Industrial Espionage – Myth or Everyday Problem

[Andrew_Swallow]

Some Israel firms have been caught spying on their rivals.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4594255.stm


Israeli firms 'ran vast spy ring'

Last Updated: Tuesday, 31 May, 2005, 10:51 GMT 11:51 UK

Police in Israel say they have uncovered a huge industrial spying ring which used computer viruses to probe the systems of many major companies.

At least 15 Israeli firms have been implicated in the espionage plot, with 18 people arrested in Israel and two more held by British police.
Among those under suspicion are major Israeli telecoms and media companies.
Police say the companies used a "Trojan horse" computer virus written by an Israeli to hack into rivals' systems.
Interpol and the authorities in Britain, Germany and the US are already involved in investigating the espionage, which Israeli police fear may involve major international companies.
Hi-tech rivalry
"This is one of the gravest scandals in... industrial and market espionage in Israel," special fraud investigator Supt Roni Hindi told Israeli media.
Israel's investigation has been running since November, uncovering as it expanded an intricate web of alleged espionage among some of the nation's best-known companies.
{snip}


Anything similar happen to your employer? Possibly from a country that is not as ready to prosecute spies as Israel.

[Towelmaster]

Erm... Andrew,

Dare I say it? Well why not. For decades the Israeli government allowed - yes even encouraged - their own people/businesses to spy. This was because they considered themselves under siege and the end justifies the means. See for instance how much the 'native Israeli fighterplanes' looked just like French Mirages in the 70-ies. And who is to say they were right or wrong?

So I'm not really surprised that this happened/happens. I am more surprised that it is seen as such a big deal...

[Ranger1]

Erm... Andrew,

Dare I say it? Well why not. For decades the Israeli government allowed - yes even encouraged - their own people/businesses to spy. This was because they considered themselves under siege and the end justifies the means. See for instance how much the 'native Israeli fighterplanes' looked just like French Mirages in the 70-ies. And who is to say they were right or wrong?

So I'm not really surprised that this happened/happens. I am more surprised that it is seen as such a big deal...

Huh? a couple that made a special trojan and sold it to firms in Israel and some firms in the UK (who know maybe US too),and its Israel government fault again?

You are talking about spying against countries in war times against israeli firms spy on eachother,two total different things.

[Andrew_Swallow]

Mosrad has been caught spying on both Britain and the USA. People copy their government. If the government spies on friends then companies will spy on their rivals.

[Ranger1]

Its Mosad,and again,whats that got to do with anything? Israel is a unique situation,when you have few BILLION people who want you dead,is a good thing to have a spy agency...oh yes,we are the only ones in the world who have spies sure.

This is the last ill post on this matter i hate politics (which fuck if i know how politics got anything to do with the actual topic),what a sucky way to start off the day [insert puke here].

[Dr Maturin]

The Mossad is pretty fucking awesome. I think they're responsible for assassinating that traitor scum Gerard Bull.

But as awesome as they are, no one beats the US in international espionage. We almost never get caught.

As for industrial...when I worked part time at Target a few years ago as a second job, I was in loss prevention. A bunch of peoples of Asian and Latin-American descent were in the store with miniature cameras taking pics of those tags on shelves. That is against store policy. They were from Wal-Mart, my boss told me. So we had to go out there and intimidate them into leaving. Fun stuff.

[Harrdy]

I don't know if the israeli Government does encourage spionage, but I worked about eight years for T-Mobile (Austria) and we had these nifty language compressors. They could use one physical connection to transmit about three times as much channels as without compression. They used a nifty table for compression, but that's not what I wanted to say. They had a open TCP/IP connection from the Compression equipment to Israel. All the time. While the IT gurus where like wideeyed-shocked. No other company could enforce that kind of open connection into the workings of the company, there where rules that every hardware purchased must be tested in a way to ensure that kind of backdoor is not possible. Hell, I sat three days in Munich waiting for the software gurus (?) from Siemens to compile the Software for our switch so I can compare that version to the one shipped with the equipment, bit by bit. But this little israeli Company had two features: They where cheap and they sold a product that helps you save money. About then I realized that Capitalism is doomed. When you can break your rules that easy - just because of the money - than you have truly lost your soul. It went worse from bad since. Pretty please tell me something nice now... 8-/

Ah, regarding the prior post and the US enspionage: At the radio stations that send and receive from the satelites in europe there is always a small building adjacent. It is guarded and US-Property. They watch every transmission over satelite. I'm quite sure they cannot do that in real time, but there is equipment avaliable to filter for special words. My friend and I make a game out of it: To use as many "bad words" in a conversation over telephone as possible... 8-)

And by the way, our own Staatssicherheit (Austria) is not that much better. They got a big black box in the main switch-central in vienna, connected to a location unknown to the techs there. Seen it, woundered 'bout it.

