Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
United States Privacy Education Government Politics

Little Red Book Draws Government Attention 1088

narcolepticjim writes "An unnamed Dartmouth student was visited by Homeland Security for requesting a copy of Mao Zedong's Little Red Book for a class project." From the article: "The student, who was completing a research paper on Communism for Professor Pontbriand's class on fascism and totalitarianism, filled out a form for the request, leaving his name, address, phone number and Social Security number. He was later visited at his parents' home in New Bedford by two agents of the Department of Homeland Security, the professors said."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Little Red Book Draws Government Attention

Comments Filter:
  • Wrong School (Score:4, Informative)

    by dunelin ( 111356 ) on Saturday December 17, 2005 @05:50PM (#14281081)
    If you mean the University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth, you're right.
  • Re:Wait, WTF??!?!?!? (Score:2, Informative)

    by EdwinBoyd ( 810701 ) on Saturday December 17, 2005 @05:54PM (#14281104)
    TFA explains that the particular version he was looking for was not available. So he filled out a request for the inter-library exchange. My local library has a similar feature and the phone number is used to send an automated call when the book/media is available. This is important as if the requested item is not picked up within a day it goes to the next person on the waiting list.
  • by Senjutsu ( 614542 ) on Saturday December 17, 2005 @05:59PM (#14281128)
    but he had to fill out a form because he was requesting an inter-library loan. I don't know how your school works, if the loan department can psychically detect what you want to request and save you the trouble of filling at a form or whatever, but obviously his school works the old-fashioned way.

    Not that this excuses the utterly retarded HomeSec nonsense, of course.
  • by billstewart ( 78916 ) on Saturday December 17, 2005 @06:05PM (#14281178) Journal
    For interlibrary loan, he presumably needed to leave his name, address, and student ID number with the library so they could contact him when the book arrived.


    There are way too many US colleges that routinely violate the privacy of their students and expose them to identity theft by using their Social Security Number as a student ID number, because it's ostensibly unique and they sometimes also need it if the student's an employee or has a government loan. Fortunately neither school I attended did that, but it's extremely common. Similarly, many US states use the SSN as a driver's license number, and all of them collect the SSN in keep it in their databases. And many medical insurance companies use SSNs as a customer ID number (HIPAA's changing that a bit, but Medicare's still based on SSNs so they usually need it anyway.) And too many companies use SSNs as an employee ID. It's appalling, but get used to it.

  • Re:Wait, WTF??!?!?!? (Score:4, Informative)

    by bhsx ( 458600 ) on Saturday December 17, 2005 @06:06PM (#14281184)
    "the student told them he requested the book through the UMass Dartmouth library's interlibrary loan program"
    He used the campus' library to request the book from another library.
    Not that that makes it right.
  • by vidarh ( 309115 ) <vidar@hokstad.com> on Saturday December 17, 2005 @06:22PM (#14281290) Homepage Journal
    Re: 5, see HST 327, Topic: Ideologies of power.
  • Re:Wait, WTF??!?!?!? (Score:3, Informative)

    by tyrione ( 134248 ) on Saturday December 17, 2005 @06:25PM (#14281306) Homepage

    Of course not, but Karma Sutra won't improve your sexual creativity. However, Kama Sutra will keep you experimenting for years to come.

    More than likely I believe Mr. Starr wouldn't see much use for Karma. Pity really, for he would if he grasped its true meaning: The Law of Cause and Effect

  • Not so scary (Score:5, Informative)

    by TubeSteak ( 669689 ) on Saturday December 17, 2005 @06:28PM (#14281326) Journal
    Terrorism for Dummies is available at your local federal governmen't printing office.

    It's called an "Army Field Manual"

    They've got How-To's on everything from training insurgents, fighting a counterinsurgency battle, improvised explosives/munitions/booby traps/guns/silencers/, code breaking, psychological ops, interrogation... the list just keeps going. And that doesn't include Marine field manuals.

