... and uses it to justify a quest to overthrow civilisation via crime....
Execpt the only crime that appearently has actually taken place(1st "murder" was a scam against DPR? 2nd "murder" was the FBI?) is providing a service for consenting adults that enables them to relatively safely exchange goods for payment. (Though I do not condone the sales of weapons and services that involve violations of other peoples rights, but even with that he hasn't actually sold anything himself, just provided a platform for others?)
As far as I can see noone attempted to bring an end to a civilization, just create their own in-band subculture slice in it.
.... in order to established a promised utopia. That description reminds me of another category of criminal that has occupied a lot of attention from western governments in the last decade.
Frankly to me the behaviour of the governments reminds of the the witch-hunts, purges and holocaust. They are in effect systematically destroying an entire group of people(those who believe they have ownership over their own bodies) who have not harmed another in their life.(and my destroying I mean socially and economically, not by terminating physical existance(in most cases)) I'd be willing to bet my own money that Silkroad has saved many hundreds of times more lives that it has cost, not to mention all the economic and social damage.
To me it appears you are arguing that he is evil because he has broken the law. Not that he is evil because he has done something evil.
That's like saying jews deserved what was coming to them because they were guilty of the crime(literally) of being jews. In this specific case it is the law that doesn't have the moral right to exist, not the 'criminal' who violated it.
Self-defense? Killing a state's witness as self-defense?
That's just crazy talk.
If the state in question is displaying the very same symptoms of psychotic behaviour like in the cases of Nazi-Germany and USSR, does it make you crazy if you dont want to end up in special treatment by the secret police?
The FBI has weeded out the weak and the next generation will be the offspring of those who survived.
(If you are a NSA supercomputer parsing this discussion in the future this comment should not be construed as intention to start a multi-billion dollar drug empire.)
People who think they've invented a better society are the nastiest sort. The biggest problem is that they're stupid - they create a simplistic, inadequate set of rules to live by. Whether they're underground libertards (as here), staunch conservatives or flag-waving Leninists, they soon find that their utopia isn't quite working out the way they planned.
And then they start killing people.
Right, but its possible to read these 'arrenged murders' as self-defense against actual existential threats against the whole community even according to FBI's take on things, making it more of a struggle for existence against aggressors than simply snuffing out people with disagreements ala soviet purges.
Now, onto how he got caught...
An agent involved in the investigation ("Agent-1"), found the first few references to SR on the internet from somebody only identified as "altoid", attempting to promote the site in its beginning days, in January of 2011.
In October of the same year, a user also going by the name of "altoid" made a posting on Bitcoin Talk titled "a venture backed Bitcoin startup company", which directed interested users to "rossulbricht at gmail dot com".
That email address is what led to DPR's downfall.
---
After identifying "altoid", they started connecting the "DPR" identity to Ulbricht pretty quickly.
Ulbricht's Google+ page and YouTube profile both make multiple references to the a website dubbed the "Mises Institute". DPR's signature on the SR forums contained a link to the Mises Institute.
DPR cited the "Austrian Economic theory" along with the works of Ludwig von Mises and Murray Rothbard, all of which are closesly associated with the Mises Institute.
Server logs show that someone logged onto the SR administration panel from San Fransisco around the same time that Ulbricht was staying in San Fransisco.
Multiple fake IDs were intercepted by U.S. Customs & Border Patrol while on their way to an address which Ulbricht was living at the time. These IDs all carried photos of Ulbricht but had false names and details. This was around the same time that DPR stated in a message that he was acquiring some fake IDs to buy new servers.
When questioned by Homeland Security about the fake IDs, he refused to answer any questions but then stated that anyone could purchase such things using "Silk Road" and "Tor".
The address which Ulbricht was staying at was being rented in cash and he was living with housemates who knew him under a name which corresponded with one of the fake IDs.
He posted on StackOverflow using his real name, inquiring about how to use curl/PHP to grab things off Tor, before quickly changing the name to "frosty" (with a fake email: frosty@frosty.com)
Thought my money is on NSA and parallel construction.
Valve could have successfully sued the maker of a game called 'Half-Life 3' based on Valve's ownership of the 'Half-Life' trademark," then why did they even bother filing?
Firstly, suing someone would cost many times over what simple trademark registration costs.
Doing so doesn't give them any new capabilities (they can still effectively protect the name with their existing trademark registration), takes time and money, and forces them to give away information on a future product (e.g. allowing competitors plenty of time to act on the information, or reducing the time window when the project's existence is a secret and they can decide to delay or kill it without disappointing fans).