Funny fact: In the old switching center there are Headphones you can use to connect into a speech-trunk. It doesn't work with modern equipment (digital) without some additional utilities, but the old analog lines are free to listen for every tech there... y'know what? They don't do that. Why? Because it is amoral? No, because it is boring. After you go like: "Whow, I gotta hear unnoticed", the first time you very fast go: "Men, how boring are those people". Talking like hours about their vacation... yessire, the "human condition" *g*

PeAcE

[Dr Maturin]

About then I realized that Capitalism is doomed. When you can break your rules that easy - just because of the money - than you have truly lost your soul.

Maybe we should just reinstate Nazism in your country...

[Harrdy]

Maybe we should just reinstate Nazism in your country...

Are you trying to be funny or just a dick... I can't sort it out, isn't my native language.

If you are trying to be funny I answer: Well, I would like to see it with humor. Sad thing is ideas like "Race" and social "Class" are coming back to bite us into our sorry asses. Politicans pulling the "National" strings are going into parliament while silent ones dissapear. I surely wouldn't say we have learned anything.

If you are a dick: Maybe you should fight Rasissm (sp?) in your own country. America (I assume you are from there, if not please correct me) is not best known in europe these days for their acceptance of minorities but for the prosecution of them. While media might give you a very narrow view of a country you get the impression that america is in constant fear of the unknown. Homophobia, Nationalism and Antisemitism seem to be on the rise, as well as a hatred for the Islam (which is a very broad spectrum of belief, compareable to the Christian religion, which also has fanatism as extreme). Know that mainly two facts gave birth to Nationalsozialism: Economic Crisis and fear (leads to anger, about the only true thing to be learned from Star Wars *g*) of the unknown. Media and church where against Jews from the Middle Ages. There where times and times again when whole families where murdered, but what made the Holocaust possible was the fact that in a corrupt system one cannot hope to stay uncorrupted. Alone 'cause of peer pressure you HAVE to do the unthinkable... just think about those flags waving from every building in US of A... once they where a symbol for a idea, now you are suspect if you don't have one. If the ideas get corrupted you can walk with them or be alone. Know that the ones not adapting to Nationalsozialism died or left the country(s)...

By the way: Hitler was from Austria and not from Germany. He left our country because he felt "Deutsch" and his psychotic ideas where about how the german military got the "Dolchstoss" by their own politicans. The idea behind is that some Military Leaders couldn't cope with loosing the first world war. They fantasized about how they would have won if only the stupid politicans wouldn't have stopped the war. I was a quite popular idea, however far from the truth. More true where the very unpopular payments to the winning countries. Some said they where responsible for the depression (I don't subscribe to that point of view...). And some nutheads thought the Jews where behind it all. They where the politicans who made the "Dolchstoss" and they have all the money (was the belief). So they thought they had a right to seize "their property" from them... silly, but not a singular event in the history.

PeAcE

[Dr Maturin]

Are you trying to be funny or just a dick... I can't sort it out, isn't my native language.

As the ellipsis would indicate, it was a facetious comment.

If you are a dick: Maybe you should fight Rasissm (sp?) in your own country. America (I assume you are from there, if not please correct me) is not best known in europe these days for their acceptance of minorities but for the prosecution of them.

Are you kidding? Europe right now is one of the most racist regions in the world, aside from obvious ones like the Middle-East.

While media might give you a very narrow view of a country you get the impression that america is in constant fear of the unknown.

Actually, it looks like the media has given you an incorrect view.

Homophobia, Nationalism and Antisemitism seem to be on the rise

Being against gay marriage does not indicate homophobia...we are very tolerant of gays in our society. Being pro-gay marriage is giving approval, not being tolerant. Anti-Semitism? I don't know where you got that one from. France seems to be the Anti-Semitic nation right now...aside from the obvious Middle-East. And nothing is wrong with nationalism when your nation is awesome.

as well as a hatred for the Islam (which is a very broad spectrum of belief, compareable to the Christian religion, which also has fanatism as extreme).

I think 9/11 made every American a little more wary about Islam, at least for a time (varying from one second to four years). But any alleged and perceived hatred of Islam is not resulting in mass executions or even firings from jobs.

Know that mainly two facts gave birth to Nationalsozialism: Economic Crisis and fear (leads to anger, about the only true thing to be learned from Star Wars *g*) of the unknown. Media and church where against Jews from the Middle Ages. There where times and times again when whole families where murdered, but what made the Holocaust possible was the fact that in a corrupt system one cannot hope to stay uncorrupted. Alone 'cause of peer pressure you HAVE to do the unthinkable... just think about those flags waving from every building in US of A... once they where a symbol for a idea, now you are suspect if you don't have one. If the ideas get corrupted you can walk with them or be alone. Know that the ones not adapting to Nationalsozialism died or left the country(s)...

That statement in the bold is asinine and uninformed.

In any event, the whole point was that capitalism is not to be talked down. What you do when you discover industrial espionage is you charge the perps with a crime. Without capitalism, no society is truly free.

[Harrdy]

And nothing is wrong with nationalism when your nation is awesome.

You know the fine line between Patriotism and Nationalism, don't you? We in europe learned it the hard way... there is a difference between thinking your country is great and thinking every other country just sucks and/or does it plain wrong...

That statement in the bold is asinine and uninformed.