    The U.S. Army has put into print enough information that terrorists don't need any other sources. And when I say "For Dummies" I really mean it, those field manuals are written for the lowest common denominator.
  • by commodoresloat ( 172735 ) on Saturday December 17, 2005 @06:30PM (#14281339)
    I got paid a visit for reading material that was hardly "subversive" -- it was published by the U.S. military! Read all about it here [shockandblog.com] and here [shockandblog.com]... I was reading the literature on a plane, to be sure, but a home visit from the feds seemed way over the top. To their credit, however, the Marshals seemed to be nice enough and they didn't seem to think I was a threat to national security, and I haven't been bothered since the visit to my house. Though I wonder whether there are now federal files on me, and whether I'm being looked at funny at the airport.
  • Re:Abuse of Power (Score:4, Informative)

    by MikeWasHere05 ( 900478 ) on Saturday December 17, 2005 @06:40PM (#14281404)
    Errr, gonna have to try harder. Maybe some mods on /. will blindly accept the "quotes" you send at them, but some of us like to research things before we believe them.

    http://www.snopes.com/quotes/caesar.htm [snopes.com]

    "Yet as popular as the quote is, it's not real. These words are not anything Julius Caesar ever wrote or said. No biographies of Caesar or histories of Rome contain these lines, and scholars who have made it their business to know everything about the man draw a blank on this quote. Likewise, Shakespeare did not stuff this soliloquy into the mouth of the title character in his play Julius Caesar, nor did any of the Bard's other characters utter it. No record of this quote has been found prior to its appearance on the Internet in late 2001."
  • Re:Libraries (Score:2, Informative)

    by Lenins_beard ( 914874 ) on Saturday December 17, 2005 @06:48PM (#14281447)
    If you don't check out the books from a public library, they get "weeded", or removed from the collection. The Great Soviet Encyclopedia was another choice that was probably removed from lack of interest rather than an overarching conspiracy. Also, if anyone granted you a library card without checking for identification, they were wrong in doing so. I'd be fired from my library for doing irresponsible stuff like that.
  • by TubeSteak ( 669689 ) on Saturday December 17, 2005 @06:48PM (#14281448) Journal
    1. Since when do IL loans have to involve class research? I've requested library books for my own reading pleasure, not because I have a paper to write.

    2. Yes they probably would. It wasn't the NSA, it was the Dept. of Homeland Security.

    3. He was requesting an 'official' translation from the original. Maybe some stupid Chinese sleeper agent will make the same mistake because he wants his kid to read the Little Red Book. It was the DoHS

    4. It wasn't the NSA, it was the DoHS. And since you claim to have read TFA, you'd know that it was his book request coupled with the student's "significant time abroad." They don't say where he's been abroad, but I'm guessing he didn't spend all his time in Australia or New Zealand.

    5. Maybe it was HST 327 Ideologies of Power, or the Honors Seminar. Use some creative thought.

    No doubt there are good answers to these questions ... but I'm not ready to believe the story just because it fits with my preconceived notions about the administration.
    I've given you some good answers to each of those questions, and none of them have anything to do with your preconceived notions about the administration.

    Don't assign to malice, behavior that can be explained by stupidity.
  • Re:and if... (Score:3, Informative)

    by the eric conspiracy ( 20178 ) on Saturday December 17, 2005 @07:00PM (#14281539)


    No where in the world do people give up their own constitutionally protected rights faster on the slightest scare than in the USA.

    That's a ridiculous ssertion, not backed up by the fact that most democarcies have been eroding civil liberties like crazy recently. For example:

    http://www.oup.co.uk/isbn/1-84-174183-3 [oup.co.uk]
    http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/southasia/History/Indep endent/anti_terr.html [ucla.edu]
    http://www.quaker.org/qcea/aroundeurope/2003/255.h tm#Third [quaker.org]
    http://uninews.unimelb.edu.au/articleid_2938.html [unimelb.edu.au]
    http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:l-h-3gElzYcJ: www.ihf-hr.org/viewbinary/viewdocument.php%3Fdoc_i d%3D5537+european+anti-terrorism+legislation&hl=en [64.233.161.104]
    http://www.forumsec.org.fj/news/2004/July/July_08. htm [forumsec.org.fj]
    http://www.statewatch.org/news/2003/apr/18funright s.html [statewatch.org]