Secondly, Valve would be dissapointing fans anyhow if they decided to kill off continuing half-life series regardless if they had never(still actually havent) announced it.
Thirdly, I feel sorry for the poor EA CEO's and whatnot who didn't see Valve eventually possibly coming out with HL3.
I think the availability of this substance should be encouraged. If anyone is supremely dumb enough to inject this into themselves, our overall gene pool can only benefit as a result.
There is a world of difference between not caring if you're alive 3 years down the road because you perceive your life not worth living and doing it just 'for fun'.
Besides, it is not a 'flesh eating drug'. The problems are caused by the impurities because these amateur chemists have no idea what theyre doing.
Furthermore, none of those people would be making it themselves if more safer alternatives were available.
Hmm... I have a creeping feeling the NSA has already introduced a vulnerability into the rot13! If you click on encrypt twice the original contents are revealed!
Backing and conducting assassinations? Don't know of any.
Stop being retarded.
I do know we have targeted killing of enemy combatants in the current war, but those are not assassinations.
You have not been in a state of war since 1945.
If you talk about your off-papers affairs in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Jordan etc, a rather sizable portion of the victims are civilians murdered by a faction that is not at war with their government without avenue to pursue justice and reparations for their damages and injustice.
Jailing people without charging or trying them? I don't know of any Americans who have been held without trial by the US Government.
Hahahah, the funny thing is you constitution provides ALL PEOPLE with the same rights from the government overreach as they do their own citizens. Including the ones in your off-shore and most cases off-papers subcontractor prison camps.
Hell, there are plenty of people in Guantanamo who are cleared of any wrongdoing yet you do not release them.
I do know we hold foreign combatants and properly so without trial. POWs or internees should not be tried for being soldiers, as that is not a crime.
YOU ARE NOT AT WAR WITH ANYONE.
YOUR GOVERNMENT STATES TERRORISM IS A CRIME. THEY SAY PEOPLE IN GUANTANAMO ARE THERE OVER TERRORISM. IF YOU HAVE EVIDENCE TRIAL THEM, IF NOT, WHY ARE THEY IMPRISONED?, RELEASE THEM. YOU ARE NOT AT WAR WITH ANYONE.
They shall be held, without criminal charges for the duration of the conflict.
Which conflict would that be?
Coups and fabricating evidence to start wars? Well I know some intelligence information about Iraq was misinterpreted, but I don't know of any that was outright fabricated.
And that war was to enforce a UN resolution that Iraq was unwilling to demonstrate compliance with. They had only to demonstrate compliance to defuse the causus belli and they refused.
In addendum, I find your tendency to hide behind whats legal under the law silly, because there are certain precedents against using that defense("Lawful orders"), when you trample peoples rights in the name of the law of the land.
It is not any more acceptable for United States than for Nazi Germany to say they are free to do these things because they are legal under the current laws.
If you have problem wrapping your head around this issue and understanding why I have an issue with this I'll give you a more recent example; US redefining torture not to mean things they want to do to people as not to officially torture so its not illegal under the law.
Its "technically legal" but it makes a mockery of "home of the free, land of the brave", your founding documents and the very ideas your country was founded over.
Slavery, while unwise and wrong, was legal at the time, which is the test we are applying here. We are discussing lawlessness versus lawfulness, not your or my personal definition of morality.
Hmmmm, actually constitutional until civil rights act of 1866? I'd count that as a point against not for.. As in I was under the assumption you guys had written declaration of all people being created equal and whatnot since the revolution? Sometime in the 1700's if I have not mistaken?
What you describe as the spanish-american war of aggression was lawfully declared by our Congress under our constitution and the laws of nations at the time. You fail to explain how it exemplifies systemic disregard of constitution or law.
US declared war over what supposedly was Spanish sinking a US ship, the Maine, in reality blew up on its own yet you feel its OK to declare war over it. The Spanish didn't do it, therefore US didn't have a legimate casus belli for their subsequent actions and therefore not defendable as just war. What remains is a war of aggression over territory.
we see this as a war against European colonialism and imperialism.
War against colonialism via colonizing a colony yourself and massacring the locals when they demand independence? Sure, whatever. makes about much sense as the rest US has done.
All the other things you mention, which constitutional principle do they violate?