Sorry, got it from an american... no wait, from several americans. They feel like the peer pressure is rising, but of course I don't know it first hand because I don't live there.

Regarding the "victory of capitalism": You surely do know where that is from, don't you? "No man can serve two masters: Ye cannot serve God and Mammon". Now while I say every one should be free to belief what he want's to believe I see some truth in that old saying. Because if you goal is to amass as much wealth as possible you have to:
* take it from others
* amass it in a save place (so no one can get it)
* saveguard it (with force (police, military, etc.), see point 2)

Now I can see that capitalism is not the final answer, but I see nothing wrong with a free market. As long as it is really free (and not like the real market today with politicans pumping in money so their country stays in the game). I would like to know if you differ between Capitalism and Free Market or if it is the same to you (as it is sadly for a lot of people).

PeAcE

[Dr Maturin]

Sorry, got it from an american... no wait, from several americans. They feel like the peer pressure is rising, but of course I don't know it first hand because I don't live there.

Peer pressure to do what? To try pot, maaaan?

* take it from others

That's called robbery or burglary.

* amass it in a save place (so no one can get it)
* saveguard it (with force (police, military, etc.), see point 2)

That's called a bank, and you don't need the police or military to keep it safe...

I would like to know if you differ between Capitalism and Free Market or if it is the same to you (as it is sadly for a lot of people).

I know that the textbook example of "Free Market" is an ideal, and that its use to describe economies in practice is a misnomer, in that its supporters are for more controls in order to make an "even playing field," so to speak. The freest market is capitalism, plain and simple.

[Harrdy]

Peer pressure to do what? To try pot, maaaan?

You don't think to often about what you do and why, or you wouldn't ask. People do a lot of thinks without thinking about them, just listen to your friends. When they talk with a person of higher status a lot of the people go like: "You are right, I think alike", while when you talked to them they where like the opposite. That is what I mean with peer pressure.

Another example: While a lot of the ideas of Christianity resemble the ideas of Communism (with the everybody is alike and the damnation of mammon, etc.) you where considered "bad" when you said you are sympathetic to Communism while you where considered "good" when you said you are sympathetic to Christianity. There are "social standards" which are used all the time, if the standards are "bad" (like: "Yews have all our money" or "Our politicans betrayed us") you get a "bad" society (like: Germany before WW2). One can try to hold up his personal beliefs but he is outcast of the society then (happens all the time). I am talking about "everyday people" here, not popstars or politicans (who can change the point of view everybode else subscribes then to).

That's called robbery or burglary.

Jup, that's what I call Capitalism... but a lot of people call me crazy 'caus of it :p

Example: If there is only one company which produces food and they ask for skyrocking prices and buy off every competition... you don't like that, do you? Because that is what Capitalism is all about. To build a monopoly and get as much money out of it as possible. And if you don't believe me just open your Television Set and look for brands. And then open your Stereo and look again. And then open you Microwave and look... there are only a hand of companies worldwide which are producing most of the appliences (sp?). I worked for Grundig half a year and we produced Grundig (duh), Philips, Blaupunkt and Minerva Television Sets on the very same line with the very same parts. Only the chassis and one Eprom was different. A Free Market leads to good prices but Capitalism leads to Monopolies. (But that's only my point of view and might be irritated because of my experiences in the industry).

That's called a bank, and you don't need the police or military to keep it safe...

Sorry, that's just plain wrong. There could be no bank without a force guarding it. Please think again... (just answer yourself why there are *armored* transports ferrying the money... just 'cause it's funny?)
If you have something everybody else wants you need some force to keep others from getting it. One force is the law, the executive (so called because they are executing the law) or police (from Polis, the City) guards the law while the legislative (Politicans) are drawing new laws. There is an amount of force nessecary in our society for the protection of the people. Just open your eyes.

The freest market is capitalism, plain and simple.

I'm just giving you one example to bite your sitting-flesh (*g*). China is considered a capitalistic force today, but they are a Communist Country. They don't have a free market (lol) and they are no Democracy. Capitalism is possible in Communism, Democracy and Dictatorship. It doesn't tell how free a society is and it also doesn't say how free the market is. It's just a Ruleset (think of the Ferengi Code, if your into that. If not forget this remark).

And sorry, but I think a free(er) Market is possible. And I think politicans should stop pumping money into the economy. It would make more sense to prevent Monopolys...

PeAcE

[Harrdy]

Oh, by the way... I just thought: You know the last (ok, maybe not the last, but one) time when one set of ideas was considered "superior" to all others? It was called Nationalsozialism. One of the (many) problems of NS is when you think you have already the solution to every problem. Then you stop thinking about how you would like the world better. Bad things happen, but they are not your problem. The ones who get rolled over MUST somehow be responsible themselves (Jews? They stole our money. Homos? They are plain ugly. Roma? They are burglars. Communists? They are thinking wrong!). Because your set of ideas is just superior, there could be no other way doing it.

Pride - is said - comes before the fall...

PeAcE

[Towelmaster]

Pre-ambule : To the moderator(s) : If This Is A Flammable And Unacceptable Posting Please Edit or Remove At Will. I have tried not to be more blunt than others in this thread but one never knows how a posting is received when it is written in a non-native language.


