You are not logged in. Login Now
 0-24   9-33   34-58   59-83   84-108   109-112     
 
Author Message
25 new of 112 responses total.
tod
response 34 of 112: Mark Unseen   Jan 27 19:22 UTC 2006

You know, my grandfather's uncle was part of the Gold Rush.  They went out
west with funding from Hudson's.  He later died from a mule kick.
I've got photos of the whole team that went with him out of Ohio.
Levi Strauss did not INVENT the blue jeans.  He might have put the patent on
the fabric, but I guarantee you he didn't invent it.
rcurl
response 35 of 112: Mark Unseen   Jan 27 19:40 UTC 2006

Are you saying that article is incorrect? How would you correct it. It is not
just the *fabric* he is claimed to have invented. It is the item of clothing,
"blue jeans", with rivets and all, that it is claimed he invented.
tod
response 36 of 112: Mark Unseen   Jan 27 20:16 UTC 2006

That article is totally incorrect.  Levi stole the invention of buttoning
pockets from the Yiddish guy Jacob Youphes from Latvia.  Coverall were around
but they put a patent on the button that keeps the pockets closed under
Strauss's company.  They were selling coveralls which were already around and
had been around for decades.
nharmon
response 37 of 112: Mark Unseen   Jan 27 21:47 UTC 2006

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denim

"In 1789 George Washington toured a Massachusetts factory producing
machine-woven cotton denim."

Levi Strauss wasn't born for another 40 years.
tod
response 38 of 112: Mark Unseen   Jan 27 21:59 UTC 2006

Denim was invented and used by latin farmers.
The power of advertising can change history beliefs no doubt
rcurl
response 39 of 112: Mark Unseen   Jan 27 22:19 UTC 2006

This isn't about denim (or jean): this is about the assembled and colored
garment, in its entirety, offered for sale. Even admitting that all the
components and methods were used by others elsewhere, I gather no one
else brought them all together and made a mint selling the result, the
"blue jean".
cross
response 40 of 112: Mark Unseen   Jan 27 23:32 UTC 2006

This response has been erased.

keesan
response 41 of 112: Mark Unseen   Jan 28 00:31 UTC 2006

denim - de Nimes (from Nimes, France).
tod
response 42 of 112: Mark Unseen   Jan 28 01:11 UTC 2006

deMI Moore (from a trailer)
happyboy
response 43 of 112: Mark Unseen   Jan 30 02:35 UTC 2006

bubba, from a trailer, also wearing jeans!
gull
response 44 of 112: Mark Unseen   Jan 31 07:18 UTC 2006

Re resp:8: I don't see what the problem is, to be honest.  When I was 
in grade school some guys wore skirts as a protest -- girls were 
allowed to wear skirts in hot weather, but guys weren't allowed to wear 
shorts, and they thought it was unfair.  I understand skirts for men 
were a brief "grunge" fad in the 90s in the Northwest, and I still see 
people wearing Utilikilts now and then.  So far it doesn't seem to have 
hurt anything or lead to the downfall of society. 
bru
response 45 of 112: Mark Unseen   Jan 31 09:38 UTC 2006

I need to get me a utilikilt!  of course, twila has been pushing to 
have me get a kilt for years, but they are  just to damned expensive.
happyboy
response 46 of 112: Mark Unseen   Jan 31 19:51 UTC 2006

lol.
keesan
response 47 of 112: Mark Unseen   Jan 31 20:49 UTC 2006

I once wore a skirt to school when I was a grad student, to protest the fact
that our visiting professor was told by the department head that she had to
teach in skirts or dresses.  She had some very nice pantsuits much more
suitable for New England weather.  The dept. head was surprised at my attire,
asked the reason, and after that the visiting professor wore her pantsuits.
Jim wears t-shirt swimming to protest the fact that I have to wear tops.
tod
response 48 of 112: Mark Unseen   Jan 31 21:02 UTC 2006

Was it severely out of character for you, Cindy?  I love when women wear
skirts usually.  
jadecat
response 49 of 112: Mark Unseen   Jan 31 21:10 UTC 2006

I like being able to wear a variety- pants, skirts, shorts- whatever
works for the occasion.
cross
response 50 of 112: Mark Unseen   Jan 31 21:13 UTC 2006