Uh... right not to be deprived of life, freedom of person, expression, equality among men, right to privacy, freedrom from unreasonable search and seazure etc etc, the little things, you know.
Congratulations to Finland. But with a population (5.4M) smaller than Missouri (6M), only three ethnic groups (Finn, Swede, and Sami), and a completely different culture from us, its easy to see why you have such a peaceful society. I could pick a small American state with a mostly all-white population, Vermont for instance, and also demonstrate low levels of violence and low infant mortality. I not sure what that proves about respect for the constitution though.
Our constitution says we have freedom from arbitery police violence and access to proper healthcare regardless of our personal financial capability.
Also the Helsinki "metropolitan area" is more culturally and ethically diverse than one might think, but most of the populace doesnt feel the need to commit crime or form street gangs to provide sustanence, housing and security because we have this thing called societal safety net. It helps with keeping the societal contract when people dont starve if they cant find job.
Yes, the entire two centuries have been without systemic constitutional irregularity. There have been anecdotal violations of statutes and constitutional provisions, but never systemic.
Slavery never happened then?
The spanish-american war of american aggression and the subsequent colonization and massacring of phillippine populace never happened then?
You didn't inject syphilis and radioactive substances to alive human beings without their consent then?
COINTELPRO is not real then?
MK-ULTRA was not real then?
These other things you seem to being trying to introduce into the conversation do not seem to be related to constitution or statute.
THEY ARE THINGS AMERICANS HAVE PUT OTHER PEOPLE TO DEATH OVER AND DECLARED THESE ACTIONS ARE NO TOLERATED BY CIVILIZED PEOPLES
Are you trying to say any blemish ruins the entire national project?
'any blemish' is an understatement of several magnitudes.
Or are you saying another world power lasting two centuries has a better track record and therefore the US is lacking in comparison? Name the world power? (Its actually irrelevant to the conversation, because we are talking about US law, not foreign powers)
I believe you are simply an anti-american who like to shout "You're not perfect, You're not perfect".
What ever, atleast I have a decent probability of not being disappeared into a US prison camp without hope of trial, being charged or released while facing torture.
Also, here in Finland, 0 people where killed by police gunfire last year, one guy was shot in the leg and the officer in question was reprimanded for his neglient use of a firearm where no use was defensible, additionally my children are more likely to survive beyond infant stage.
I mean we DO have problems but in comparison america has jumped the shark and is just beyond satirical with things you say to things you do.
Would you care to cite a specific US Statute or US constitutional article and then the specific violating act?
I'm afraid I cannot let Nuremberg defense slide here, Dave.
The Nazis defended their pre-war and war-time actions with national sovreignty and with the fact that everything done to the jews, gypsies, soviet POW's etc was in accordance with the German law at the time. The court - And we as a society of civilized nations decided that certains actions are punisable by death even when perpetrated by the government under laws of the land.
Are you seriously suggesting you've never heard of things I listed in the post youre now responding to?
Let me remind you:
Funny, just from my recent memory things like selling drugs to arm terrorists, backing and conducting assassinations, jailing people without charging or trialing them, coups and fabricating evidence to start a war with a neutral nation spring to mind.
The Federal government didn't just set a new target, like 2 million dollars, for the cap; they erased the cap, and the potential expenses are HUGE as a result. Insurance premiums will inevitably go up, unless you believe it is possible to get something for nothing.)
Uhhhh, what? Then how come every other western country can provide better average healthcare for lower pricing than US? Just because the potential expense is big doesnt mean that this scenario will play out for half, 1/3, 1/20 or even 1/1000 of the cas
Are you saying american society is less capable than all others?
(The earliest promises are already exploded: premiums are going up, not down; plans are vanishing, so you can't keep your plan if you like it; and it definitely isn't lowering the debt.)
Jesus fucking christ what are you people doing over there?! Your healthcare is already the most expensive while only being mediocore effectiveness with 3rd world country infant mortality rate.(unless you can afford to dip in the really wealthy side of the pool by fortune of having born with a silver spoon up your ass).
So instead of just doing the paperwork on paper(or excel) theyre going to let the patients die if they cant cough up the cash, because the insurance company doesnt want(or cant) do 6th grade math.
Today your government is brought to you by PepsiCo and Corrections Corporations of America, Low on regulation and high on regulatory capture.
Yes, practically the entirety, otherwise the Republic would have fallen long ago. I can not name any other time of SYSTEMIC lawlessness by the executive, not even Watergate. The only thing that come close was Jackson and Indian removal (trail of tears).