So before I reply to Ranger1;

On the off-chance that I will offend Z'Ha'dum-dweller I would like to warn Hardy that so far I have not seen one discussion like this that involved Zhd in which he was actually convinced of anything by any other discussionpartner about him making false assumptions about Europe. It makes for great heated arguments but so far it has gone nowhere as far as more mutual understanding is concerned. To anyone who can prove me wrong; please send me the link.

Of course this is Zhd's absolute right as far as I am concerned. It's just that your postings read like you are actually trying to correct the incorrect assumptions about(for instance) Europe that he has. Good luck. According to Zhd's worldview(as far as I have read about it here), Europe is racist, old, over-the-hill and America is better in every way. I think it is called patriottism. Or nationalism, the one is very close to the other one.

BTW, if Zhd is reading this : Europe has just soundly rejected a proposal for a new and first European constitution because - among other things - the damned thing was to vague and Not Democratic Enough. So far the countries that have rejected the constitution do not wish to hand over any official constitutional power to Europe without a sound system of checks and balances. I don't think the Patriot-act was subject to a referendum. A 'war-situation' was used to curtail the freedom of all americans permanently.
Why do you call Europe less free then America? Do you define Freedom as Unlimited Capitalism? What about freedom of speech? What about freedom against arrest without charges(...). What about freedom against torture(...).

As we say in Holland "I think you have butter on your head".

One thing that you do not include in your definition(s) of freedom(as in your observation "Without capitalism there can be no...") is that without morals capitalism is a monster that will destroy us all. Just like any other system. Without moral values that transcend the capitalism per se it is no different than any other system. "Thou shalt not kill" Has nothing to do with capitalism but it is an essential rule, necessary for the system to work. What I read in your postings is that you do not want freedom, your want the survival of the fittest. Personally I'm more a fan of Libertarianism.

But enough said. As I said; please let no one think that this in any way dimishes anyones right to have his or her opinions. I am a great admirer of the work of Voltaire. Who was French by the way... :)


Now, I would like to explain my first posting here :

Huh? a couple that made a special trojan and sold it to firms in Israel and some firms in the UK (who know maybe US too),and its Israel government fault again?

You are talking about spying against countries in war times against israeli firms spy on eachother,two total different things.

Nope, sorry Ranger1, but that was not what I meant. I was talking about how the Israeli government did not have sufficient rules and regulations against industrial spying for decades let alone that they enforced them in a court of law. As long as it made Israel as a whole stronger everything was allowed. I fully admit that I am talking about the 70-ies and early 80-ies, I lost track after that time. It basically meant that industrial spying was condoned just as much as governmental spying. In those days the Mossad actually was into industrial spying.

And let me repeat myself before I am accused of anti-semitism : I do not condemn this as I do not know what I would have done in similar circumstances(three wars fought, constant threats from neighbours, etcetera). I am just stating the fact as they were then. Nuzzing more... ;)

Cheers,

TM.

[Dr Maturin]

One thing that you do not include in your definition(s) of freedom(as in your observation "Without capitalism there can be no...") is that without morals capitalism is a monster that will destroy us all. Just like any other system. Without moral values that transcend the capitalism per se it is no different than any other system. "Thou shalt not kill" Has nothing to do with capitalism but it is an essential rule, necessary for the system to work. What I read in your postings is that you do not want freedom, your want the survival of the fittest. Personally I'm more a fan of Libertarianism.

I believe in Social-Darwinism, so yeah, survival of the fittest.

I don't think you understand what Libertarianism is...having the freedom to say what you want, to do what you want, hell, to fuck in public, means nothing without economic freedom to equal it.

And capitalism in the US does have morals...we charge people with crimes.

I don't think the Patriot-act was subject to a referendum. A 'war-situation' was used to curtail the freedom of all americans permanently.

You've no idea what you're talking about. I don't know if you've ever even visited here, and if not, you'd have no frame of reference to judge whether or not any of our freedoms have been curtailed. The Patriot Act hasn't curtailed any freedoms. Not one. The Patriot Act (under a different name) was proposed to President Clinton during his time in office after all of the terrorist attacks of the 90's, but he rejected it and 9/11 happened. Did he reject because he didn't think it was a good idea? No...he probably rejected it because of the way it would be perceived, and he didn't want to be near anything like that.

It seems like everywhere I go, people have the same talking points -- almost key words -- but they can NEVER elaborate upon any of it. And I'm talking about people on both sides of the road, too.

And as for why the USA is freer than Europe...we here have the greatest combination of economic and social freedom anywhere. I mean, if whatever you guys have works for you, then more power to you.

[David Panzer]

As an aside, I've tried to read the Patriot Act to find out what it says. It's about 500 or so pages of drivel which is essentially in this manner of writing: "In Sec.5782 paragraph 47 subsection 9a, of U.S. Code 83248, substitute "and" for "or".