  • by commodoresloat ( 172735 ) on Saturday December 17, 2005 @07:07PM (#14281586)
    This book is actually the second-most published book in the world [wikipedia.org] (well, third if you count the Ikea catalog), which means that if it is on some kind of watch list, the Feds really have their work cut out for them. If this is one of those books that can change the world, it already has, and there's little the Feds can do about it now by stopping people from writing papers about it at universities.
  • Comment removed (Score:3, Informative)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Saturday December 17, 2005 @07:10PM (#14281599)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by vidarh ( 309115 ) <vidar@hokstad.com> on Saturday December 17, 2005 @07:27PM (#14281705) Homepage Journal
    Have you ever read Maos little red book? I have.

    Unless you're living in a void and not critically evaluating what you read, Mao's little red IS harmless.

    Mao certainly caused a lot of deaths, but contrary to leaders like Stalin, Mao was more a flawed leader that screwed up badly than someone whose core ideology involved mass murder, and if you read the little red book you will see that reflected in a lot of what he is saying.

    Most people reading it will find themselves agreeing with a lot of it, either because it is vague enough so as to be more or less apolitical, or because it plain makes sense. Most of those same people will probably never like Mao, nor will they they ever become apologists for what he did. Even the Chinese Communist Party readily admits that Mao had many flaws and that many of his policies should never have been carried out because they were disasterous and caused vast numbers of deaths that could have been avoided with better leadership.

    But you will also likely find that many of the things in Maos little red book are things you can agree with exactly because it contains admonishions of how to act that the Chinese Communist Party really ought to be learning from.

    A few examples (NOTE: There are certainly far more controversial quotes too - particularly regarding the Leninist concept of democratic centralism - I'm not trying to whitewash Mao, just to show a side most peopke don't know - for the other side, read the book):

    "A proper measure of democracy should be put into effect in the army, chiefly by abolishing the feudal practice of bullying and beating and by having officers and men share weal and woe.".

    And: " With regard to economic democracy, the representatives elected by the soldiers must be ensured the right to assist (but not to bypass) the company leadership in managing the company's supplies and mess."

    And: "We must not be complacent over any success. We should check our complacency and constantly criticize our shortcomings, just as we should wash our faces or sweep the floor every day to remove the dirt and keep them clean."

    And: "We should be modest and prudent, guard against arrogance and rashness, and serve the Chinese people heart and soul. . . ."

    And: " Our duty is to hold ourselves responsible to the people. Every word, every act and every policy must conform to the people's interests, and if mistakes occur, they must be corrected -- that is what being responsible to the people means."

    The biggest "danger" the little red book constitutes is that it might make some readers see the difference between communist ideology and what has been practiced in the name of communism in totalitarian states - the greatest bulwark against support for communist ideas today is that most people still think of countries like China, North Korea or the old Soviet Union as representative of communist ideology, rather than as dictatures that flagrantly abuse it's symbolism and phrases. How many people today consider the Inquisition representative of Christian ideas (I don't, and I'm an atheist), or for that matter consider Hitlers support for the church as proof churches are evil?

    However, the Chinese Communist Party is really the organisation that should worry most about people actually reading and understanding Mao and realising just exactly how far from the goals of the Chinese revolution they have moved.

    They better hope the Chinese people don't start taking to heart quotes like the ones above, or the following one, and start expecting for them to be followed:

    " Every comrade must be brought to understand that the supreme test of the words and deeds of a Communist is whether they conform with the highest interests and enjoy the support of the overwhelming majority of the people."

    If you'd like to see for yourself what it actually says, all of Mao's little red book is available online [morningsun.org]

  • From a UMass alum... (Score:5, Informative)

    by TCQuad ( 537187 ) on Saturday December 17, 2005 @07:39PM (#14281765)
    1. Why would a student have to write down a SSN for a book loan, but not have to write down the class for which he is requesting the book?
    The UMass system when I was there asked for your SSID/student ID and the various other pieces of information, but not what class you were doing it for (you could include it as optional information). The reason is that they really don't care if you're reading it for a class, multiple related classes or for your own personal improvement.