This response has been erased.

tod
response 51 of 112: Mark Unseen   Jan 31 21:22 UTC 2006

Yea, but try to convince her it's okay to have a breeze in the house in the
dead of Summer..
jadecat
response 52 of 112: Mark Unseen   Jan 31 21:23 UTC 2006

Ah, but how many layers are under that skirt and are leggings involved?
tod
response 53 of 112: Mark Unseen   Jan 31 21:25 UTC 2006

If she's from Moscow, then we're talking miniskirt and thong.
keesan
response 54 of 112: Mark Unseen   Jan 31 23:25 UTC 2006

It is out of character for me to wear summer clothing in the winter, and also
to wear pants in the summer on hot days.
rcurl
response 55 of 112: Mark Unseen   Feb 17 19:47 UTC 2006

ACLU Online:  February 17, 2006
The e-newsletter of the American Civil Liberties Union

*********************************

In this Issue:
-- Americans Demand Answers on NSA Spying 
-- Patriot Debate Nears Finish, But Battle Continues 
-- New Abu Ghraib Photos Confirm Need for Independent Counsel
-- What Will Your Legacy Be? 
-- In the States:
   * Homeowner Associations Must Respect Free Speech 
   * Veterans Affairs Nurse Accused of Sedition Over Political Views

*********************************
AMERICANS DEMAND ANSWERS ON NSA SPYING

The Bush Administration keeps hoping the questions will stop about illegal 
spying on Americans, but lawmakers, the media and the American people grow 
more and more determined to get to the truth behind the scandal.

The administration's abuses of power through illegal spying violate the 
Fourth Amendment, and the First Amendment and put our constitutional 
freedoms at risk.

Congress has a Constitutional obligation to serve as a check against 
presidential abuses of power and must demand that President Bush uphold 
the Constitution. Leaders on both sides of the aisle in Congress have 
called for real answers about the warrantless NSA spying program but we 
cannot expect real action unless we continue to make our voices heard.

The ACLU is taking action and you can get involved and add your voice. 
This Monday in Washington, D.C., we're holding a national town hall 
meeting to discuss illegal domestic spying, presidential power and the 
future of our democracy.

Panelists will include former White House counsel John W. Dean, Harvard 
law professor Laurence Tribe, ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero, 
among others. You can follow the event live online and submit your own 
questions and comments for the panel. Learn more about this live national 
event at: http://action.aclu.org/site/R?i=nH3RJNXzp6IXGw0UfmBvZA..

Illegal NSA surveillance on Americans is only part of a pattern of abuses 
that includes Pentagon spying on peaceful protestors and government 
surveillance of groups like Greenpeace and PETA as "terrorist 
organizations."

This week on ACLU.org, you can read personal statements from some of the 
regular American citizens swept up in the government's indiscriminate net 
of invasive and illegal surveillance activities. People like veteran and 
mother Debbie Clark, who served in the Army for eight years and is now a 
target of illegal Department of Defense surveillance simply for being a 
member of the peaceful protest group Veterans for Peace. In Ms. Clark's 
courageous words, when government officials are suspected of high crimes 
and abuses, "vigilant Americans should act."

Please raise your own voice today. Join in our Demand for the Truth. Add 
your name to thousands of others seeking real answers and a restoration of 
our fundamental protections under the Constitution. And submit a comment 
or a question to be read at our live national town hall event next Monday, 
February 20, at 11 a.m. ET.  Sign the petition here: 
http://action.aclu.org/site/R?i=s8OoCrFhDSo_sO_YXQ6gmA..

*********************************
SPEAK OUT LOCALLY

Join a "Constitution Vigil" in your area. Next Wednesday, February 22nd, 
MoveOn.org is organizing community vigils and Bill of Rights readings 
across the country. Join a local vigil, or take the lead and start one 
yourself. Stand up that night with hundreds of American communities and 
send Congress and your local media a simple message: The time to defend 
the Constitution is now:


ADD YOUR VOICE: DEMAND FOR THE TRUTH Sign our Demand for the Truth. Call 
on Congress to end the illegal spying and fully investigate the Bush 
Administration's illegal spying programs. Add your own comment when you 
sign your name, and tell Congress how you feel and why the illegal spying 
on Americans and abuse of power must end today.