As another aside, "Thou shalt not kill" is a mistranslation. In the Hebrew, the word "ratsach" means murder. It's been a while since I read the Bible, but Leviticus has hundreds of laws, some of which demand the life of an individual who breaks them. There are also instances where god gives his approval or even tells his followers to kill, such as telling Saul to utterly wipe out the Amalekites, even down to the animals.

[AaronB]

As an aside, I've tried to read the Patriot Act to find out what it says. It's about 500 or so pages of drivel which is essentially in this manner of writing: "In Sec.5782 paragraph 47 subsection 9a, of U.S. Code 83248, substitute "and" for "or".


Welcome to modern day law writing 101. :)

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) for short and objected to about 10 points in the Patriot Act. Life continues just as usual, Marshal Law has not been declared and they are not lining up and killing non-christians (although if you would listen to some people you would think that has happened). The hysteria over these kind of things is really unwarrented.

WillieSteal: I'll comment on the other part of you post in the religion section.

[David Panzer]

What were the points that they objected to?! A preference for one conjunctive over another? I never saw anything clearly stated that said certain laws and practices would either be curtailed, bended, or otherwise removed. To me, it read more like a list of substituting 3 letter words for other 3 letter words or 2 letter words. Unless the ACLU had the cliff notes version of the Patriot Act or some pebbles, chicken entrails, and a young virgin to better understand it.

[AaronB]

What were the points that they objected to?! A preference for one conjunctive over another? I never saw anything clearly stated that said certain laws and practices would either be curtailed, bended, or otherwise removed. To me, it read more like a list of substituting 3 letter words for other 3 letter words or 2 letter words. Unless the ACLU had the cliff notes version of the Patriot Act or some pebbles, chicken entrails, and a young virgin to better understand it.
Quite honestly I don't remember what they were. I'm sure that they had lawyers and former law makers pouring over it to see what they could find objectionable.

[Dr Maturin]

Check this out: New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/auth/login?URI=http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/31/national/31planes.html&OQ=hpQ26exQ3D1117598400Q26enQ3D8e93dc2aa23dd421Q26 eiQ3D5094Q26partnerQ3DhomepageQ26orefQ3Dlogin&OP=7cba435f/tbN~t0nr(EnnQ244t4Q2BQ2BQ5DtQ2BQ5DtQ3D5tVQ23Q24DnV Q23/tQ3D5Q60/Q23VN(Q2A}Q24g/)

A case of activist journalism.

New York Times...the voice of dissension in this troubling era!

[AaronB]

Check this out: New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/auth/login?URI=http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/31/national/31planes.html&OQ=hpQ26exQ3D1117598400Q26enQ3D8e93dc2aa23dd421Q26 eiQ3D5094Q26partnerQ3DhomepageQ26orefQ3Dlogin&OP=7cba435f/tbN~t0nr(EnnQ244t4Q2BQ2BQ5DtQ2BQ5DtQ3D5tVQ23Q24DnV Q23/tQ3D5Q60/Q23VN(Q2A}Q24g/)

A case of activist journalism.

New York Times...the voice of dissension in this troubling era!
ZHDD,

tinyurl.com (http://tinyurl.com) is your friend. :)

[Dr Maturin]

ZHDD,

tinyurl.com (http://tinyurl.com) is your friend. :)

I shortened it on the edit using the "insert hyperlink" tool. Does it not appear as "New York Times?"

[AaronB]

I shortened it on the edit using the "insert hyperlink" tool. Does it not appear as "New York Times?"
The first time I saw it, it didn't. Now that I am at work, it shows as a link. That may be an issue with Safari (the Mac default browser).

[SpooRancher]

I believe in Social-Darwinism, so yeah, survival of the fittest.

I don't think you understand what Libertarianism is...having the freedom to say what you want, to do what you want, hell, to fuck in public, means nothing without economic freedom to equal it.

And capitalism in the US does have morals...we charge people with crimes.


As a card-carrying member of the Libertarian Party, US, "fuck in public" is not one of the things in our platform. We do not believe in the freedom to "say what you want, to do what you want". We believe that each person should have the freedom to make their own choices, for good or for bad, and deal with the consequences, good or bad, of their decision. We do not believe the government should make artificial consequences for non-violent behavior.

Initiation of force, fraud and violence are 100% against our platform. So we do not endorse all behaviors. We merely believe that what happens between two consenting adults, be it sexual, personal or financial, should not be unduly regulated by the government.

[Dr Maturin]

Initiation of force, fraud and violence are 100% against our platform. So we do not endorse all behaviors. We merely believe that what happens between two consenting adults, be it sexual, personal or financial, should not be unduly regulated by the government.

Exactly. It's unfortunate that some believe you are free when the sexual and personal are factored in while leaving out the financial.

[SpooRancher]

Exactly. It's unfortunate that some believe you are free when the sexual and personal are factored in while leaving out the financial.

That is what makes the difference between a "civil libertarian" which is basically a leftist liberal and a "libertarian" who believes that the only thing people should not be free to do is avoid the consequences of their behavior.

I have watched with interest some goings on in Europe and Canada. "Civil libertarian" issues such as gay marriage and drug legalization (neither of which am I opposed to, mind you) are given as great examples of the increasing freedom proffered by the governments, where heavy taxation, high social program spending, gun control and oppressive business regulation are basically ignored as issues.

