Slashdot Mirror

story not about taxes, but arbitrary enforcement of vague laws on one specific company, and not any of their competitors.

The IRS also targeted individuals in 2012 based on which campaigns they were donating money to. Many fired from IRS, and they admitted in court to acting illegally.

So it does happen, even if you seem to think it doesn't. It may be illegal for them to do it, but not one person was charged with a crime in their illegal actions, so by the letter of the law it is illegal, but in reality it seems perfectly legal for the IRS to target individual businesses/people based on political views.

Once reefs were being really demolished, but most things killing reefs off have greatly diminished - and reefs appear to be able to rebound really well.

It just doesn't seem like there is enough danger to warrant this level of depression.

Sure! Here ya go: http://www.la-articles.org.uk/fascism.htm The history of fascism, extensively footnoted and annotated. Think about this: We know the name of the philosopher of capitalism, Adam Smith. We also know the name of the philosopher of Marxism, Karl Marx. So, quick: What is the name of the philosopher of fascism? Yes, exactly. You don't know. Virtually no one knows. This is not because he doesn't exist, but because the political left - which dominates academia, the media and Hollywood - had to get rid of him to avoid confronting fascism and Nazism's unavoidable leftist orientation.

So let's meet the man himself, Giovanni Gentile, who may be termed fascism's Karl Marx. Gentile was, in his day, which is the first half of the 20th century, considered one of Europe's leading philosophers. A student of Hegel and Bergson and director of the Encyclopedia Italiana, Gentile was not merely a widely published and widely influential thinker; he was also a political statesman who served in a variety of important government posts. How, then, has such a prominent and influential figure vanished into the mist of history?

For Gentile, people by themselves are too slothful and inert to form genuine communities by themselves; they have to be mobilized. Here, too, many modern progressives would agree. Speaking in terms with which both Obama and Hillary would sympathize, Gentile emphasized that leaders and organizers are needed to direct and channel the will of the people.

Gentile was, in fact, a lifelong socialist. Like Marx, he viewed socialism as the sine qua non of social justice, the ultimate formula for everyone paying their "fair share." For Gentile, fascism is nothing more than a modified form of socialism, a socialism arising not merely from material deprivation but also from an aroused national consciousness, a socialism that unites rather than divides communities.

Gentile's philosophy closely parallels that of the modern American left. Consider the slogan unveiled by Obama at the 2012 Democratic Convention: "Government is the only thing we all belong to." That apotheosis of the centralized state is utterly congruent with Gentile's thinking. Only Gentile would have provided a comprehensive philosophical defense that the Democrats didn't even attempt. In many respects, Gentile provides a deeper and firmer grounding for modern American progressivism than anyone writing today.

Prove the first one? Ok, not hard to find. There's a search engine for that called Google. He's referring to the now thoroughly discredited inconvenient truth film. That really was a load of bullshit.

Read here -
http://humanevents.com/2011/08...

Just admit you've believed the lies from the left. No shame in it because they've spent billions to make people believe it. There is shame if you don't realize you're wrong and still believe it. Read where Eric Holder let him off the hook like Democrats always do for each other. Even if they get put in jail, they let them out in droves when they get control of the White House. Even convicted terrorists that killed people.

IPCC-accepted modelers caution that they produce scenarios, not forecasts. Scenarios are stories constructed from a collection of assumptions, not necessarily from observed historic climate dats. Climate scenarios can seem convincing, in the same way that a well-written novel is, but they are not forecasts, and don't pretend to be. Scenarios don't use validated forecasting methods, which is a point of contention among scientists using mathematical modeling in other disciplines.

Other concerns include too-small sample sizes, the lack of homogeneity of sampling methods, data cherry picking, and rejection of negative results. The IPCC-favored models also have no formal methodology to eliminate confirmation bias, and are unscientific in the sense that they are not falsifiable. Any difference between modeled scenarios and actual future climate measurements (witness the infamous "pause") are explained away as resolution errors.

An audit of computational procedures used by IPCC-selected models found that they ignore 80% of established scientific forecasting principles. But the IPCC promotes these scenarios as if they were forecasts.

Even the IPCC admits that there is no certainty that global warming is man-made. It only says there is "consensus". But science is not a consensus enterprise. 100 scientists can believe in some theory, but a single objecting scientist with non-conforming results is supposed to send everyone back to the drawing board. That hasn't happened with climate "science".

Here's a list of credentialed scientists that take issue with the IPCC's "consensus":

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...

Julian Assange is a KGB agent, on a mission to elect Donald Trump.

Wait, Snowden — hiding in Russia is a hero for his exposes, but Assange — hiding in London — is a "KGB agent" for his?..

Only releases information that is useful to russia.

The only known instance of an American politician covertly seeking Russian help in exchange for favorable policy changes is that of Ted Kennedy (struggling against Ronald Reagan) — the Democratic "lion" and otherwise a hero of everything Progressive.

Secretary Clinton lied yesterday, when she claimed, Trump is the first to be accused of collaborating with Russia. And, while accusations against Trump are completely unsubstantiated, those against Kennedy are backed by the KGB's archives...

You may not, but the problem is that too many of the politicians you vote for do. HRC is on record many times this campaign saying she wants to see the "Australian model" implemented in the US. That means forced confiscation of all personally owned firearms under the guise of "buybacks." The buybacks are mandatory, and you go to prison is you don't comply.

Here's a list of politicians talking about confiscating guns, just from a short period in 2013:

Hawaii legislature proposes gun confiscation
http://www.hawaiireporter.com/...