    2. If he *did* have to write down his class, then why would the [DoHS] waste resources on this case?
    See 1

    3. Why would a book by Mao be on a watch list?
    The article mentioned that the student had been abroad for a significant amount of time; it was probably a totality of the evidence. (Note: not justifying the situation, just saying how it probably came about)

    4. Why does it seem just a little too convenient that this unnamed student is being investigated by the NSA while doing research for a class on "fascism and totalitarianism"?
    The course is Ideologies of Power, as has been pointed out. Fascism and totaliarianism might be part of the course or an Honors' Colloquium, which typically takes part of the course and creates a focused presentation, research paper or discussion group for an extra credit plus honors credit in the area of the course. This would also explain why a course text was not available in the UMass Library system.

    5. Why are none of Robert PontBriand's classes (the professor in question, according to TFA) listed as "fascism and totalitarianism"?
    See 4
  • Re:Wait, WTF??!?!?!? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Martin Blank ( 154261 ) on Saturday December 17, 2005 @08:03PM (#14281899) Homepage Journal
    I don't know about anyone specifically going to jail for being a Communist, but in California, no person can teach in a public school and be a member of the Communist Party. It is grounds for immediate dismissal.
  • Re:Not so scary (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Brave Guy ( 457657 ) on Saturday December 17, 2005 @08:18PM (#14281966)
    And when I say "For Dummies" I really mean it, those field manuals are written for the lowest common denominator.

    To be fair to the boys and girls in the field, I think military field manuals are often written for people who may need to read things in a hurry, while under pressure. (Being under fire will do that to you, I hear.) A medic friend who served in the military for a while sometimes noted the apparently simplicity of the army field medic's handbook, which says things like this on page 1:

    Is the casualty conscious?
    If no, leave him.
    If yes, turn the page.

    It's assumed that while under fire, you might forget the basic things, so they state everything, clearly and simply.

  • Re:Mixed feelings (Score:3, Informative)

    by greginnj ( 891863 ) on Saturday December 17, 2005 @08:58PM (#14282131) Homepage Journal
    Hey genius, Senator McCarthy had nothing to do with the House Unamerican Activities Committee (before which Robeson famously testified). Brain surgeons such as yourself frequently talk about the the stupid shit HUAC did and label it McCarthyism, when in fact Senator McCarthy's targets were by and large credible threats.
    Whoops, you got me. I must be the only poor soul who uses the term "McCarthyism" to refer to the attitude of anticommunist phobia and paranoia prevalent in the House, Senate, and (god forbid) among mere commoners of the general public.

    Since you're so well-informed, perhaps you could remind me -- when he said he would happily turn over evidence of subversion by government employees, what did he come up with when Sen. Lehman asked him? What was the final number of "known Communists" working in the state department, or did he just make up the number as he went along? And the biggie -- how many indictments and convictions resulted from his investigation of 'credible threats'?

    The overlap between McCarthy's names and the Venona names is embarassingly small for someone who is supposed to be well-informed (and not just making stuff up). Perhaps that's what you get when a grandstanding drunk is given a position of power and a microphone -- ruin a few lives, call for strikers to be shot, etc.

    Perhaps you should remember that the right of American citizens peaceably to assemble is guaranteed by the first amdendment (you know, the one right above the second, which I'm sure you're familiar with). That right is not abridged, even if the name of the assembly is "Communist Party of the USA". Treason is a crime; membership in the Communist Party is a civil right. Oh, and just for the sake of making steam come out of your ears, you should know that even advocating the violent overthrow of the US government [cornell.edu] is not a crime, and is in fact protected speech -- only speech designed to provoke 'imminent lawless action' can be restricted.

