Your post highlights the fact that it's simply a lack of experience problem coupled with technology:
deep into isolated territory
The problem is that it doesn't seem like deep isolated territory, and it doesn't have to be to get into serious trouble. There's a lot of places where you might park your car at a bustling parking lot filled with civilization and plan a day hike, back by 5pm, but instead find yourself alone and freezing on the peak as weather has shifted and visibility has dropped.
I saw this prominently in Rickets Glenn in PA a couple weeks ago. There's a very short but lovely day hike up and down about 14 waterfalls in a bustling park. Lots of amenities in the parking lots and park proper and lots of people. No Cell phone reception on the trail though, and while extremely well maintained it's still very steep ascents and descents around the waterfalls. I ran into one extremely overweight woman about halfway through the trip that was sweating and throwing up because she had a heart condition and left her nitro in the car. There was no Earthly reason a woman like this should be hiking, but with the amenities and easy access she probably thought she was going for a short walk through the park to check out some waterfalls.
As if that wasn't bad enough, this same trip we ran across a dude that fell 20-30 feet off the trail landing on rocks at the base of the falls cracking his head open. There was a nurse and PT to work on him but I had to run the trail for about a mile before I could find someone with cell reception and put in the call. These are crowded trails, but because of the masquerade of civilization no one else was carrying a first aid kit. Took about an hour for the Park ranger to respond with a med bag and the helicopter a little later. I'm guessing he made it, he had lost a bit of blood but had regained consciousness and they were trying to keep him calm and talking while waiting by the time I peaced out, but my point is that these people don't think their in the deep woods or isolated territory because of how convenient we've made park access.
People just don't get that when you walk off the road for 15 minutes you are isolated and better have everything you need for whatever that area can throw at you. And it's not something that's intuitive, because these areas don't look isolated, and they don't feel dangerous. It's like a sunny calm day on the ocean, everything's real peachy till it ain't.
As a side note I believe he was referencing the earthquake in Haiti, not the invasion of Iraq, when speaking of the hospital ship. I don't think anyone considers the invasion of Iraq just "something that happens" lol.
I know the area he's talking about, he's on Pentagon Grounds and there are clearly posted signs saying photography is not allowed on the property. I don't think military property counts as public space. You could easily stand on the other side of the road and take pictures though, like where all the news crews were set up immediately post 9/11.
Why would you believe no one was voting for the candidate that actually won the primary? Was the same thing happening on the democrat side? Everyone was voting for the old white guy that says crazy things and we some how snuck a black president in there?
To be fair a lawyer isn't going to do much. Those teachers don't actually have any more legal power than you or I do to make him go get his kid diagnosed so all they did was ask him to. What's he going to do, sue the teacher for having an after school meeting to ask him to look into a problem they thought they saw? I'm not saying they were right, they clearly weren't. But I am saying I know teachers don't have the power to make him do anything, and that's painfully obvious if you've ever been in a school where you know a child is being beaten. Their only option would be to contact social services and social services really doesn't give two shits about whether a kid might be ADHD or not when they've got 20 other cases of sexual/physical abuse they need to look into. What he should do is contact the principal after the second time the teacher brought it up and tell them he's concerned the teacher is spending too much time giving unsolicited medical advice and not enough time educating.
Have you ever bought a hammer, frying pan, or screw driver? You think the colors/shape of the handles on those devices are entirely utilitarian in form or do you think just maybe, they might also be made to be aesthetically pleasing? It doesn't matter as much with tools of course, but then you don't have that tool permanently installed where you have to look at it every day and have it affect property values.
High Ranking people don't read through 90,000 pieces of intelligence documents and analyze it, they have low ranking people do that and present to them key facts and trends in power point slides. This outrage that a PFC (Specialist before demotion) would have access to the low level intel reports is like asking why a Software Engineer with a just a few years with the company has access to your SVN repository when CLEARLY that should only be allowed to Vice Presidents and above.
A War of Aggression is a war waged without any justification of self defense and without being sanctioned by the UN security council. The concept was basically based upon Nazi Germany's expansionist wars, they made no claim to self defense and simply wished to take over the world. The Taliban's unwillingness to deal with an element within it's border's that attacked and killed 3,000 American citizens pretty much covers at least a 'justification' for self defense and the UN Security Council has in fact sanctioned the war. Therefore it cannot be considered illegal due to being a War of Aggression.
You'll have to point out to me the treaty all nations signed giving up the right to ever engage in war with another nation thereby making it "illegal". you do realize the term illegal implies that there is a law that is being broken right? That's the point I'm getting at here, that there's a difference between what you think is wrong, and what is actually illegal.