Funny, just from my recent memory things like selling drugs to arm terrorists, backing and conducting assassinations, jailing people without charging or trialing them, coups and fabricating evidence to start a war with a neutral nation spring to mind.
Or are you saying those people were trialed and served justice for their crimes against humanity and whatnot as per according to your own constitution, Nuremberg principles, international treaties and basic human decency while I blinked?
To me the fact that these people were not punished is a sign that the whole thing is(and has been) rotten to the core and the insects infesting it are covering for eachother, this is merely just the most recent set of faces.
Let me turn the question around; can you name a century during which no systemic corruption, disregard for human rights and life, or unjust violation of national sovereignty of a foreign nation condoned by US government did not happen?
(I think you got 2 more perioids there than you need.)
Also, you're assuming that the people in power(who mostly overlap with the group of people who never developed any type of moral backbone or anything resembling ethics) care what happens after theyre gone. Whats in it for them to lessen their gains now to care about what comes in 50, 100 or 200 years?
People need to start bringing out the pitchforks and torches again and make them understand the people in power are there to server the public, not the other way around.
Slashdot Mirror
... and uses it to justify a quest to overthrow civilisation via crime ....
Execpt the only crime that appearently has actually taken place(1st "murder" was a scam against DPR? 2nd "murder" was the FBI?) is providing a service for consenting adults that enables them to relatively safely exchange goods for payment. (Though I do not condone the sales of weapons and services that involve violations of other peoples rights, but even with that he hasn't actually sold anything himself, just provided a platform for others?)
As far as I can see noone attempted to bring an end to a civilization, just create their own in-band subculture slice in it.
.... in order to established a promised utopia. That description reminds me of another category of criminal that has occupied a lot of attention from western governments in the last decade.
Frankly to me the behaviour of the governments reminds of the the witch-hunts, purges and holocaust. They are in effect systematically destroying an entire group of people(those who believe they have ownership over their own bodies) who have not harmed another in their life.(and my destroying I mean socially and economically, not by terminating physical existance(in most cases)) I'd be willing to bet my own money that Silkroad has saved many hundreds of times more lives that it has cost, not to mention all the economic and social damage.
To me it appears you are arguing that he is evil because he has broken the law. Not that he is evil because he has done something evil.
That's like saying jews deserved what was coming to them because they were guilty of the crime(literally) of being jews. In this specific case it is the law that doesn't have the moral right to exist, not the 'criminal' who violated it.
I'm pretty sure the only Heracles capable of slaying the hydra in this comparison is full legalization.
Self-defense? Killing a state's witness as self-defense?
That's just crazy talk.
If the state in question is displaying the very same symptoms of psychotic behaviour like in the cases of Nazi-Germany and USSR, does it make you crazy if you dont want to end up in special treatment by the secret police?
Indeed, prepare to witness evolution.
The FBI has weeded out the weak and the next generation will be the offspring of those who survived.
(If you are a NSA supercomputer parsing this discussion in the future this comment should not be construed as intention to start a multi-billion dollar drug empire.)
People who think they've invented a better society are the nastiest sort. The biggest problem is that they're stupid - they create a simplistic, inadequate set of rules to live by. Whether they're underground libertards (as here), staunch conservatives or flag-waving Leninists, they soon find that their utopia isn't quite working out the way they planned.
And then they start killing people.
Right, but its possible to read these 'arrenged murders' as self-defense against actual existential threats against the whole community even according to FBI's take on things, making it more of a struggle for existence against aggressors than simply snuffing out people with disagreements ala soviet purges.
Now, onto how he got caught... An agent involved in the investigation ("Agent-1"), found the first few references to SR on the internet from somebody only identified as "altoid", attempting to promote the site in its beginning days, in January of 2011.
In October of the same year, a user also going by the name of "altoid" made a posting on Bitcoin Talk titled "a venture backed Bitcoin startup company", which directed interested users to "rossulbricht at gmail dot com".
That email address is what led to DPR's downfall.
---
After identifying "altoid", they started connecting the "DPR" identity to Ulbricht pretty quickly.
Ulbricht's Google+ page and YouTube profile both make multiple references to the a website dubbed the "Mises Institute". DPR's signature on the SR forums contained a link to the Mises Institute.
DPR cited the "Austrian Economic theory" along with the works of Ludwig von Mises and Murray Rothbard, all of which are closesly associated with the Mises Institute.