    The fact that Drunken Joe was right with a few of his accusations was almost incidental -- he was a publicity whore out solely for himself. His style of persecution and character assassination show US government at its worst. It is arguable that his tactics played a role in driving people who might have been wavering to act against US interests. If your point was merely '"he wasn't 100% bad", I might agree - but his percentage was definitely above 80%.
  • Re:Wait, WTF??!?!?!? (Score:4, Informative)

    by Talez ( 468021 ) on Saturday December 17, 2005 @08:59PM (#14282134)
    http://www.rusted-crush.com/macgyver/maceps4.html [rusted-crush.com]

    The Outsiders
    MacGyver is saved from an auto accident by an Amish family facing eviction from their farm and a hostile employee of the construction company waiting to tear the buildings down.

    He destroyed the plane of the employer? :P
  • Re:Wait, WTF??!?!?!? (Score:2, Informative)

    by SkullMac ( 420520 ) on Saturday December 17, 2005 @10:51PM (#14282517)
    When I applied to be a TA for a CS course at GA Tech (thus making me a state employee), I had to sign an agreement saying that I had not been a member of, nor would I ever join, the Communist party. This regulation is not uncommon in most state government jobs.
  • by sumdumass ( 711423 ) on Saturday December 17, 2005 @11:14PM (#14282628) Journal
    This illegal spying and stuff has been going on since before bush was in office. Actually it isn't illegal either but that another story.

    We have always had agreements with other countries to spy and tap phone conversations. If something interesting is found they alert the proper authorities. This was automated around 1997 and now key words are caught and automated recording takes place. Typically, our agreements with the other countries allow them to collect the data on US citizens while we collect on their citizens. This gives the appearance of the government not having to deal with the constitution.

    This project is commonly refereed to as Echelon [echelonwatch.org] Here is a tad bit more info on it [fas.org]

    The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act [fas.org] authorized spying and searches in terrorist/national security and other related matters regardless of the nationality or location of the person(s) being spied on. Originally this act intended for a court consisting of around 11 members to approve the actions. This court regularly reports to congress. Unfortunately (fortunately depending on your outlook), in 1979, President Carter decided that under certain circumstances could allow government officials to bypass these procedures [fas.org]. This was probably a reaction to the hostage crisis during his term. President Clinton expanded this a little in '95 [fas.org]. Bush using the processes from these executive orders changed the policy being used to take advantage of them. Unlike Carter and Clinton, his provision were made into law by provisions in the patriot act. [aclu.org]. Your probably right in that these executive orders go against the constitution but until they are successfully challenged, they are law and therefore legal. (That doesn't mean it rite though.)

    As for the ban on torture loophole? I think you are misreading somethign here. All this deal did was say that interrogators accused of using improper methods could offer as a defense that they were acting on orders that a reasonable person would believe to be lawful. [latimes.com] This doesn't mean that i could order you to starve a person until they talk and you would get away with it. What it does say is that if an order is lawful to a reasonable person you can use that as a defense. This means if i order you to wake the prisoner at different time in the night to disrupt thier sleeping habits and confuse them, as long as a reasonable person wouldn't consider that torture, you wouldn't get in trouble. Imunity isn't even mentioned either. This is a purposed bill too, it hasn't made it's way into law and needs to be cleared with debate before it becomes law.

    I know it is fun to bash Bush and the current administration. People always do it when thier party isn't in control. Lets be honest here and bash him for stuff that needs to be bashed. Saying we can toruture people even though existing law says we cannot is stretching the truth a bit. This doen't mean it hasn't happend and if it did, those resoncible should be presecuted. Saying ilegal wire taps or ilegal spying isn't being truthfull either. The facilities that made it possible were put in place well before bush or his cronies came to power. Under current law, regular law enforcment have to get permision from a judge (well except for patriot act provisions). But we can see were government officials aren't held to that law unnder certain circumstances. Is it right that government officials can spy on it's citizens without going thru the regular chanels? Probably not but that doesn't mean it is not legal.

