To: spiral3 who wrote (4544 ) 10/15/2001 7:45:03 AM From: spiral3 Respond to of 281500 folks I’d like to put in a retraction. not because it was not pc, but because that phrase ‘racial profiling’ does not address the real issue. Motivated by fear, anger and grief I made the following comment which was stupid. I am not thrilled about it, but I think that racial profiling is required, and that to some extent it already happens in this country, albeit informally, on a daily basis. Message 16494450 --------------- The difficulty of Civil Liberties, in particular with respect to the Media and Censorship, is no more clearly demonstrated than in this Army Document, Information Operations , which describes how the ground war in the Gulf came to an abrupt halt. In the space of 11 hours, a press conference that included unguarded opinions about the past and future course of a war profoundly affected the strategic, operational, and tactical levels of that war. Commanders on the front lines were neither informed nor consulted on the intent of the public briefing, either before or after it had taken place. The ubiquitousness and immediacy of press reportage effectively erased boundaries between national and theater command authorities and dramatically compressed the time between strategic decision and operational consequences. Field Manual 100-6, quote is from chapter 3, towards the end. 155.217.58.58 --------------- For the record: House Endorses Snoop Bill By Declan McCullagh 2:00 a.m. Oct. 13, 2001 PDT WASHINGTON -- The House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly Friday afternoon to hand unprecedented surveillance powers to police. wired.com --------------- And while I have the stage, here’s two more (minor) items.Bush Is Said to Scale Back His Religion-Based Initiative (ny times Oct 14) But his agenda to provide money for religious charities ran into trouble not only in Congress but among religious groups and minorities that feared the issue was a direct assault on the constitutional provisions separating church and state. nytimes.com and finally, for those interested in the topic, Fundamentalism v the Modern World was explored by Karen Armstrong in a book released last year called The Battle for God The subject is fundamentalism in the world's great monotheisms--Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Armstrong represents the dissimilar movements called fundamentalist as fearful reactions to modernity, especially the modernist predispositions for materialist reason and empirical evidence, which have increasingly encouraged denying the validity, or even the possibility, of truths expressed by the symbolic systems of religion. But, she maintains, these fundamentalisms are themselves typical products of modernity, for they tacitly accept the modern scientific devaluation of religious mythos by insisting on the literal truth of sacred writings. Contrary to popular belief, fundamentalism is not a throwback to some ancient form of religion but rather a response to the spiritual crisis of the modern world. amazon.com