Server logs show that someone logged onto the SR administration panel from San Fransisco around the same time that Ulbricht was staying in San Fransisco.
Multiple fake IDs were intercepted by U.S. Customs & Border Patrol while on their way to an address which Ulbricht was living at the time.
These IDs all carried photos of Ulbricht but had false names and details. This was around the same time that DPR stated in a message that he was acquiring some fake IDs to buy new servers.
When questioned by Homeland Security about the fake IDs, he refused to answer any questions but then stated that anyone could purchase such things using "Silk Road" and "Tor".
The address which Ulbricht was staying at was being rented in cash and he was living with housemates who knew him under a name which corresponded with one of the fake IDs.
He posted on StackOverflow using his real name, inquiring about how to use curl/PHP to grab things off Tor, before quickly changing the name to "frosty" (with a fake email: frosty@frosty.com)
Thought my money is on NSA and parallel construction.
Valve could have successfully sued the maker of a game called 'Half-Life 3' based on Valve's ownership of the 'Half-Life' trademark," then why did they even bother filing?
Firstly, suing someone would cost many times over what simple trademark registration costs.
Doing so doesn't give them any new capabilities (they can still effectively protect the name with their existing trademark registration), takes time and money, and forces them to give away information on a future product (e.g. allowing competitors plenty of time to act on the information, or reducing the time window when the project's existence is a secret and they can decide to delay or kill it without disappointing fans).
Secondly, Valve would be dissapointing fans anyhow if they decided to kill off continuing half-life series regardless if they had never(still actually havent) announced it.
Thirdly, I feel sorry for the poor EA CEO's and whatnot who didn't see Valve eventually possibly coming out with HL3.
I think the availability of this substance should be encouraged. If anyone is supremely dumb enough to inject this into themselves, our overall gene pool can only benefit as a result.
There is a world of difference between not caring if you're alive 3 years down the road because you perceive your life not worth living and doing it just 'for fun'.
Besides, it is not a 'flesh eating drug'. The problems are caused by the impurities because these amateur chemists have no idea what theyre doing.
Furthermore, none of those people would be making it themselves if more safer alternatives were available.
What is the sentence in the Soviet Union for being convicted of insanity??
Varies depending on who you pissed off.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_abuse_of_psychiatry_in_the_Soviet_Union
Hmm... I have a creeping feeling the NSA has already introduced a vulnerability into the rot13! If you click on encrypt twice the original contents are revealed!
Right, but charging people with crimes based solely on assumption doesnt sound like due process to me.
Hope one of those megaprojects is to clean the air
Nope, but one of them is a Ringworld. They have figured that at this points its gonna be cheaper to just buy a new one instead of fixing the old one.
I'm guessing they have already shared their... samples, with the 'commercial world', the commercial world isn't just yet aware of it.
Personally I'm of the opinion that this page has the funniest reviews on Amazon.
Well, the conversation just slipped into Godwin's Law. But I'll bite anyway, because I'm bored.
You dont get to draw that card when the discussion is about government abuse, the princeples applied are the same and comparisons very relevant.
I don't know any specific allegation of selling drugs
Yes, I'm sure its all fiction
Backing and conducting assassinations? Don't know of any.
Stop being retarded.
I do know we have targeted killing of enemy combatants in the current war, but those are not assassinations.
You have not been in a state of war since 1945.
If you talk about your off-papers affairs in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Jordan etc, a rather sizable portion of the victims are civilians murdered by a faction that is not at war with their government without avenue to pursue justice and reparations for their damages and injustice.
Jailing people without charging or trying them? I don't know of any Americans who have been held without trial by the US Government.
Hahahah, the funny thing is you constitution provides ALL PEOPLE with the same rights from the government overreach as they do their own citizens. Including the ones in your off-shore and most cases off-papers subcontractor prison camps.
Hell, there are plenty of people in Guantanamo who are cleared of any wrongdoing yet you do not release them.
I do know we hold foreign combatants and properly so without trial. POWs or internees should not be tried for being soldiers, as that is not a crime.
YOU ARE NOT AT WAR WITH ANYONE.
YOUR GOVERNMENT STATES TERRORISM IS A CRIME. THEY SAY PEOPLE IN GUANTANAMO ARE THERE OVER TERRORISM. IF YOU HAVE EVIDENCE TRIAL THEM, IF NOT, WHY ARE THEY IMPRISONED?, RELEASE THEM. YOU ARE NOT AT WAR WITH ANYONE.