New York Assemblyman asks colleague not to mention that original proposed SAFE Act included confiscation
http://www.breitbart.com/Breit...

Missouri Democrats introduce legislation to confiscate guns
http://nation.foxnews.com/gun-...

VA has veterans who cannot manage their own financial affairs declared prohibited persons unable to own firearms
http://www.humanevents.com/201...

NJ State Senator "We needed a bill that was going to confiscate confiscate confiscate."
http://www.politickernj.com/ba...

Oregon Legislator calls fears of gun confiscation a "paranoid delusion" and then states he is in favor of gun confiscation
http://www.examiner.com/articl...

Governor Cuomo says, "confiscation could be an option."
http://www.nationalreview.com/...

Feinstein suggests "compulsory buyback."
http://washingtonexaminer.com/...

CA assembly proposes confiscating 166,000 legally registered guns.
http://www.mercurynews.com/bre...

And the classic from 1995:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Do you notice any common political party among the people calling for confiscation?

>> Microsoft, GE, the National Council of La Raza, the National Association of Manufactures, and the National Science Teachers Association

I see 2 corporations, 2 associations and one racist council (La Raza stands for "The Race"), members of which frequently advocate for re-conquering "Aztlan" (the american southwest, California to Colorado) and ceding control back to mexico. "The Race" has a large overlap with Mecha, a group that has the motto "For La Raza todo. Fuera de La Raza nada", translated meaning "For The Race, Everything. Outside The Race, Nothing".

http://humanevents.com/2006/04...

Yes, Bernie Sanders is a Communist. And that particular article came out before he started to run for Presidency. The "Socialist" label he prefers is hardly better (Socialism is nothing but Communism-lite), but he was and remains a member and supporter of openly Communist organizations. As recently as 2014 Bernie Sanders was hailed by Democratic Socialists of America — a "New Left" organization comprised of what was left of the Socialist and Communist movements of the "Old Left". And he was not merely endorsed by these assholes (the way, Trump was endorsed by Duke) — Sanders was a distinguished speaker at a DSA gathering that year. On the same page the Senator is also called "DSA member".

The funny part is, most of his defenders would dispute — often angrily — the "Communist" label while also disagreeing, there is anything wrong with being a Communist. So, before going any further, please, state for the record, whether you are one of such people... Thanks!

While Fascism/Nazism is largely extinct from public life (though, sadly, not from government), Socialism/Communism — the far more murderous school of thought — is rearing its even uglier head... And not only on Slashdot.

http://humanevents.com/2014/04...

It does cover it, however, it is a very specific case that is allowed, does this seizure count for that? If they are allowing the ranchers to graze their cattle on the property being seized, why did they even take the property in the first place?

The specific clause of the Fifth amendment:

nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

So, how is it being taken for "public use" when the government isn't even using it for anything but allowing the ranchers to graze their cattle still? What "public use" is it being put to?

"the Presidential hopeful states the new law is necessary because the FCC's "burdensome" net neutrality rules are destroying innovation, diversity, and network investment."

Examples plz

There seem to be some problems.

Net Neutrality - Issues

Strict Net neutrality legislation would limit the terms, conditions, and potentially prices set by broadband Internet service providers. This could restrict their ability to use innovative network management technology, provide appropriate levels of quality of service, and deliver new features and services to meet evolving consumer needs.

Cisco believes that allowing the development of differentiated broadband products, with different service and content offerings, will enhance the broadband market for consumers.

Net neutrality for dummies

Net Neutrality is a solution in search of a problem. The reader has probably not encountered much difficulty accessing even the smallest web sites. Big sites that deliver huge amounts of multimedia content with blistering speed pay extra for their performance, but this happily leaves ISPs with plenty of lower-cost extra bandwidth to sell. Net Neutrality would be movement, at gunpoint, away from efficient Internet capitalism, and into dreary online socialism. Imagine what would happen to Internet traffic if ISPs were required to treat obscure cat blogs the same way they handle Fox News, CNN and Netflix.

Net Neutrality would foul things up on the user end of the Internet experience, too. Most basic Internet services have some sort of usage cap, beyond which performance is automatically slowed down. The caps are very high, so average users are perfectly happy with this arrangement. Even cell phone users, with more aggressive usage caps than household cable or DSL access, rarely encounter their service limits. Those who desire more bandwidthâ"most commonly for downloading large amounts of multimedia content, like high-definition moviesâ"can pay extra to raise or remove their usage limits.

This kind of multi-tiered service is the reason cheaper, "lower-tiered" service exists at all. It would be silly to charge the same rate to an average home user who fiddles with email and Facebook for a couple of hours each day, versus a movie fanatic who wants to download a hundred high-def movies a month.

At worst, Net Neutrality would "redistribute" bandwidth, so that network hogs have no reason not to download everything in creation, at all hours. Meanwhile, those average users would be reduced to hammering their keyboards in frustration, and wondering why even simple everyday websites took several minutes to load. The past would become a bygone age of wonders.

Net Neutrality waivers

As always, vast power would accrue to those who control the "redistribution" of Internet bandwidth. It wouldn't be long before the first Net Neutrality waivers appeared, the same way ObamaCare is riddled with special exemptions for the politically connected. Like so much else in our centrally planned economy, Internet access would become a boon granted by politicians, rather than a commodity sold by businesses.

The proponents of Net Neutrality sell their agenda by inverting the language of freedom, warning darkly of evil ISPs "blocking" content from website proprietors if they don't pay a ransom. This is true in precisely the same sense that motorists who drive a Chevy Volt are "blocked' from driving as fast as a Porsche can. Net Neutrality "solves" this "problem" by outlawing Porsches . . . and spending taxpayer money on an army of regulators to ensure that every car dealership sells nothing but Volts.

