nixon was a crook

  While true, Nixon ALSO got us out of Viet Nam, quickly, and he ALSO started
teh modern era of US/Chinese relations.  Clinton built upon that, most likely
NOT in our country's best interests.

>Reagan did immeasurable damage to the country

   Yes, that is true, we were MUCH better off under the economic conditions we
had in 1975-79.
   I recall the "misery index" on the nightly news.  Don't you?  That went away
in 82 or so.

  *I* recall that the only way that Regan could establish a CREDIBLE defense
for our nation was to strike a deal with congress.  That deal resulted in the
biggest tax hike in history and the lion's share of it was NOT for defense.  It
was for liberal social programs that are all mostly gone now, due to the fact
they were poorly coniceved to begin with.

  I dislike historical revisionists.  Don't mess with my heritage.  regan made
mistakes, to be sure, Ed Meese comes to mind, along with the idiot that he put
in charge of the Dept of the Interior (disremember his name).  But are you
living better now under lower taxes or would you like a return to 1977, when
people in any tax braket above $25,000 suffered confiscatory taxes because they
were "rich"?

>but this is the first administration that has sent the same kind of
>worry and downright fear through me that was previously only associated with
>the McCarthy/HUAC period.

  When you are called to testify before a comitte on UnAmerican activities, let
me know, until then, this is silly.

  The system is WORKING, there *is* debate, there are NOT detention centers. 
The Courts are deciding the issue, as it was INTENDED!!!

>They're shredding the Constitution up there with terrifying speed.


Play more with Claymore!  V-Man
Living Vicariously through my Characters...

From: jmsatb5 at aol.com (Jms at B5)
Date: 20 Aug 2002 00:17:11 GMT
Lines: 18

>You keep leaving this out.  You *SEEM* to be ignoring this fact.  Why?

I'm not ignoring any facts.

I'm simply ignoring you.

Slight difference.


(jmsatb5 at aol.com)
(all message content (c) 2002 by synthetic worlds, ltd., 
permission to reprint specifically denied to SFX Magazine 
and don't send me story ideas)

More information about the B5JMS mailing list