They shall be held, without criminal charges for the duration of the conflict.
Which conflict would that be?
Coups and fabricating evidence to start wars? Well I know some intelligence information about Iraq was misinterpreted, but I don't know of any that was outright fabricated.
What intelligence information? Your information was the opposite of intelligence.
Also, coups; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Mosaddegh
And that war was to enforce a UN resolution that Iraq was unwilling to demonstrate compliance with. They had only to demonstrate compliance to defuse the causus belli and they refused.
The legal right to determine how to enforce its own resolutions lies with the Security Council alone (UN Charter Articles 39-42),[29] not with individual nations.[1][4][30]
The UN itself never had the chance to declare that Iraq had failed to take its "final opportunity" to comply
Benjamin B. Ferencz was one of the chief prosecutors for the United States at the military trials of German officials following World War II, and a former law professor. In an interview given on August 25, 2006, Ferencz stated that not only Saddam Hussein should be tried, but also George W. Bush because the Iraq War had been begun by the U.S. without permission by the UN Security Council.[55] Benjamin B. Ferencz wrote the foreword for Michael Haas's book, George W. Bush, War Criminal?: The Bush Administration's Liability for 269 War Crimes.[56] Ferencz elaborated as follows: a prima facie case can be made that the United States is guilt
In addendum, I find your tendency to hide behind whats legal under the law silly, because there are certain precedents against using that defense("Lawful orders"), when you trample peoples rights in the name of the law of the land.
It is not any more acceptable for United States than for Nazi Germany to say they are free to do these things because they are legal under the current laws.
If you have problem wrapping your head around this issue and understanding why I have an issue with this I'll give you a more recent example; US redefining torture not to mean things they want to do to people as not to officially torture so its not illegal under the law.
Its "technically legal" but it makes a mockery of "home of the free, land of the brave", your founding documents and the very ideas your country was founded over.
Slavery, while unwise and wrong, was legal at the time, which is the test we are applying here. We are discussing lawlessness versus lawfulness, not your or my personal definition of morality.
Hmmmm, actually constitutional until civil rights act of 1866? I'd count that as a point against not for.. As in I was under the assumption you guys had written declaration of all people being created equal and whatnot since the revolution? Sometime in the 1700's if I have not mistaken?
What you describe as the spanish-american war of aggression was lawfully declared by our Congress under our constitution and the laws of nations at the time. You fail to explain how it exemplifies systemic disregard of constitution or law.
US declared war over what supposedly was Spanish sinking a US ship, the Maine, in reality blew up on its own yet you feel its OK to declare war over it. The Spanish didn't do it, therefore US didn't have a legimate casus belli for their subsequent actions and therefore not defendable as just war. What remains is a war of aggression over territory.
we see this as a war against European colonialism and imperialism.
War against colonialism via colonizing a colony yourself and massacring the locals when they demand independence? Sure, whatever. makes about much sense as the rest US has done.
All the other things you mention, which constitutional principle do they violate?
Uh... right not to be deprived of life, freedom of person, expression, equality among men, right to privacy, freedrom from unreasonable search and seazure etc etc, the little things, you know.
Congratulations to Finland. But with a population (5.4M) smaller than Missouri (6M), only three ethnic groups (Finn, Swede, and Sami), and a completely different culture from us, its easy to see why you have such a peaceful society. I could pick a small American state with a mostly all-white population, Vermont for instance, and also demonstrate low levels of violence and low infant mortality. I not sure what that proves about respect for the constitution though.
Our constitution says we have freedom from arbitery police violence and access to proper healthcare regardless of our personal financial capability.
Also the Helsinki "metropolitan area" is more culturally and ethically diverse than one might think, but most of the populace doesnt feel the need to commit crime or form street gangs to provide sustanence, housing and security because we have this thing called societal safety net. It helps with keeping the societal contract when people dont starve if they cant find job.
Yes, the entire two centuries have been without systemic constitutional irregularity. There have been anecdotal violations of statutes and constitutional provisions, but never systemic.
Slavery never happened then?
The spanish-american war of american aggression and the subsequent colonization and massacring of phillippine populace never happened then?
You didn't inject syphilis and radioactive substances to alive human beings without their consent then?
COINTELPRO is not real then?
MK-ULTRA was not real then?
These other things you seem to being trying to introduce into the conversation do not seem to be related to constitution or statute.