Net Neutrality shares many attributes of the Left's other favored causes. It's steeped in anti-capitalist rhetoric, and d

When Assange surrenders to the UK authorities & then does his prison time for jumping bail & is then extradited to Sweden as anyone else would be, THEN it will be about the Swedish rape charges.

You mean when Sweden makes it clear it's about fucking rape, and nothing but the rape, you 50 pounds-of-dumbfuck-in-a-five-pound-sack idiot. Every time you open your mouth, you add another 10 pounds to the sack. Since the previous 18 demonstrations of what a goosestepping fool you are have gone over your head, lets go for 19:

Like the boy who cried wolf, you lose the right to be butthurt when anyone questions your honesty and motives, after you've proven your motives and honesty should be questioned.

Sweden has turned people over to the CIA to be tortured, and the only person who has been sent to prison for the CIA's torture program is the man who revealed its existence. So not only is Assange's demand that he not be handed over to the CIA not unreasonable, he'd have to have a whole in his head not to demand such a condition.

This really isn't hard to understand, even for a goosestepping fool such as yourself. If the cops want to question you for alleged drug possession, it would seem crazy to insist that they don't sexually assault you with multiple colonoscopies, over the better part of the day, just to show that you aren't actually hiding drugs up your ass. Unless the warrant is from Hidalgo County, where the cops have been known to do just that.

Those cops have completely lost the right to act indignant and butthurt over being asked for such a guarantee, since they've done exactly what the suspect is accusing them of doing. And it would be the easiest thing in the world for an honest DA to say "fine, we wont shove a probe up your ass time and time again". But we aren't dealing with honest prosecutors.

As Assange has already raped in all probability two women I can see why pedophilia is a likely next step for him, one you seem eager to emulate given your fixations and how you worship him.

Then. They. Would. Make. It. About. Rape. If. It. Was. About. Rape. But thanks for making it clear you don't actually give a shit about rape, by not giving a shit about rape far worse, and far more widespread than anything Assange is accused of doing. You Nazi shit-for-brains pecker head, you.

At least they didn't talk about how Mozilla are leaders in the diversity movement and have pride in having a different standard.

I guess once you put politically correct groupthink over people with a proven track record of innovation, innovation starts to suffer and go away.

This process is also known a "Bad Luck". Sounds like Mozilla is suffering from bad luck...

Why is this appearing on Slashdot now? Especially with such a misleading headline. The kkk ties were debunked last month. He actually spoke to the Jefferson Heights Civic Association. The kkk associated group used the same conference room later in the day. He had already left by then. And all this is from investigation done by Slate which is a super liberal news blog. http://humanevents.com/2014/12...

Maybe not.

The myth of gun battles in the street due to citizens legally carrying weapons is a product of ignorant, agenda pushing, wussies.

And we all know WHY the USPS is broke. Not because it can't deliver letters, but because it's being forced by Congress to prefund its pension/healthcare/workers comp funds to an absurd extent

All the more reasons to privatize it — thus setting it free from Congress' meddling, is not it?

The point, however, was that nobody is suggesting, the stamp price should go up because fewer people use the service (thanks to e-mail)... And that is the argument the Illiberal in TFA is making: raise the gas-tax because people buy less of it (thanks to improvements in fuel-economy).

Bridges have a natural monopoly over their local environment.

"Natural monopoly" is a myth — perpetuated by government types with vested interest in expanding government's power. It is particularly obvious in case of bridges — building another one next to an existing one is not substantially harder, than building the first one: you don't even need to exercise "eminent domain" for most of the distance (above the river)...

With that in mind, why would a private bridge owner have any incentive to lower prices?

For the same reason, your local pizzeria does not charge you $1000 for a pie — for fear, you'll go elsewhere. The attraction of "free" crossing is balanced against the additional time it would take to make use of it — and attracts people willing to wait instead of spending money. The number of such people is determined largely by the additional delay of the free option. For some people $1 of price-difference is enough, for others it would take $5. But the cost-consideration is there. Once bridges are independently-owned and compete, their owners will have a financial incentive to keep the traffic flowing (and expanding). Some competitors might even undertake to build a new crossing — when they figure, such an investment has a good chance of paying off...

Come on, if New York's toll bridges and tunnels were all owned by the same private corporation, you too would be screaming against their monopoly. But if that monopoly is the government's, then it is Ok with you somehow...

And btw it might be decent in some parts of the country but $30/hr is a shitty wage in NYC.

Yeah, that's nominal wage — add bonuses and "overtime", etc. and it becomes a very-well paying job, which is impossible to get without "connections" (note, how this "help wanted" listing does not even advertise full-time toll-collection opportunities).

Regardless, whether the booth-workers are under- or over-paid, the building and maintenance of bridges and tunnels can be made by competing corporations and thus must not be done by the government...

Exactly. We don't have a collection problem, we have an outradeous spending problem.

Federal Budget Death & Taxes:
2004
2007
2008
2009
2011
2012

I.e. The government collect more tax dollars from the people than any nation in recorded history, still spend a Trillion dollars more than it has per year - for total spending of $7 Million PER MINUTE and complain that it doesn't have nearly enough money!?!?

Spending money to kill other people is NOT the solution to balance the budget.

Please provide a single scientific proof of anything Al Gore ever accomplished?