    In case anyone is wondering, executive
  • by FleaPlus ( 6935 ) on Saturday December 17, 2005 @11:14PM (#14282630) Journal
    Now the fact that American history books as taught in our schools will only go into detail on the first two (non-American "bad guys") and gives only token treatment to slavery and usually don't mention the Native American genocide is an entirely different problem...

    I don't know if my experience is representative, but throughout my public middle school and high school history/English courses, we spent -much- more time being taught about slavery and the plight of Native Americans than the holocaust and Stalin.
  • by Master of Transhuman ( 597628 ) on Sunday December 18, 2005 @12:20AM (#14282913) Homepage
    Wasn't that released years ago?

    (Well, let's say the parts they wanted to release were released years ago...)

    Check here: http://www.ufoevidence.org/topics/ProjectBlueBook. htm/ [ufoevidence.org]

    Comprehensive Catalog of 1,500 Project BLUE BOOK UFO Unknowns (Version 1.1)(PDF Warning)

    Project Blue Book Archive (URL:http://www.bluebookarchive.org//>
    The Project Blue Book Archive is a new web-site which will provide free online access to the National Archives Blue Book microfilm collection, and has so far posted about 10% of the Blue Book microfilm. The Blue Book Archive provides a fully searchable interface to high-resolution document scans relating to the US government's investigation of the UFO phenomena. Also available are high-quality CD-ROMs of the microfilms, which can be purchased directly from the website.
  • Re:Wait, WTF??!?!?!? (Score:5, Informative)

    by IntelliTubbie ( 29947 ) on Sunday December 18, 2005 @12:34AM (#14282962)
    I don't know about anyone specifically going to jail for being a Communist, but in California, no person can teach in a public school and be a member of the Communist Party. It is grounds for immediate dismissal.

    It's important to understand the distinction between being a communist and being a member of the Communist Party. (A lot of people miss this distinction in discussions of McCarthyism, for example.) Being a communist is one thing -- i.e. believing in and espousing communist ideals, associating with other communists, etc. The Communist Party, however, was actually an American branch of the Party in the U.S.S.R. -- it took orders from Moscow, had the goal of violently overthrowing the U.S. government, and was involved in espionage within the U.S. (See, for example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_USA. [wikipedia.org])

    Basically, it's the difference between being sympathetic with Al Qaeda (totally legal, if not moral) and being an active member of Al Qaeda.

    Cheers,
    IT
  • by cold fjord ( 826450 ) on Sunday December 18, 2005 @01:31AM (#14283150)
    Translation: the government is not currently acting as a civilian government.

    Your translation is wrong. We have a civilian government, but the country is at war, and the President is exercising his powers, granted by the Constitution and Law, to prosecute the war. For the benefit of others, I've provided a more inclusive and meaningful extract from the original [whitehouse.gov] below:

    To fight the war on terror, I am using authority vested in me by Congress, including the Joint Authorization for Use of Military Force, which passed overwhelmingly in the first week after September the 11th. I'm also using constitutional authority vested in me as Commander-in-Chief.

    In the weeks following the terrorist attacks on our nation, I authorized the National Security Agency, consistent with U.S. law and the Constitution, to intercept the international communications of people with known links to al Qaeda and related terrorist organizations. Before we intercept these communications, the government must have information that establishes a clear link to these terrorist networks.

    This is a highly classified program that is crucial to our national security. Its purpose is to detect and prevent terrorist attacks against the United States, our friends and allies. Yesterday the existence of this secret program was revealed in media reports, after being improperly provided to news organizations. As a result, our enemies have learned information they should not have, and the unauthorized disclosure of this effort damages our national security and puts our citizens at risk. Revealing classified information is illegal, alerts our enemies, and endangers our country.


    See, nothing about secret declarations of martial law as you speculate here [slashdot.org]. We still have a civilian government. The Congress & the Courts still operate. Americans still vote to change their government. President Bush is in his 2nd and final term as the Constitution requires. The Army is still subject to the Posse Comitatus Act [uscg.mil].