If you are not free to earn and spend your money as you see fit, you are not free, you are merely a member of a vassal state. You are not a free man, you are a resource for your government, to be exploited at it's whim, not your own.

Likewise, if you are not free to engage in non-violent personal and sexual behavior (and make no mistake, I consider any action toward a minor to be violent, as they are not legally or morally able to consent) you are not free, you are merely, again, a servant of a government.

Out of the boardroom AND the bedroom is the only direction we should be taking government. Scale them back to the point where they are protecting us from others who initiate force, fraud or violence, and we have the amount of government we need. They should protect us from others. We can neither afford, not dare have, enough government to protect us from ourselves.

[Dr Maturin]

That is what makes the difference between a "civil libertarian" which is basically a leftist liberal and a "libertarian" who believes that the only thing people should not be free to do is avoid the consequences of their behavior.

I have watched with interest some goings on in Europe and Canada. "Civil libertarian" issues such as gay marriage and drug legalization (neither of which am I opposed to, mind you) are given as great examples of the increasing freedom proffered by the governments, where heavy taxation, high social program spending, gun control and oppressive business regulation are basically ignored as issues.

If you are not free to earn and spend your money as you see fit, you are not free, you are merely a member of a vassal state. You are not a free man, you are a resource for your government, to be exploited at it's whim, not your own.

Likewise, if you are not free to engage in non-violent personal and sexual behavior (and make no mistake, I consider any action toward a minor to be violent, as they are not legally or morally able to consent) you are not free, you are merely, again, a servant of a government.

Out of the boardroom AND the bedroom is the only direction we should be taking government. Scale them back to the point where they are protecting us from others who initiate force, fraud or violence, and we have the amount of government we need. They should protect us from others. We can neither afford, not dare have, enough government to protect us from ourselves.

Don't mistake libertarian with Libertarian. The party has its own stances on ALL issues, so "civil" and "economic" doesn't really come into it. Those modifiers can be used when the L is not capitalized.

[Towelmaster]

Zhd: Is freedom as defined in America only for americans or is it a universal principle? I do not visit the U.S.A. For one : I would have to get a damned retinascan-passport although these things have not even been tested, are bloody expensive and Do Not Work Properly. If I don't get one I won't get into America. Although I do not have anything even remotely like a criminal record I am treated as one by default. If you do not call that curtailing people's right to freedom, dismantling the 'innocent until proven guilty-idea' as well as spreading paranoia and hate of foreigners I don't know what is.

Further more there are numerous stories in your own press(from left- to rightwing in this case) that are either all lies or that contradict your opinion/data/etcetera. There is no way in Hell that you can call someone like for instance Jerry Pournelle left-wing(www.jerrypournelle.com). Stories of people not allowed to carry a nailfile on a plane... As R. Williams joked in december 2001 ; "What are they thinking? YOU! Take this plane to Washington or the bitch loses a cuticle!" Not having plastic cutlery on the plane anymore, by Jove; ever tried to eat with one of those crapthingies? They break if you handle them without love and affection. How is one supposed to force a plane down with a plastic fork?

It has gone to the extreme and I have to admit immediately that, although the european countries have not gone that far yet, they are definitely following a lot of the American rules. I believe strongly that politicians just love to spread this FUD. It keeps the people on edge and insecure. I also think politicians should be booted out of office for this kind of thing as it is the exact opposite of what they are supposed to work for.

Now on a related note : No, I have not travelled the length and breadth or the U.S.A. although before 9/11 I had plans to do so during a long vacation. The plan was to hire a van or something and just drive into America. Because do not get me wrong ; I believe there is much to be seen and enjoyed in the U.S.A. and much of it seems beautiful to me. And I'm not just talking about mountains and other landmarks, I'm also talking about people. I also believe that politics does not define a people, it only defines the "image" of a people to the outside world. Europe consists of a couple of dozen countries and they are all very different. Hence my objection to you trying to define Europe as a whole. Hence my example of the European Constipation being flagged down by the people. Although I do not consider the European Union a democratic institution at all, the same can be said for a big chunk of the American system. How come that if a president is "lucky" and several judges in the supreme court die, he gets to completely change the outlook of the Supreme Court for who knows how long? How can it be that one person can rule over his own political grave? After 8 year he is gone and if this president has been able to get lets say 3 judges elected they could be there for ever. As a matter of fact ; your supreme court justices typically grow to be very old. If you consider the U.S.A. to be a complete and utter democracy(for instance), how can it be that the winner takes all in politics, thus shutting out a(usually) very sizable minority? That is called a Republic and that is what the U.S.A. is. It may be a democratic republic but a republic it remains. Compare this to the Netherlands where the winner does not get all, he gets exactly what he deserved. This forces compromise into the system and prevents stuff like those idiotic Fillibusters that the democrats now have to use to get compromises from the republicans.