OTOH:

Blood And Gore: Making A Killing On Anti-Carbon Investment Hype

Al Gore invests millions to make billions in cap-and-trade software

Al Gore Invests $6M To Make BILLIONS In Cap And Trade

Gore lies to Congress about personal finances

Gore’s Dual Role: Advocate and Investor

The Money and Connections Behind Al Gore’s Carbon Crusade

Al Gore pushes Global Warming for personal profit

Cyber-Thieves Make Millions from Emissions Cap-and-Trade Scam

Obama's draft budget projects cap-and-trade revenue

Cap-and-trade: The biggest scam of all

Experts: Carbon Tax needed and NOT Cap-and-Trade Emission Trading Scheme (ETS)

Leading Global Warming Crusader: Cap and Trade May INCREASE CO2 Emissions

Cap-and-Trade's Unlikely Critics: Its Creators

Fraud in Europe's Cap and Trade System a 'Red Flag,' Critics Say

Spending Cap and Trade Auction Revenues Will Undermine California’s Climate Goals

Yet LFTR get's pooh poohed because it's experimental. Amazing.

I disagree, it isn't a myth, it's an outright lie and they know it. http://www.humanevents.com/201...

Gender baiting along with race baiting from this administration.

When an agencny like the EPA takes action the science is based upon compilations of complex studies and agreement among scientists.

No, it's not. You can find example after example of the EPA and other agencies falsifying information and distorting data to get to a political-based outcome. Another famous one was the snail darter population issue in California. The EPA did not go after the problem (agricultural runoff), but decided to treat the symptom by cutting off water to the small farmers in the San Joaquin valley so that the corporate farms on the SF Bay watershed could continue to pollute.

To ignore these abuses is to submit to tyranny.

Yes, we should be dumb and stupid...great way to plan for the future.

Repeat after me, throwing money at something does not make it better, it just makes it more expensive. WE are constantly under-performing in test scores compared to other countries that spend a fraction of what we do on education. Not spending more does not equate to being dumb and stupid. Spending more with no or negative results could equal dumb and stupid though.

And 30-40 MILLION more people have health insurance available to them. Overall spending DECREASE since once it's fully in force and people are enrolled the number of ER visits goes way way down. Again, 'decade over decade' and you compare to just 'now'.

No they do not. Right now, the number of people who do not have health insurance available is actually greater then before as policies were canceled and some increased in costs to the point people claim they cannot afford them any more.

Even the government claims less then 6 million people signed up for the exchanges. The CBO claims that after Obamacare is fully implemented, 30 to 40 million people will not have coverage. Before the ACA, it was only 50 million who were uninsured. But right now, we have seen over 80 million policies canceled because of the ACA. So unless you are counting a large amount of people who had their policies canceled as the ones who are going to be getting insurance, the best you can claim is that 10-20 million will have access to insurance. But currently, it seems like only 6 million or so is able to be claimed if you discount anyone who was canceled from the number of people signing up for the exchanges. But that isn't the case in reality.

I know, that is not what you have been told by your handlers. But it actually is the cold hard truth of the matter.

I think the proper question is why aren't you getting off your lazy AC ass and actually doing something about it? If you don't like the government, you're quite free to persuade your neighbors to join you in replacing your representatives.

I think you will find this to be a common theme over the next several elections. Whether the politicians will stand and deliver is another story, but we can expect to see some different talking heads in the mix.

Abstract: An examination of the effects of concealed weapons laws and assault weapons bans on state-level murder rates. Like many papers published in academic journals you would have to pay to see the whole thing, although you can preview it.

You can read a news story about it here:

Study shows concealed-carry laws result in fewer murders

Similar work:

An interview with John R. Lott, Jr.

You may find this interesting as well.

Detroit police chief: More legally armed citizens deter crime

How may gun-relate crimes have been stopped thanks to citizen carrying guns? It seems to me that the more guns there are, the more death there are.

It happens all the time. Recent example:

Dallas Store Manager Shoots at 5 Armed Robbers Police Arrive 74 Minutes Later

Study shows concealed-carry laws result in fewer murders

Alcohol use fell greatly due to prohibition, and the rate of use took many decades to return to the previous level.

Did Prohibition Really Work? Alcohol Prohibition as a Public Health Innovation

Are you suggesting that there would be the same or less drug use if it wasn't illegal?

You don't go into any detail about what you think the issue is with "guns", but I assume you've heard that ownership of them is a Constitutionally protected right. Some people think that a murder with a gun is a gun problem when it is a murder problem.

Study shows concealed-carry laws result in fewer murders

However, those two years have brought on voter registration laws designed to disenfranchise, laws so blatantly racist that it's pants-on-heads insane that anybody let them get away with it.

Voter turnout in Texas nearly doubles under new ID law
Minority turnout increased dramatically after Georgia voter-ID law
New Analysis Shows Voter Identification Laws Do Not Reduce Turnout

Voting fraud is an important question since so many elections are now decided by margins of victory less than the margin of fraud.

Al Franken May Have Won His Senate Seat Through Voter Fraud

Poor and minority votes seem especially vulnerable.

Poor and Disadvantaged are Most Likely to Have Their Vote Stolen
Officials Plead Guilty in New York Voter Fraud Case

Mississippi NAACP leader sent to prison for 10 counts of voter fraud
New York Investigators Obtain Fraudulent Ballots 97 Percent of Time
The “snowbird vote” takes wing

How often do you encounter a platoon of enemy soldiers in the middle of America?

What's a platoon? Normally about 20-40 or so?

It happens.

Normally it is less than a platoon.

Lifting the Ice Curtain - October 23, 1988

The most alarming report was in October 1982, of five men emerging from the water in wetsuits over olive drab uniforms. Spetsnaz, the elite Soviet Special Forces charged with behind-the-lines reconnaissance and sabotage, often wear olive drab.