Selected statements from supporters like you will be posted online and 
read live at our national town hall on February 20th.

Sign the petition here: 
http://action.aclu.org/site/R?i=KNsPKBiy2pULYU-gqbgKTg..

PARTICIPATE Join us live online next Monday, February 20 at 11:00 AM 
ET/8:00 AM PT for our national town hall event: Fundamental Freedoms at 
Risk: Spying, Secrecy and Presidential Power.

*********************************
Patriot Debate Nears Finish, But Battle Continues

The Patriot Act reauthorization debate appears to be drawing to a close 
after some key reformers cut a deal with the White House to reauthorize 
the Patriot Act without making the most needed changes to protect our 
privacy and freedom.

We expect a vote on this flawed Patriot Act reauthorization the week of 
February 27th. While the reformers were acting with good intentions, the 
White House has repeatedly failed to negotiate in good faith over the past 
several months and refused to allow modest, common sense changes that 
would better protect our civil liberties.

The Patriot Act should require that the federal government show that any 
financial or internet transactions or medical or library records they 
demand are about a suspected foreign terrorist or someone conspiring with 
a terrorist or terrorist organization.

The reauthorization bill fails to provide a meaningful right to challenge 
the secret court orders under Section 215 of the Patriot Act for medical, 
library or employment records that intrude on your privileged, private 
information.

The bill also fails to rein in the National Security Letter power expanded 
by the Patriot Act's Section 505 which is being used to gather financial 
or internet transactions about tens of thousands of Americans without any 
individual proof of wrongdoing.

We have made significant progress over the past several months, as we were 
able to stop the president from getting the Patriot Act reauthorized under 
the radar. Instead, the entire reauthorization process has highlighted for 
the nation that the Patriot Act has serious flaws and we know a majority 
of Americans support Patriot Act reform. In fact, California has just 
joined seven other states and over 400 municipalities that have passed 
resolutions supporting reforms to restore real checks and balances to 
protect our civil liberties.

Even if Congress has yet to get the message, the Patriot Act debate is far 
from over, and the ACLU will continue to demand the restoration of the 
rule of law to protect our most fundamental freedoms.

*********************************
NEW ABU GHRAIB PHOTOS CONFIRM NEED FOR INDEPENDENT COUNSEL

In response to newly released images of abuse at Abu Ghraib, the ACLU 
renewed its call this week for an independent investigation into 
widespread and systemic abuse in U.S. detention centers in Iraq, 
Afghanistan and Guantánamo Bay.

"We continue to see undeniable evidence that abuse and torture has been 
widespread and systematic, yet high level government officials have not 
been held accountable for creating the policies that led to these 
atrocities," said Anthony D. Romero, Executive Director of the ACLU. "We 
need to look up the chain of military command, because when the rule of 
law is not followed all of our personal freedoms are threatened. President 
Bush should appoint an independent counsel to uncover the full truth about 
the extent of the abuse and who is ultimately responsible."

The ACLU has sued the Department of Defense for withholding photographs 
and videos depicting abuse at Abu Ghraib and other detention facilities. 
In September, a federal judge in New York ruled that the government must 
turn over the Abu Ghraib images, as well as other visual evidence of 
abuse, noting "the freedoms that we champion are as important to our 
success in Iraq and Afghanistan as the guns and missiles with which our 
troops are armed." The decision is currently on appeal by the government. 
The ACLU does not know whether the new photos aired by the Australian 
"Dateline" program are the same photos being withheld by the government.

"The public has a right to know the full truth about the treatment of 
detainees not just in Abu Ghraib but elsewhere in Iraq, Afghanistan and 
Guantánamo Bay," said ACLU attorney Amrit Singh. "Instead of continuing to 
deny the widespread abuse, the government must hold relevant officials 
accountable for this abuse."

The ACLU has been in the courts since 2003 seeking the release of evidence 
of abuse. To date, almost 90,000 pages of government documents have been 
released in response to the ACLU's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 
lawsuit. The documents have revealed that harsh interrogation techniques 
were used indiscriminately in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantánamo Bay, and 
ultimately led to cases of abuse and torture.

For more on the ACLU's FOIA lawsuit, go to: 
http://action.aclu.org/site/R?i=1uZaJw2iZTohVaj1lR1h1Q..