I do not think that America is the 'baddie' of the world as so many others do outside the U.S.A. but neither is Europe. And it is disturbing to see how you assume so much that just isn't true while at the same time responding incredibly protective when it comes to the pitfalls of the American system.
Both are far from perfect and - to put it a bit extreme - it does not do to glorify the one crucify the other.

P.S. I never mistake a political movement with an ethical movement. With liberterian I meant the ethical movement(as promoted by for instance Benjamin Franklin I believe), not whatever political movement might exist. Because political movements frequently tend to screw their own initial beliefs because of their best personal interests.

If you are not free to earn and spend your money as you see fit, you are not free, you are merely a member of a vassal state. You are not a free man, you are a resource for your government, to be exploited at it's whim, not your own.

Absolutely. But I think that there should be a choice. You either decide to get health-insurance or you decide not to, but there should be a health-insurance garantueed to be available if you want to pay for it. If you don't want it then that is your own decision. This is not the same as 'lets do away with government-controlled health-insurance'. It means that everyone should have the liberty, the personal freedom, and you yourself decide whether you want to get insurance or not. So in my view there is definitely a place for government-controlled services(which are therefor available to everyone). However, they should not be monopolized by the state and they should not be compulsary.

Is that somewhat in accordance with the idea of libertarianism in the U.S.A. or is this a typically non-American view?

TM.

[Dr Maturin]

Absolutely. But I think that there should be a choice. You either decide to get health-insurance or you decide not to, but there should be a health-insurance garantueed to be available if you want to pay for it. If you don't want it then that is your own decision. This is not the same as 'lets do away with government-controlled health-insurance'. It means that everyone should have the liberty, the personal freedom, and you yourself decide whether you want to get insurance or not. So in my view there is definitely a place for government-controlled services(which are therefor available to everyone). However, they should not be monopolized by the state and they should not be compulsary.

Is that somewhat in accordance with the idea of libertarianism in the U.S.A. or is this a typically non-American view?

You do have the choice in having health care...it's called getting a job that offers it or paying for it on your own. That's the whole thing...the USA was not set up to offer health care coverage. The Clintons' big health care bill was shot down in the 90's.

Do you realize that life-appointments for judges are the only things that have allowed progressive movements to take hold in the USA? They are the sole reason that decisions are made in government that go against the majority of American opinion. What's sad is that when it's a Republican's turn to appoint judges, the Democrats don't want to play fair and give the judges a vote.

And here is a little factoid for you: There are places you can live here that would resemble your home country. There are others that would be much more conservative. The great thing is that you can choose a place that best fits you and live there.

[Dr Maturin]

Oh yeah, and I'll tell you one thing...if anyone ever tries to hijack a plane again in this country, they're going to get rushed. The terrorists do not know how much they've strengthened America by carrying out the devastating attacks.

[David Panzer]

What's sad is that when it's a Republican's turn to appoint judges, the Democrats don't want to play fair and give the judges a vote.

And when a Democrat was in the White House, the Republicans didn't want to play fair and give the judges a vote. Reminds me of when I was in pre-school when something didn't go the way someone wanted, they'd throw a tantrum and yell "No fair", and whine to the teacher.

[Harrdy]

They are the sole reason that decisions are made in government that go against the majority of American opinion.

That doesn't sound very democratic to me...

And here is a little factoid for you: There are places you can live here that would resemble your home country. There are others that would be much more conservative. The great thing is that you can choose a place that best fits you and live there.

Who would have guesst the same is true for Europe! (WOW!)
You could live in England, where work conditions are more similar to USA or you could (try) to live in Germany where there are a lot of social services but also a lot of unemployment. Or you could live in the northern part of the Continent where welfare is even better than in germany. Or you could try the new Member States where things like Flat Tax happen... Europe is before everything else diversive.

PeAcE

[Dr Maturin]

That doesn't sound very democratic to me...

I'd have to agree.

Who would have guesst the same is true for Europe! (WOW!)
You could live in England, where work conditions are more similar to USA or you could (try) to live in Germany where there are a lot of social services but also a lot of unemployment. Or you could live in the northern part of the Continent where welfare is even better than in germany. Or you could try the new Member States where things like Flat Tax happen... Europe is before everything else diversive.

Taxes anywhere in Europe are too high.

[SpooRancher]

Don't ever make the mistake of thinking there is really a dime's bit of difference between Democrats and Republicans in America. They are both interested in control, albeit (at this point) in different areas. They both amount to control freaks. And, if they get their way, it always spreads to new issues.

As to the health care insurance issue: Currently, health insurance is generally available to anyone who wants to get it. There is, however, a cost. The financial burden of carrying health insurance is determined by assessing the risks of the person who wishes coverage. The health insurance companies are in business for one reason, honestly, and that is to make money. To expect them to do otherwise is foolish, and would seriously limit (in the long run) those companies willing to provide the service. So, if you are a young, healthy person with a history of not smoking, you will be able to purchase the insurance coverage at a relatively low cost. If you are older or have preexisting health problems, you will pay more. That is because it is a safe bet that the company will have to pay more claims for the older, less healthy consumer.