The evidence of covert Soviet landings on St. Lawrence is impressive but still circumstantial ....

Spokesmen for the Defense Intelligence Agency deny that any Russians have penetrated our perimeter, but Abner Gologoren, the local coroner and longtime magistrate of Savoonga, told me of a Russian found dead inside the old Air Force listening post at Northeast Cape around 1979. ''The military took charge of the body,'' the magistrate said. Alaska State Trooper A.J. Charlton believes that the Russian was somehow separated from his unit ''and hid out as long as he could, hoping they'd come back for him.''

Why Spetsnaz or other Soviet special forces would want to penetrate the island is another matter. A senior military intelligence source in Washington offered a plausible motive: ''It's like the old American Indian tradition of 'counting coup.' For a young Indian brave to be accepted as a man, he has to get close enough to his opponent, either in battle or in one-on-one combat, to touch him, and then to survive. Evidence, whether it be a wound or a scalp, that you were able to go in there and come back was having 'counted coup.' That's what the Soviet commandos are doing on St. Lawrence. It's a perfect place to do it.''

My source explained the military logic. ''In peacetime, all such organizations seek training opportunities for their special units that approximate the real risks and hazards of wartime,'' he said. ''Going in covertly in ones and twos is the best possible training. The coastline is undefended and indefensible. Practicing out on St. Lawrence is not like flying a U-2 over the Soviet Union and getting shot down. There's risk, but not that dire risk.''

His assessment of what the Russians are up to was the most candid and sensible that I'd heard. Back in Nome, though, yet another theory was propounded to me one night at the Board of Trade - a saloon. Spetsnaz were indeed making covert landings, it went, but part of their mission was to poach ivory artifacts.

Sometimes they aren't all foreign, and they are just waiting for the sign.

Terror Training Camps On American Soil

“We are fighting to destroy the enemy. We are dealing with evil at its roots and its roots are America.”

So said the Pakistani Sheikh Muburak Gilani, leader of the jihad terrorist group Jamaat ul-Fuqra. And the way that he and his organization are “dealing with evil at its roots” is to set up jihad terror training camps all over the United States — often under the noses of government and law enforcement officials who are either indifferent or too hamstrung by political correctness to do anything about it.

Sheikh Gilani is no shrinking violet, and Jamaat ul-Fuqra is a force to be reckoned with both in the United States and elsewhere. Journalist Daniel Pearl was on his way to interview Gilani when he was kidnapped and beheaded in 2002. The following year, a member of Jamaat ul-Fuqra, Iyman Faris, pled guilty to plotting to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge. In 2005, the Department of Homeland Security included the group among “predicted possi

I think this is what you are looking for:

Occupy organizers linked to Cleveland bridge bombing plot
Fellow activists express disbelief at arrest of NATO summit bomb plot suspects
I think there are one or two more, at least, associated with Occupy.

Domestic Eco-Terrorism Has Deep Pockets. And Many Enablers.

I think it's reasonable to keep an eye on everyone planning to break into nuclear weapons facilities. If you disagree I'd be interested to hear why.

Suppose granny and her two friends were only the first wave, just to check if the way was clear? It is entirely possible that granny and friends wouldn't know they were being used. Or perhaps they are being used as "human shields," a tactic that is increasingly popular with various groups these days. Lots of nasty possibilities.

Algerian bloodbath: 23 hostages killed, death toll continues to rise

The Algerian government says it had to take action because the terrorists were going to blow up the facility and execute the hostages, many of whom were strapped to explosives. Others were taken as human shields by terrorists who were either fleeing or re-locating within the facility (depending on whose account you believe) when they came under fire from Algerian helicopters.

David Headley Said to Have Helped Terrorists Target Nuclear Plant

Maybe not - please see, read, and share this: http://www.humanevents.com/2013/08/15/mark-levins-liberty-amendments/

Let's unfuck America now!

Both of the numbers we listed are correct: about half from membership dues, and 3.2% from corporate donations. The NRA also gets money from advertisements in its publications, payouts from its endowments, donations from members, donations from state-level gun-rights groups, etc. The point I'm trying to make is that there simply isn't a logical case to be made that gun companies control the NRA when they don't provide even close to half of its funding, while gun-owning members provide more than half.

Indeed, that would be inefficient when they can get members to do their dirty work for them.

You're literally saying that people acting in what they've each determined to be their own best interest, is in fact a giant behavioral control conspiracy. If the NRA's policies really were so out of line with the membership's desires, we wouldn't see the membership continue to increase. Your whole argument relies on the pretentious fallacy that people don't know what is best for themselves, but you do.

The judicious use of outright lies, such as the "they're coming to get your guns" narrative, also helps.

All but the last one of these is from THIS YEAR.