I'm confused how you talk about the callousness of a general that would risk the life of soldiers to check in on an informant while in the same breath saying it's perfectly OK to let an informant who has risked his life to help your forces in the past hang in the wind.
But beyond that, yes, the soldiers lives do belong far more to the General to risk than some civilian from another country. Maybe you're confused about how an Army works, but there's these guys called officers and they make tactical decisions that risk the lives of soldiers. The soldiers don't generally get to volunteer for each mission individually and they enlist expecting to be commanded by officers into dangerous situations.
If you accept that the documents could contribute to the Taliban wanting to kill certain people as you seem to do, I fail to see how pointing out that everyone living there already lives on the knife's edge of the Taliban wanting to kill them excuses pushing them over it. I think faced with the task of explaining to children and wife that their father/husband being be-headed by the Taliban was a necessary sacrifice so you could cut down on the "excesses" of the united States Government you'd feel much different. It's as if the pro-war and anti-war people have suddenly done a Chinese fire drill and now they're the ones driving the "It's OK if some innocents get killed for what I believe is the greater good" car.
I'm not sure how the concept that old news with new details can elude you but the two are not incompatible arguments. For example, if you read in the newspaper that "Coalition forces caught 4 insurgents while they were planting an IED device" and then read in the wiki reports that "4 AIQ members were picked up while planting 2 EFP (Explosively Formed Penetrators) disguised as concrete blocks using RF detonators on frequency XXX after being tipped of by O'Gonna GetItInThe'Face" then one could accurately claim that the release is old news (there was no relevant new information) but contains details that one would not want out (the informant, the fact that they know the RF frequency, ect..)
I'm not purporting a stance one way or another on the righteousness of the leak here, just the viability of your argument that the "old news - new details" argument is logically incompatible.
And yet MS and Apple make shit-tons of money from them
You left the door open so wide there using that as a metric for success in your example that even I want to put on somebody's crazy hat and make crap up about how the goal of the war is to generate money. My God, they must have all short circuited their keyboards while salivating to have not responded yet =P
No, he was speeding as a result of pressing the accelerator down until his car reached a speed over the speed limit. He was caught due to bragging online with specifics which allowed witnesses to corroborate.
Yes, and fingerprints can be manufactured, hairs can be stolen from a hairbrush and placed at the scene and the witnesses might have just seen someone wearing a movie-set quality mask that made them look like you carrying the body out to a different car that's the same make and model as yours with fake plates. But it's called reasonable doubt for a reason. In addition, that level of doubt is only needed for a jury to convict and this never got that far. It's a much lower standard to simply charge someone with something. And you don't require much proof at all if someone is willing to plead guilty.
Yes, generally if you admit to a crime in writing it is enough to arrest you. It is then up to the courts to decide whether there is enough evidence to try you. And when you plead guilty as this guy did, it's generally consider enough evidence to convict and punish you. People don't generally plead guilty because they think it looks cool and all those reasoning you provided are defenses that could be brought up in court when the case is tried. If someone is in a public place shouting to the world that they committed a crime it's the police's job to arrest them and then the court's job to determine guilt based on evidence collected.
Yea, not everyone has the money and machinery to saturate the market with books and pamphlets dominating free speech and under the guise of witty little titles like "Common Sense" so we need to enact laws in order to restrict this. We can't let this elitist plutocracy use their machines and wealth to spread these dangerous ideas in text that will drown out the voice of us God fearing and King loving common people. God save the King!
I can see the Ad campaign now with Captain Reynolds driving a volvo:
For the last 3 year Volvo drivers have experienced ZERO fatalities. You know why? Because we are so... very... pretty. We are just too pretty for God to let us die. Huh? Look at that chiseled jaw!
Slashdot Mirror
deep into isolated territory
The problem is that it doesn't seem like deep isolated territory, and it doesn't have to be to get into serious trouble. There's a lot of places where you might park your car at a bustling parking lot filled with civilization and plan a day hike, back by 5pm, but instead find yourself alone and freezing on the peak as weather has shifted and visibility has dropped.
I saw this prominently in Rickets Glenn in PA a couple weeks ago. There's a very short but lovely day hike up and down about 14 waterfalls in a bustling park. Lots of amenities in the parking lots and park proper and lots of people. No Cell phone reception on the trail though, and while extremely well maintained it's still very steep ascents and descents around the waterfalls. I ran into one extremely overweight woman about halfway through the trip that was sweating and throwing up because she had a heart condition and left her nitro in the car. There was no Earthly reason a woman like this should be hiking, but with the amenities and easy access she probably thought she was going for a short walk through the park to check out some waterfalls.