What made health insurance so expensive in America WAS the idea that everyone needed it. Dollar one insurance became an expected perq of employment in the 80's. (that means that your doctor visit is entirely covered by the insurance, no deductible). That meant there were a lot more people with insurance they didn't really need, but, since they had it, they might as well use it. That, in turn, clogged up the doctors offices with patients who otherwise would have gone down to Wal-Mart and bought some cough syrup instead of visiting the friendly neighborhood doctor. The increased demand on the doctor's time increased the cost of their services (study your basic economics class). The increased cost of the doctor's time in turn increased the cost of the insurance. Then, we found out that insurance was suddenly a bit too expensive for those who did not work at a company that provided it. So the government stepped in and said that in emergency situations, the hospitals needed to provide care regardless of the patient's ability to pay or insurance status. So, now, instead of going to the doctor at the corner and paying $75 for the chest cold that never went away, people go to the emergency room. The emergency room could, after a quick exam, say that it is not an emergency and send the patient to their doctor, but, it is usually easier just to go ahead and prescribe some medicines and treat them. So, instead of a $75 bill for a doctor visit that is paid before services rendered, the individual now has a $200 charge at the hospital that they have no intention to pay. So, the hospital increases the cost of the emergency room visit for those who do pay, to cover the costs of those who do not. THAT becomes a VERY vicious cycle. The higher costs mean that more patients do not pay. So hospitals end up petitioning the local and state and federal governments for relief for those unpaid bills.

In the end, if someone, somewhere, somehow is getting something for nothing, that means someone, somewhere, somehow is getting nothing for something. It is called the TANSTAAFL principle (pronounced tanstaffel). There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch.

(BTW, I used to work in an Emergency Room, so I saw this thing happening EVERY day).

[Dr Maturin]

Don't ever make the mistake of thinking there is really a dime's bit of difference between Democrats and Republicans in America. They are both interested in control, albeit (at this point) in different areas. They both amount to control freaks. And, if they get their way, it always spreads to new issues.

There are certain things that need to be controlled by the government, such as the military. A privately-run military wouldn't be wise. And you have to realize that politicians -- mainly congressmen -- say stuff more because they want votes than because it's something they strongly back. I think all Americans are fairly libertarian thinkers. Who LIKES to be pulled over by Barney and given a ticket for going 50 in a 40?

As to the health care insurance issue: Currently, health insurance is generally available to anyone who wants to get it. There is, however, a cost. The financial burden of carrying health insurance is determined by assessing the risks of the person who wishes coverage. The health insurance companies are in business for one reason, honestly, and that is to make money. To expect them to do otherwise is foolish, and would seriously limit (in the long run) those companies willing to provide the service. So, if you are a young, healthy person with a history of not smoking, you will be able to purchase the insurance coverage at a relatively low cost. If you are older or have preexisting health problems, you will pay more. That is because it is a safe bet that the company will have to pay more claims for the older, less healthy consumer.

What made health insurance so expensive in America WAS the idea that everyone needed it. Dollar one insurance became an expected perq of employment in the 80's. (that means that your doctor visit is entirely covered by the insurance, no deductible). That meant there were a lot more people with insurance they didn't really need, but, since they had it, they might as well use it. That, in turn, clogged up the doctors offices with patients who otherwise would have gone down to Wal-Mart and bought some cough syrup instead of visiting the friendly neighborhood doctor. The increased demand on the doctor's time increased the cost of their services (study your basic economics class). The increased cost of the doctor's time in turn increased the cost of the insurance. Then, we found out that insurance was suddenly a bit too expensive for those who did not work at a company that provided it. So the government stepped in and said that in emergency situations, the hospitals needed to provide care regardless of the patient's ability to pay or insurance status. So, now, instead of going to the doctor at the corner and paying $75 for the chest cold that never went away, people go to the emergency room. The emergency room could, after a quick exam, say that it is not an emergency and send the patient to their doctor, but, it is usually easier just to go ahead and prescribe some medicines and treat them. So, instead of a $75 bill for a doctor visit that is paid before services rendered, the individual now has a $200 charge at the hospital that they have no intention to pay. So, the hospital increases the cost of the emergency room visit for those who do pay, to cover the costs of those who do not. THAT becomes a VERY vicious cycle. The higher costs mean that more patients do not pay. So hospitals end up petitioning the local and state and federal governments for relief for those unpaid bills.

In the end, if someone, somewhere, somehow is getting something for nothing, that means someone, somewhere, somehow is getting nothing for something. It is called the TANSTAAFL principle (pronounced tanstaffel). There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch.

You're a smart man. Always remember, health care is denied to NOBODY in the USA.

[Harrdy]

Taxes anywhere in Europe are too high.

What is "to high" for you? I found a figure about taxation in relation to the BIP (Brutto Inlands Produkt, I think GDP is the english abbreviation). The highest value was for Sweden with 51,4%, then Denmark with 49,8%. The lowest values where for Lithuania with 28,7%, Latvia with 29,1% and Slovakia with 30,9 Prozent. These figures include all aspects of taxes, from income tax to sales to energy tax. Maybe you know the value of the United States? I found 17.4% for 2003, but that value was not so current...

PeAcE