Hawaii legislature proposes gun confiscation
http://www.hawaiireporter.com/its-hawaiis-proposed-guns-laws-that-are-criminal/123

New York Assemblyman asks colleague not to mention that original proposed SAFE Act included confiscation
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2013/01/20/NY-Assemblyman-exposes-gun-confiscation-agenda-of-Democrats

Missouri Democrats introduce legislation to confiscate guns
http://nation.foxnews.com/gun-control/2013/02/14/missouri-democrats-introduce-legislation-confiscate-firearms-gives-gun-owners-90-days-turn-weapons

VA has veterans who cannot manage their own financial affairs declared prohibited persons unable to own firearms
http://www.humanevents.com/2013/04/15/va-targeting-veterans-for-gun-confiscation/

NJ State Senator "We needed a bill that was going to confiscate confiscate confiscate."
http://www.politickernj.com/back_room/confiscate-confiscate-confiscate#

Oregon Legislator calls fears of gun confiscation a "paranoid delusion" and then states he is in favor of gun confiscation
http://www.examiner.com/article/gun-grabber-has-meltdown-flees-public-affairs-forum-anger

Governor Cuomo says, "confiscation could be an option."
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/336373/cuomo-confiscation-could-be-option-eliana-johnson

Feinstein suggests "compulsory buyback."
http://washingtonexaminer.com/sen.-feinstein-suggests-national-buyback-of-guns/article/2516648

CA assembly proposes confiscating 166,000 legally registered guns.
http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_22544460/californias-state-senate-democrats-roll-out-big-gun

And the classic from 1995:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JoWE8v9QTOY

$5,000? Seems like quite a bit of work and risk for just $5,000.

I hadn't heard that Wikileaks operated in the style of the KGB.

Just Like Old Times: KGB Murders Continue

You just don't have the security clearance to view the evidence. And because such evidence will raise nasty questions about how it was collected.

Well, not all the evidence anyway. The fact that some evidence exists at all reveals important things about how it was uncovered.

For the purposes of illustration, suppose the US was able to listen in on a North Korean spy that had just delivered a load of man portable anti-aircraft missiles to an al Qaida cell*. If the al Qaida leader had told the North Korean spy that he had a plan to shoot down a passenger jet at San Francisco airport, and the spy reported that back to headquarters, the US could intercept that message and know about it. There might be enough information in the spy's report (to whom the missiles were delivered, where, when, what they would be used for) to lead to an arrest of the terrorist. But if the source of the information leading to the arrest was made public, then North Korea would know that it didn't have secure communications with its spies in the field, and would change its codes and/or communication procedures. If it did that, the US would lose its ability to conduct surveillance of the spies of a hostile nation, which would be a pretty important thing to lose. There can be plenty of conundrums that arise from this sort of thing.

* Manual found in Mali suggests al-Qaida training to use surface-to-air missile. State Sponsors: North Korea

Relist North Korea As a Terrorist Sponsor

...Pyongyang kidnapped at least 10 Japanese citizens and harbored Japanese Red Army terrorists since the 1970s. Until 2008, the Bush administration routinely cited the kidnappings and the presence of Japanese Red Army terrorists as justification for including North Korea on the list.

CRS cites reports describing North Korean attempts to smuggle conventional arms, including machine guns and anti-tank rocket launchers, to the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (Tamil Tigers), a U.S. Government designated foreign terrorist organization in Sri Lanka. Those reports indicate the Sri Lankan navy intercepted and attacked three North Korean ships carrying arms in separate 2006 and 2007 incidents.

North Korea’s relationship with Hizballah, an Iranian terrorist proxy that is also designated a terrorist organization by the U.S., continues. CRS cites 2006 and 2007 reports detailing an extensive program by North Korea to provide arms and training to Hizballah. The training provided to Hizballah cadre lasted months and included officials such as Hassan Nasrallah, Hizballah’s secretary-general. North Korean trainers masquerading as the Korea Mining Development Trading Corporation went to southern Lebanon to teach Hizballah terrorists how to develop and construct underground military facilities.

Like your idea: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Transparent_Society

And for related ironic humor in the news: :-)
http://www.humanevents.com/2013/06/14/rep-stockman-requests-nsa-logs-for-phone-traffic-between-white-house-irs/

An example in fiction of a Transparent Society is in Marshall Brain's "Manna" at the end:
http://www.marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm

My suggestion a couple years ago to a public call for ideas by the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology:
http://pcast.ideascale.com/a/dtd/-The-need-for-FOSS-intelligence-tools-for-sensemaking-etc.-/76207-8319
"This suggestion is about how civilians could benefit by have access to the sorts of "sensemaking" tools the intelligence community (as well as corporations) aspire to have, in order to design more joyful, secure, and healthy civilian communities (including through creating a more sustainable and resilient open manufacturing infrastructure for such communities). It outlines (including at a linked elaboration) why the intelligence community should consider funding the creation of such free and open source software (FOSS) "dual use" intelligence applications as a way to reduce global tensions through increased local prosperity, health, and with intrinsic mutual security."

And I also wrote:
http://www.phibetaiota.net/2011/09/paul-fernhout-open-letter-to-the-intelligence-advanced-programs-research-agency-iarpa/
"So, with all the billions of dollars a years spent on âoeintelligenceâ, why not at least try to produce some freely-available âoedual useâ intelligence tools to help civilian American citizens make sense of the real things that are killing most real Americans by the hundreds of thousands every year?"

My wife and I have worked on some software used by the intelligence community in different countries. But our focus had been to try to help decision makers see issues from multiple perspectives. Note the Snowden here is a different Snowden from the leaker:
http://cognitive-edge.com/blog/entry/4318/un-wired/
"There had been two DARPA projects, working off two very different philosophies. One (TIA) sought to obtain and search all possible data to detect the possibility of terrorist events. That raised civil liberties concerns and much controversy in the USA leading to resignations and programme closure. A parallel program Genoa II took a very different philosophy, based on understanding nuanced narrative supporting the cognitive processes of decision makers and increasing the number of cultural and political perspectives available to policy makers. I was a part of that program, and proud to be so. It also forms the basis of our work for RAHS and contains neither the approach, not the philosophy of TIA."

We tried to get the related company to open source the software, but not much luck. My wife does have some rights to some of the work, plus the core ideas are available in the public literature (which is what my wife based her research on).