THEY ARE THINGS AMERICANS HAVE PUT OTHER PEOPLE TO DEATH OVER AND DECLARED THESE ACTIONS ARE NO TOLERATED BY CIVILIZED PEOPLES
Are you trying to say any blemish ruins the entire national project?
'any blemish' is an understatement of several magnitudes.
Or are you saying another world power lasting two centuries has a better track record and therefore the US is lacking in comparison? Name the world power? (Its actually irrelevant to the conversation, because we are talking about US law, not foreign powers)
I believe you are simply an anti-american who like to shout "You're not perfect, You're not perfect".
What ever, atleast I have a decent probability of not being disappeared into a US prison camp without hope of trial, being charged or released while facing torture.
Also, here in Finland, 0 people where killed by police gunfire last year, one guy was shot in the leg and the officer in question was reprimanded for his neglient use of a firearm where no use was defensible, additionally my children are more likely to survive beyond infant stage.
I mean we DO have problems but in comparison america has jumped the shark and is just beyond satirical with things you say to things you do.
Would you care to cite a specific US Statute or US constitutional article and then the specific violating act?
I'm afraid I cannot let Nuremberg defense slide here, Dave.
The Nazis defended their pre-war and war-time actions with national sovreignty and with the fact that everything done to the jews, gypsies, soviet POW's etc was in accordance with the German law at the time. The court - And we as a society of civilized nations decided that certains actions are punisable by death even when perpetrated by the government under laws of the land.
Are you seriously suggesting you've never heard of things I listed in the post youre now responding to?
Let me remind you:
Funny, just from my recent memory things like selling drugs to arm terrorists, backing and conducting assassinations, jailing people without charging or trialing them, coups and fabricating evidence to start a war with a neutral nation spring to mind.
The Federal government didn't just set a new target, like 2 million dollars, for the cap; they erased the cap, and the potential expenses are HUGE as a result. Insurance premiums will inevitably go up, unless you believe it is possible to get something for nothing.)
Uhhhh, what? Then how come every other western country can provide better average healthcare for lower pricing than US? Just because the potential expense is big doesnt mean that this scenario will play out for half, 1/3, 1/20 or even 1/1000 of the cas
Are you saying american society is less capable than all others?
(The earliest promises are already exploded: premiums are going up, not down; plans are vanishing, so you can't keep your plan if you like it; and it definitely isn't lowering the debt.)
Jesus fucking christ what are you people doing over there?! Your healthcare is already the most expensive while only being mediocore effectiveness with 3rd world country infant mortality rate.(unless you can afford to dip in the really wealthy side of the pool by fortune of having born with a silver spoon up your ass).
So instead of just doing the paperwork on paper(or excel) theyre going to let the patients die if they cant cough up the cash, because the insurance company doesnt want(or cant) do 6th grade math.
Today your government is brought to you by PepsiCo and Corrections Corporations of America, Low on regulation and high on regulatory capture.
Yes, practically the entirety, otherwise the Republic would have fallen long ago. I can not name any other time of SYSTEMIC lawlessness by the executive, not even Watergate. The only thing that come close was Jackson and Indian removal (trail of tears).
Funny, just from my recent memory things like selling drugs to arm terrorists, backing and conducting assassinations, jailing people without charging or trialing them, coups and fabricating evidence to start a war with a neutral nation spring to mind.
Or are you saying those people were trialed and served justice for their crimes against humanity and whatnot as per according to your own constitution, Nuremberg principles, international treaties and basic human decency while I blinked?
To me the fact that these people were not punished is a sign that the whole thing is(and has been) rotten to the core and the insects infesting it are covering for eachother, this is merely just the most recent set of faces.
Let me turn the question around; can you name a century during which no systemic corruption, disregard for human rights and life, or unjust violation of national sovereignty of a foreign nation condoned by US government did not happen?
Where is the Republic going when the executive branch no longer feels constrained by the law or the democracy?
Are you saying there was a period in american history where the government actually did more than play a lip service to the written rules?
Fossil fuels are not sustainable. Period.
(I think you got 2 more perioids there than you need.) Also, you're assuming that the people in power(who mostly overlap with the group of people who never developed any type of moral backbone or anything resembling ethics) care what happens after theyre gone. Whats in it for them to lessen their gains now to care about what comes in 50, 100 or 200 years? People need to start bringing out the pitchforks and torches again and make them understand the people in power are there to server the public, not the other way around.
"We will add proper tags on your collection for you!".