    It would be a pity if you confused or misled people.
  • by brianglynwilliams ( 939697 ) on Sunday December 18, 2005 @02:46AM (#14283402)
    I am one of the professors mentioned in this 'conspiracy theory response' (Dr. Brian Glyn Williams). With all due respect I wanted to add a few comments. A. The incident with our Univ. of Massachussetts history student happened several weeks ago, I was asked to comment on President Bush's sweeping surveillance activities only yesterday. I innocently cited this incident as an example of the White House policies' very real applications and how they trickle down to the university level. My description of the incident was in response to an inquiry from a reporter at the Standard Times, New Bedford who called requesting a commentary and I thought it was appropriate. B. There are several key sections omitted in the version of the Little Red Book here in the USA and we are proud of our student for probing the issue. C. I have tenure and I do not know how you came to the assumption that I do not, my webpage brianglynwilliams.com clearly states that I am Associate Professor of History. But I do appreciate your reference to the field work I do in Afghanistan and Central Asia in trying to understand the roots of jihadism and terrorism. It is precisely this sort of cutting edge research and teaching I hope to protect by bringing this issue up. D. I know this student well. He is the real thing, he is mature, honest, reliable, hard-working and genuinely interested in getting to the truth on issues, i.e. he is everything we train our students to be. The fact that Dr. Bob Pontriband who is by the way a passionate educator who seeks to instill just this sort of above-and-beyond-the-call-of-duty research in his students also vouches for him lends two voices to his defense. I sincerely hope that your questions are meant to be the sort of critical inquiry we expect from our students and not some reflexive attempt to delegitimize was our reporting of what it is frankly a rather disturbing act of surveillance that does not seem to be an example of productive, preemptive counter terrorism. Sincerely, Dr. Brian Glyn Williams Associate Professor of History University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth
  • by cold fjord ( 826450 ) on Sunday December 18, 2005 @03:21AM (#14283539)
    You just can't get that kind of gut-level understanding without a visit from the authorities. That is one kid who will have a deeper understanding of the material now than anyone else in class.

    Either that or the anonymous "kid" is a plot device used by a couple of professors with an agenda.

    I wonder exactly which part of the Department of Homeland Security these two were supposedly from? DHS is a big agency, after all. Which part is responsible for monitoring inter-library loans and sending out pairs of agents to check up on things, especially borrowers of Communist books available in libraries, used book stores, and Amazon.com [amazon.com]?

    It seems more likely that either this story is fiction, or there is more going on, on both sides, than is being told. Maybe the professors assigning visits to Al Qaeda web sites [southcoasttoday.com] had something to do with it?
    Dr. Williams said he had been planning to offer a course on terrorism next semester, but is reconsidering, because it might put his students at risk.
      "I shudder to think of all the students I've had monitoring al-Qaeda Web sites, what the government must think of that," he said. "Mao Tse-Tung is completely harmless."

    Any bets on the professors being Bush supporters and they were just trying to "help"?

  • Re:not a free county (Score:3, Informative)

    by Alsee ( 515537 ) on Sunday December 18, 2005 @03:52AM (#14283640) Homepage
    it is easier if you use hex you know:)
    1 becomes 2h,4h,8h, 10h,20h,40h,80h, 100h,200h,400h,800h, ... and so on and so forth.


    Hex? REAL programmers work in binary :)
    1 becomes 10, 100, 1000, 10000, 100000, 1000000, 10000000, 100000000, 1000000000, 10000000000, 100000000000, ... and so on and so forth.
    See? That's so much simpler!

    -
  • You know, I am fairly sure that Congress never issued an official declaration of war. I thought wars had to be approved by Congress or the troops had to be pulled out after 60 days.. Did this change or something? Did they vote and not tell anybody?
  • Re:Peking Version? (Score:5, Informative)

    by ShakaUVM ( 157947 ) on Sunday December 18, 2005 @07:41AM (#14284205) Homepage Journal
    The professor mentioned in the story (Dr. Brian Glyn Williams) took the time to answer these points. I'm pasting it verbatim here.