We all may well benefit from an expectation of privacy, and a healthy government may well have an obligation to defend privacy the same way it might defend our physical infrastructure. I don't want to argue against those things (even if in practice in the communal extended-family villages that hunter/gatherer humans had historically, privacy may have been rare). But in practice right now, I doubt we can stop the spying, because it is too seductive, an

Just to pic two of your points:

I do want Congress to pass a law banning cable franchises by local and state governments.

And how, exactly would said municipalities force telcos and cable companies to serve the lower-income areas of the town? It is the offer of a monopoly that allows the local governments to enforce access requirements.

I do want laws specifically enabling municipal internet utilities, especially on this new bandwidth.

Yeah, because every time a local/municipal government decides to start a business (incinerator, prison, etc.) it always works out so well...

Worth a shot. Seems like very time I go to the grocery store, someone is in front of me loading up on Oreos, Doritos, soda, and ice cream and putting it on the food stamp card. I'm all for helping people who need it, but they should only be able to buy fruit, veggies, meat, milk, and pasta. Na, forget the meat. They can pay for their own lobster. If they can tear themselves away from the strip club.

Endemic Corruption - How your American tax dollars are spent by Israel.

Fascinating. And you know this how?

You're assuming that those jets were not ones the Israelis purchased? Do you have any grounds for that?

Were these jet engines stolen at an American Air Force base due to "endemic corruption," or the activity of simple thieves?
HAFB THIEVES CANNOT SET THE VALUE OF 3 STOLEN JET ENGINES, SAYS JUDGE

Do you have equal concerns about Venezuela and Iran? Or just the Jewish state?

Do you think Israel is less corrupt, as corrupt, or more corrupt than Egypt, Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Palestinian Authority, all of whom receive large amounts of US aid?

Speaking of endemic:
Rising Anti-Semitism on the Left
The European Left and Its Trouble With Jews
The Full-Blown Return of Anti-Semitism in Europe

Not true responsible, legal citizens cannot have guns in these areas leaving only the criminals to get them. And the criminals don't care about the proper, legal process of getting a concealed weapon permit. If you make it legal for people to privately carry and defend themselves, the crime rate will drop. There are statistics proving this: http://www.humanevents.com/2009/01/26/concealed-carry-permits-are-life-savers/ "But since adopting a concealed carry law Florida’s total violent crime rate has dropped 32% and its homicide rate has dropped 58%. Floridians, except for criminals, are safer due to this law. And Florida is not alone. Texas’ violent crime rate has dropped 20% and homicide rate has dropped 31%, since enactment of its 1996 carry law."

because the locals, who refused to fund it with taxes

I was there when those roads were being planned, the locals were very angry about them being toll roads. The state has consistently refused to invest in Austin area roads (compared with the rest of the state). Perry and the Legislature rammed it through anyway. Partially because it was their buddies getting the contracts to operate them. Its operated differently than every other toll road in the US, where the tolls go into the highway budget, instead those roads are a "private public partnership" which is code for all the profits going to big corps. http://www.humanevents.com/2007/03/12/texas-toll-road-plan-stirs-grassroots-protest/

In fact as another poster pointed out they were intending to add tolls to existing tax payer funded roads. Plus, the amount they can charge is based on some formulas which have a speed limit component.

Basically, the speed limit is being bumped so Perry's buddies can make more money.

It is a reasonable claim based on recent federal law changes that would undoubtedly place his ponds under the jurisdiction of the EPA.

How could this be safe?

Just like CFL bulbs are not being said to cause skin damage. I'm not talking about the Mercury here either http://www.humanevents.com/2012/07/23/study-says-energy-efficient-light-bulbs-may-emit-harmful-radiation/

Before we leap into this where is the safety checks on all this stuff. IF I had a small child that got fried there would be all hell to pay. I know the article mentions fried eggs and fried cats but still.

Actually, I've pretty much only have seen the vitriol spewing forth with idiocy from the usual race baiting crowd. Most reasonable, thinking people have remained silent on the issue, waiting for the wheels to turn.

The tards in power aren't connecting the dots, even now.

When the tards in power have their agenda messed up by foreign competition they know exactly what to do. None of this is lost on them.

They have always understood the situation. The left supports it due to your second point; exporting industry to Asia while simultaneously erecting a vast statist regulatory regime for ourselves is optimal. Meanwhile, the right enjoys huge profit margins earned by manufacturing sans regulation in third world hell holes with disposable labor.

For example, do you remember how polar bears drowning in the Arctic sea due to global warming were cited as a reason to classify them as an endangered species, and how they were used as a symbol of climate change in Al Gore's movie? The lead scientist was actually placed on administrative leave, and several questions were raised about how the bears actually died and how the corpses were observed from 1,500 up in a helicopter rather than examined to actually determine their cause of death. Whether or not they were really drowning, there just wasn't enough data to come to the conclusion that was presented to the public with the level of certainty that was conveyed.

The Charles Monnett (polar bear scientist) investigation was likely politically motivated since nothing has come of it, but either way, the agency is on-record saying that his temporary administrative leave was unrelated to his polar bear research. He is back to work as of last August. This entire climate debate is so politically charged that a "rational "healthily skeptical" position" probably doesn't exist.