*********************************
HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATIONS MUST RESPECT FREE SPEECH

In an appeals court decision last week, new rights are provided for more 
than one million residents of private communities governed by homeowners 
associations in the state.

"For the first time anywhere in the United States, an appellate court has 
ruled that such private communities are 'constitutional actors' and must 
therefore respect their members' freedom of speech," said Rutgers Law 
Professor Frank Askin, lead counsel in the case. "The court recognized 
that just as shopping malls are the new public square, these associations 
have become and act, for all practical purposes, like municipal entities 
unto themselves."

The case involved the 10,000-resident community of Twin Rivers in East 
Windsor, where the rights to post political signs on members' lawns, to 
equal access to the community newspaper run by the Board of Trustees, and 
to equitable access to the community room for meetings for dissidents. The 
complaint raised claims under the free speech protections of the New 
Jersey Constitution.

The opinion by the appellate panel relied heavily upon earlier decisions 
of the New Jersey Supreme Court which held that privately owned and 
operated shopping malls were public forums under the State Constitution, 
and had to allow non-profit advocacy groups to gather petitions and 
distribute educational material on mall property.

Building on those cases, the court held that private residential 
communities could no more deny free speech to its residents to discuss 
public issues than municipal governments.

The case is a national landmark and was awaited by homeowners groups 
across the country in hopes of emulating a similar decision.

*********************************
VETERANS AFFAIRS NURSE ACCUSED OF SEDITION OVER POLITICAL VIEWS

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs investigated a federal employee 
who published an editorial critical of the Bush administration in a local 
newspaper. The ACLU is demanding an explanation.

In her letter to the weekly Alibi, Laura Berg, a clinical nurse 
specialist, criticized the Bush administration's handling of Hurricane 
Katrina and the Iraq War, noting that, "as a VA nurse working with 
returning...vets, I know the public has no sense of the additional 
devastating human and financial costs of post-traumatic stress disorder." 
She urged readers to "act forcefully to remove a government administration 
playing games of smoke and mirrors and vicious deceit."

In September 2005, VA Information Security employees seized Berg's office 
computer because they claimed "government equipment was used 
inappropriately...during government time for drafting an editorial 
letter." No evidence was recovered to support that belief.

"The VA had no reason to suspect Laura Berg used government resources to 
produce her editorial," said ACLU of New Mexico Executive Director Peter 
Simonson. "She signed the letter as a private individual. From all 
appearances, the seizure of her work computer was an act of retaliation 
and a hardball attempt to scare Laura into silence."

In a November 9th memorandum to Berg, Mel Hooker, Chief of Human Resource 
Management Service at the VA, conceded that no evidence was found 
implicating the use of Berg's work computer in the writing of the 
editorial. However, he justified the investigation by saying "the Agency 
is bound by law to investigate and pursue any act which potentially 
represents sedition."

*********************************
American Civil Liberties Union
125 Broad Street, 18th Floor
New York, New York 10004-2400
http://action.aclu.org/site/R?i=7JEhYEV7HP7v7TxASH3ngA..
Gerri Engel and Jed Miller, Editors

other
response 56 of 112: Mark Unseen   Feb 18 18:28 UTC 2006

The phrase "act forcefully to remove [the current government or
administration]" in the context of an editorial exhortation does
_potentially_ fall within the definition of sedition, so this seems like
an unfortunate combination of incautious phrasing on the part of Berg
and _potentially_ (but not necessarily) politically motivated zealotry
on the part of Hooker in pursuing it.

I don't think this case has much value other than pointing up the
obvious: be careful how you phrase arguments opposing whichever idiots
are in charge at the moment.
rcurl
response 57 of 112: Mark Unseen   Feb 18 19:09 UTC 2006

The current administration is likely to consider "act forcefully" as
seditious, even though just mounting a campaign to vote the administration
out of office is "acting forcibly". 
other
response 58 of 112: Mark Unseen   Feb 18 19:22 UTC 2006

It is an ambiguous choice of phrasing, and this is a time in which
ambiguity can be dangerous as well as counter-productive.
 0-24   9-33   34-58   59-83   84-108   109-112     
Response Not Possible: You are Not Logged In
 

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss