It is surprising that the Washington Post would run editorial against free press as a news article.
"In many, many ways, the damage has already been done," said Evan F. Kohlmann, an expert on al-Qaeda's online operations who serves as a consultant to the FBI, Scotland Yard and other agencies. "It certainly would have been a lot easier if the U.S. government had taken this seriously back in 2004. Back then, these guys were looked upon as miscreants and cretins, like they were just Internet terrorists and not for real."
This is flabbergasting. Does the US stand for democracy and freedom of speech or is it a place where you can't get Al-Jazeera on cable TV? When you step over the lines of disrupting military communications into full blown censorship, you become the oppressor.
The disproportionate use of force is obvious because it's aimed at you. Domestic spying aims at identifying and disrupting communications deemed unfavorable to US interests as defined by GWB and corporate interests. The idea is to keep any opposition disorganized, despised and ineffective. If you want to know how far it goes, have a look at Fox News "mistakes" about the democratic presidential candidate, Osama Barak.
The tech is interesting but besides the bigger point:
How has one man in a cave managed to outcommunicate the world's greatest communication society?
He's winning because censorship always backfires. The censored party, no matter how wrong, gains an air of truth. The technology used to carry the message does not matter. Attacks on Al-Jazeera and websites were a terrible mistakes almost as bad as invading Iraq, torturing captives and legal immunity for contractors. We have acted as badly as our supposed Islamo-Fascist enemy and our talk about democracy, freedom of press and human dignity rings hollow.
Polar bears already have problems. Ice freezes later and thaws sooner, so bears have to swim further and many drown. Seals, their primary food source, are also under pressure because they need the ice to birth. Your wiki source also includes this:
The IUCN now lists global warming as the most significant threat to the polar bear, primarily because the melting of its sea ice habitat reduces its ability to find sufficient food. The IUCN states, "If climatic trends continue polar bears may become extirpated from most of their range within 100 years."[1] On May 14, 2008, the United States Department of the Interior listed the polar bear as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act.
Finally, the National Geographic was a little glib, if not intentionally missleading, when it said:
The melt would be mostly symbolicâ"thicker ice, pushed against the Canadian continental shelf by weather and Earth's rotation, would still survive the summer."
Any reasonable person quickly realizes there will be no ice to "push" if it's all gone in the center. Models that have not predicted the rapidity of ice loss need to be recalibrated as do politicians who deny global warming and it's impact. The alarmists are alarmingly correct.
Slashdot Mirror
It is surprising that the Washington Post would run editorial against free press as a news article.
This is flabbergasting. Does the US stand for democracy and freedom of speech or is it a place where you can't get Al-Jazeera on cable TV? When you step over the lines of disrupting military communications into full blown censorship, you become the oppressor.
The disproportionate use of force is obvious because it's aimed at you. Domestic spying aims at identifying and disrupting communications deemed unfavorable to US interests as defined by GWB and corporate interests. The idea is to keep any opposition disorganized, despised and ineffective. If you want to know how far it goes, have a look at Fox News "mistakes" about the democratic presidential candidate, Osama Barak.
The tech is interesting but besides the bigger point:
He's winning because censorship always backfires. The censored party, no matter how wrong, gains an air of truth. The technology used to carry the message does not matter. Attacks on Al-Jazeera and websites were a terrible mistakes almost as bad as invading Iraq, torturing captives and legal immunity for contractors. We have acted as badly as our supposed Islamo-Fascist enemy and our talk about democracy, freedom of press and human dignity rings hollow.
Polar bears already have problems. Ice freezes later and thaws sooner, so bears have to swim further and many drown. Seals, their primary food source, are also under pressure because they need the ice to birth. Your wiki source also includes this:
Finally, the National Geographic was a little glib, if not intentionally missleading, when it said:
Any reasonable person quickly realizes there will be no ice to "push" if it's all gone in the center. Models that have not predicted the rapidity of ice loss need to be recalibrated as do politicians who deny global warming and it's impact. The alarmists are alarmingly correct.