Re: non military license for ada

[Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com>]

Preben Randhol wrote:
> Sadly it is so. Bush is talking about "fight for our Freedom", but he
> passes laws to restict it. Is it only me that sees the paradox here?

It sounds like the law is to let investigations go forward
more easily. It's not preventing you from reading whatever
you want to, but it may make it easier for the government
to find out what you read. I've said before that I favor
no limits on what information may be gathered from public
sources. Since public libraries are explicitly government-
run agencies, I find it even more absurd that they should
be forbidden from sharing information with the rest of the
government.

> CNN is censoring

Or perhaps just editing.

> Independant reporters are threatened that satelite
 > uplinks will be fire upon

This is claimed by one BBC correspondent. I assume that the
Pentagon intends to target any detected communications sources
that it doesn't know about. If that happens to be a freelance
reporter in the middle of a war zone, well, as she said, they've
been warned.

>    http://www.wired.com/news/conflict/0,2100,58043,00.html?

OK, this is a reporter who intends to go to northern Iraq. Cool.

>    http://www.gulufuture.com/news/kate_adie030310.htm

This is the bombing story above. OK. How is the Pentagon supposed
to distinguish between Iraqi C^3 and stray reporters?

>    http://www.thememoryhole.org/

The war pictures? It rather reminds me of the anti-choice
people who like to show pictures of aborted fetuses. Yes,
I already knew that war kills and maims. So do planes flown
into buildings. The anti-war people are fond of saying that
it's dangerous to attack Iraq because it will invite more
incidents of terrorism against us. On the contrary, attacking
Iraq will demonstrate to nations so inclined that if they do
not restrain their support of movements which wish to attack
Americans and their interests, they might find themselves on
the receiving end next. I rather like the image of the US as
a maniacal junkyard dog that you do well not to provoke.

> I'm sad for the thousands of civilians who will be killed.

So am I, to the extent that those civilians do not support the
actions of their government. Unfortunately, if we decided not
to go to war for fear of killing civilians, then that would
simply encourage enemies to surround their military infrastructure
with civilians.