Director Bromwich:
" I can assure you that the decision had nothing to do with his scientific work, or anything relating to a five-year old journal article, as advocacy groups and the news media have incorrectly speculated. Nor is this a "witch hunt" to suppress the work of our many scientists and discourage them from speaking the truth. Quite the contrary. In this case, it was the result of new information on a separate subject brought to our attention very recently."

http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/boemre-director-says-offshore-oil-agency-not-witch-hunt

I think the lesson to take away is to strive for a rational, "healthily skeptical" position when presented with climate data. It's just such an unpredictable thing--literally, a complicated system the size of the entire world with a scale spanning molecules, continents, and beyond. The media doesn't help, either--it's drive for alarmism tends to overly simplify or exaggerate situations, and perhaps even the scientists involved get caught up in it.

For example, do you remember how polar bears drowning in the Arctic sea due to global warming were cited as a reason to classify them as an endangered species, and how they were used as a symbol of climate change in Al Gore's movie? The lead scientist was actually placed on administrative leave, and several questions were raised about how the bears actually died and how the corpses were observed from 1,500 up in a helicopter rather than examined to actually determine their cause of death. Whether or not they were really drowning, there just wasn't enough data to come to the conclusion that was presented to the public with the level of certainty that was conveyed.

Unfortunately, if you're someone who agrees with doing the logical thing--reducing the negative environmental impact of humans as much as possible, within reasonable economic boundaries--the exaggerations and alarmism sweep you away into being on a "side", and you're shoved right in the middle of the mosh pit of tribal politics. If you question a conclusion or suggest a way of doing things, and you maintain a nuanced or balanced position, you get shit on by everybody, and nothing gets accomplished.

George Carlin did an insightful (and profanity-laden) bit on alarmism in modern society.

I see plenty of comments on how reasonable or unreasonable the price is, and they are interesting. I generally agree it doesn't seem that out of whack price wise for a working application supported for some time period.

What I find more interesting is this story is being posted all over the web all of the sudden:

• IT World
• Free Republic
• Human Events
• Business Insider
• Gizmodo
• Big Government
• TPM

And of course here on /.

Hitting that range of sites (and more) with this sort of non-story story trying to push a narrative of the government is wasting your money? Someone behind the scenes is pushing this narrative, I suspect. Not news for nerds, but manufactured political outrage.

Hmm . . . Christians have bombed federal buildings and abortion clinics in the U.S., and buildings in Norway.

By your logic, physics degrees should not be given to Christians because they might build nuclear bombs and drop them on people.

So a lone wolf "Christian" tries to bomb an abortion clinic because he truly believes that it will save the lives of hundreds of children and at the very most, kills a staff of 6 that work at the abortion clinic and is shunned by over 99% of Christians.

The most recent abortion protest death was not done by a pro-life activist, but was done TO a pro-life activist James Lawrence Pouillon.

Before that, it was George Tiller, an abortion doctor, who was murdered. Oh, yeah, George Tiller was also an usher at a church. Guess those terrorist Christians didn't know about his job. Oh wait. Yeah they did and none of the church people killed him. That's strange and disproves your entire point. Must be an error.

A group of Islamist followers get funding from other Muslims, and work and plan for years before hijacking four planes full of random, innocent men, women and children and fly them into buildings filled with more, random, innocent people to kill as many as humanly possible. They end up killing around 3,000, but make it perfectly clear that if they could have killed 300 million, they would jump at the chance. There is dancing in the streets overseas and their actions are supported by about 25% of Muslims IN THE US.

Yeah. It's the same thing.

(I must add that this is sarcasm. I have to add that because you really and truly believe that the two examples I've given are truly the very same thing. This proves that you are an idiot, or just really bad at math.)

Source:

According to a new survey by the Pew Research Center, one in four American Muslims between the ages of 18 and 29 believe that slaughtering random civilians in suicide bombings is justifiable, if it is “to defend Islam.”

This proves it! It's all a lie. Fox news is right! ;)

I don't trust Fox News, but a nobel laureate in physics at least gets me to listen.

And the other Nobel laureates that stay in the APS because they agree with this, don't. Yeah, figures.

This proves it! It's all a lie. Fox news is right! ;)

I don't trust Fox News, but a nobel laureate in physics at least gets me to listen.

Sorry but you are full of shit.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=39166
http://missouri.watchdog.org/5937/dead-voters-in-missouri/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/starting-friday-protective-orders-easier-to-get-dead-voters-votes-count-new-va-fiscal-year/2011/06/30/AGbcVtrH_story.html

Voting fraud is almost a national tradition.

>>Pray tell: what *is* the difference between a religion and a cult?

When I studied it in some social science class in college, it was defined generally by having three traits: 1) a cult of personality built around a charismatic leader, 2) encouraging isolation from former friends and family, 3) generally engaging in some intrusive form of control over the members social lives and/or thoughts.

As with most things in social sciences, it's not a rigid definition (the Roman Catholic Church engages in confession, for example), but most mainstream churches fail to meet the definition of cults, because members will easily move from one church to another within the same denomination, they are not required to cut ties with former friends and family, and the churches don't engage in excessive control.

By contrast, the CCC (Campus Crusade for Christ) is cult-ish, as it doesn't have the charismatic leader, per se, but it does force its members to drop non-CCC friends, and engage in heavy control over the members social lives and thoughts. You have to go to weekly meetings and confess having lustful thoughts about the opposite sex, for example, which results in a public shaming. If you don't do it, they accuse you of lying. Catch-22, and all that.

Jim Jones (of Jonestown drinking-the-koolaid fame) absolutely ran a cult. Cult of personality, moved his congregation to South America, and got them all to kill themselves. Fun Fact: Diane Feinstein thought his approach was the wave of the future for religions, since he was a big communist and multiculturalist. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peoples_Temple and http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=41263)

Likewise the Heaven's Gate guys were a cult for the same reasons.