Here is John Poindexter’s home address:
[We do not allow the posting of other people’s phone numbers and addresses, even for scoring debate points. The information has been excised. -JMCJ]
What the heck is this?
Other than a serious breach of netiquette?
- Tamerlane
I assume it’s a response to the Total Information Awareness initiative. A sort of “If you want to spy on us, we’ll spy on you” thing.
It’s COLOR=darkblue]Total Information Awareness[/COLOR], dude!
Edited by CKDH to cut the link.-- CKDH
How is this a debate? Or is the debate about the Total Information Awareness initiative?
Ya see, Tamerlane, John Poindexter is head of the Pentagon’s Total Information Awareness (TIA) project, which is data mining information to collect intelligence on terrorists. This may mean that the Pentagon knows your home address.
So because that is a bad thing in Chumpsky’s, view, he thinks it is OK for him to do the thing he thinks is bad to Mr Poindexter. Because Chumpsky has given himself permission to do evil, bad things if it helps his position.
Chumpsky thinks the ends justify the means. Which, ironically, is exactly the POV that he condemns when conservatives propound it.
Chumpsky doesn’t think much.
Sua
What’s the point here, Chumpsky? I’m guessing you aren’t suggesting we send fan mail.
The head of the government’s Total Information Awareness project, which aims to root out potential terrorists by aggregating credit-card, travel, medical, school and other records of everyone in the United States, has himself become a target of personal data profiling.
Online pranksters, taking their lead from a San Francisco journalist, are publishing John Poindexter’s home phone number, photos of his house and other personal information to protest the TIA program
Insert obvious irony about class warfare, downtrodden masses etc.
Now the issue of personal privacy in an age of 1ft resolution images from orbit would be a cool topic.
Ah, I see. “Do what I say, not what I do,” eh?
Still a serious breach of netiquette.
If you want to discuss the ethics of TIA, feel free - I’m pretty solidly in the civil libertarian camp myself.
But this is a rather opaque and morally questionable way to start a debate
- Tamerlane
Is there even a DEBATE here?
Well, I see a debate about situational ethics.
Chumpsky believes that everything he does in the war against the Evil Imperialists is ethically proper.
Chumpsky believes that if the Evil Imperialists do the exact same thing Chumpsky does, the Evil Imperialists are ethically improper.
Is Chumpsky right?
Debate. 
Sua
How about a debate on the differences between the representatives of the US government, and the SDMB’s resident one-trick pony?
Bye-bye, Chumpsky.
Regards,
Shodan
Or what Shodan said.
Sua
Poindexter is a public figure. There’s no more ‘netiquette’ breach than posting the address of the White House. It’s kind of slummy for a journalist to do such a thing, but Chumpsky isn’t one as far as I know.
The White House is 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, by the way… and the line is 202-456-1111. Call and ask to speak to President Gore - they’ll love ya.
Doesn’t anybody appreciate sarcasm anymore? A Quentin Crisp quote comes to mind.
Personally, this one page made me chuckle. The only confirmed sighting so far - http://www.breakyourchains.org/jp_sightings.htm.
Shodan I really must protest. The use of the term “SDMB’s resident one-trick Pony” should in fact be used in reference to one specific poster, and then it should include the [sup]TM[/sup].
now go in the corner until I tell you that you can leave.
So, your positions are:
-
You get to decide who a public figure is - (do you consider all government employees “public figures”?);
-
“Public figures” are entitled to no privacy;
-
A private residence owned by an individual is the same as a public building owned by the U.S. government; and
-
Private individuals should be held to a lower ethical standard than journalists.
Weird.
Sua
You can honestly see no difference between these two situations?
I look forward to you announcing YOUR address.
I think sarcasm’s great. Irony, too. However, this here’s the Great Debates forum, not the stupid sarcasm forum.
Public figures, at least in politics, are those who are attempting to formulate public policy. Clearly the convicted felon Poindexter qualifies.
It’s quite a leap from having your home address and phone number published to having no privacy. In fact, Poindexter should be sitting in prison with no privacy at all. Just because the address to his mansion is published does not mean he has no privacy.
I recommend we all send a letter to Mr. Poindexter thanking him for his public service in helping to funnel arms to the Ayatollah and funding a secret terrorist organization in Central America, as well as for his recent efforts in trying to turn the U.S. into a police state.
[sub]do we have a stupid sarcasm forum?[/sub]
I know we have a pointless one, and a humble one, and a barbecued one, but stupid? Seems kind of pointless.
ohh…