    -----

    Dear Bill,
    Delighte to hear from you and I hope my response is of service. If you could post it I would be most grateful.
    I am one of the professors mentioned in your 'conspiracy theory response' (Dr. Brian Glyn Williams)With all due respect I wanted to add a few comments. A. The incident with our Univ. of Massachusetts history student happened several weeks ago, I was asked to comment on President Bush's sweeping surveillance activities only yesterday. I cited this incident as an example of the White House policies' very real applications and how they trickle down to the university level. My description of the incident was in response to an inquiry from a reporter at the Standard Times, New Bedford who called requesting a commentary and I thought it was appropriate. B. There are several key sections omitted in the version here in the USA of the Little Red Book and we are proud of our student trying to search out the original. This is exactly the sort of primary document research that makes for good history!
    C. I have tenure and I do not know how you came to the assumption that I do not, my web page brianglynwilliams.com clearly states that I am Associate Professor of History. But I do appreciate your reference to the field work I do in Afghanistan and Central Asia in trying to understand the roots of jihadism and terrorism. It is precisely this sort of cutting edge research and teaching I hope to protect. One must go to the original sources to get the facts, wether it be jihadi webpages or Mao's Little Red Book. I am hardly a liberal firebrand, I just want to carry out my research unfettered by the fear of investigation and encourage the same in my students. D. I know this student well. He is the real thing, he is mature, honest, reliable, hard-working and genuinely interested in getting to the truth on issues, i.e. he is everything we train our students to be. The fact that Dr. Bob Pontriband who is by the way a passionate educator who seeks to instill just this sort of above-and-beyond-the-call-of-duty research in his students also vouches for him lends two voices to his defense. I sincerely hope that your questions are meant to be the sort of critical inquiry we expect from our students and not some reflexive attempt to de-legitimize our reporting of what it is frankly a rather disturbing act of surveillance that does not seem to be an example of productive, preemptive counter terrorism. Sincerely,
    Dr. Brian Glyn Williams
    Associate Professor of History
    University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth
  • by cold fjord ( 826450 ) on Sunday December 18, 2005 @09:27PM (#14288246)
    I don't know where you get your information, but a lot of it is bad.

    To go to war, a formal declaration from the Congress is required under the War Powers Resolution.

    No, it isn't required. Try going back and reading the "Provisions" section of your Wikipedia link. The War Powers Resolution theoretically (it may be unconstitutional) limits the President's ability to commit and maintain US troops in combat without Congressional approval.

    Nor does it extend to creating a new category of enemy, namely "illegal combatants", who are neither civilans nor enemy soliders.

    Its not new. The Geneva Convention [unhchr.ch] protections have conditions. Unlawful combatants are those who fail to meet the tests to qualify for their protection. Likewise, spies have no protection. Try reading Article 4. All Al Qaeda fail it, and well as various associated organizations.

    many Taliban soliders, who were members of the armed forces of an officially recognised (by the US!) government

    Nope [nwsource.com].
    Only three countries - Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates - recognize the Taliban as the legitimate government in Kabul.


    The authority granted to the President under a resolution authorizing the use of force does not extend to spying on its own citizens,

    Citizens can already be "spied" upon, its called surveillance. It is an ordinary investigative procedure used countless times each year in criminal and national security investigations.

    I could go on...
  • Re:Abuse of Power (Score:3, Informative)

    by 10Ghz ( 453478 ) on Monday December 19, 2005 @05:19AM (#14289696)
    The quote is fake, as has been pointed out. if you want a proper quote, how about one from Hermann Goering? [snopes.com]

    "Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."
  • by lseltzer ( 311306 ) on Saturday December 24, 2005 @12:12PM (#14332382)
    The most predictable thing about this story was that it would be exposed as a hoax because of all the nonsense and contradictions in it.

    Now the student, whose anonymous allegations were the only evidence of the whole matter, has recanted. [southcoasttoday.com]

    I pitched this as another story and it was rejected. Maybe it will show up from another author, or maybe the editors prefer the story to be true.

Real Programmers don't eat quiche. They eat Twinkies and Szechwan food.

Working...