As if that wasn't bad enough, this same trip we ran across a dude that fell 20-30 feet off the trail landing on rocks at the base of the falls cracking his head open. There was a nurse and PT to work on him but I had to run the trail for about a mile before I could find someone with cell reception and put in the call. These are crowded trails, but because of the masquerade of civilization no one else was carrying a first aid kit. Took about an hour for the Park ranger to respond with a med bag and the helicopter a little later. I'm guessing he made it, he had lost a bit of blood but had regained consciousness and they were trying to keep him calm and talking while waiting by the time I peaced out, but my point is that these people don't think their in the deep woods or isolated territory because of how convenient we've made park access.
People just don't get that when you walk off the road for 15 minutes you are isolated and better have everything you need for whatever that area can throw at you. And it's not something that's intuitive, because these areas don't look isolated, and they don't feel dangerous. It's like a sunny calm day on the ocean, everything's real peachy till it ain't.
As a side note I believe he was referencing the earthquake in Haiti, not the invasion of Iraq, when speaking of the hospital ship. I don't think anyone considers the invasion of Iraq just "something that happens" lol.
Lawyers from TFA, and the animated FBI warning at the start of it, would like to have a word with you
I know the area he's talking about, he's on Pentagon Grounds and there are clearly posted signs saying photography is not allowed on the property. I don't think military property counts as public space. You could easily stand on the other side of the road and take pictures though, like where all the news crews were set up immediately post 9/11.
Why would you believe no one was voting for the candidate that actually won the primary? Was the same thing happening on the democrat side? Everyone was voting for the old white guy that says crazy things and we some how snuck a black president in there?
Man, I bet you could get pretty rich inventing money...
To be fair a lawyer isn't going to do much. Those teachers don't actually have any more legal power than you or I do to make him go get his kid diagnosed so all they did was ask him to. What's he going to do, sue the teacher for having an after school meeting to ask him to look into a problem they thought they saw? I'm not saying they were right, they clearly weren't. But I am saying I know teachers don't have the power to make him do anything, and that's painfully obvious if you've ever been in a school where you know a child is being beaten. Their only option would be to contact social services and social services really doesn't give two shits about whether a kid might be ADHD or not when they've got 20 other cases of sexual/physical abuse they need to look into. What he should do is contact the principal after the second time the teacher brought it up and tell them he's concerned the teacher is spending too much time giving unsolicited medical advice and not enough time educating.
Have you ever bought a hammer, frying pan, or screw driver? You think the colors/shape of the handles on those devices are entirely utilitarian in form or do you think just maybe, they might also be made to be aesthetically pleasing? It doesn't matter as much with tools of course, but then you don't have that tool permanently installed where you have to look at it every day and have it affect property values.
High Ranking people don't read through 90,000 pieces of intelligence documents and analyze it, they have low ranking people do that and present to them key facts and trends in power point slides. This outrage that a PFC (Specialist before demotion) would have access to the low level intel reports is like asking why a Software Engineer with a just a few years with the company has access to your SVN repository when CLEARLY that should only be allowed to Vice Presidents and above.
Perhaps the title of the study should be "Researches Don't Understand Parenthesis Sign"
A War of Aggression is a war waged without any justification of self defense and without being sanctioned by the UN security council. The concept was basically based upon Nazi Germany's expansionist wars, they made no claim to self defense and simply wished to take over the world. The Taliban's unwillingness to deal with an element within it's border's that attacked and killed 3,000 American citizens pretty much covers at least a 'justification' for self defense and the UN Security Council has in fact sanctioned the war. Therefore it cannot be considered illegal due to being a War of Aggression.
You'll have to point out to me the treaty all nations signed giving up the right to ever engage in war with another nation thereby making it "illegal". you do realize the term illegal implies that there is a law that is being broken right? That's the point I'm getting at here, that there's a difference between what you think is wrong, and what is actually illegal.
I'm confused how you talk about the callousness of a general that would risk the life of soldiers to check in on an informant while in the same breath saying it's perfectly OK to let an informant who has risked his life to help your forces in the past hang in the wind.
But beyond that, yes, the soldiers lives do belong far more to the General to risk than some civilian from another country. Maybe you're confused about how an Army works, but there's these guys called officers and they make tactical decisions that risk the lives of soldiers. The soldiers don't generally get to volunteer for each mission individually and they enlist expecting to be commanded by officers into dangerous situations.
If you accept that the documents could contribute to the Taliban wanting to kill certain people as you seem to do, I fail to see how pointing out that everyone living there already lives on the knife's edge of the Taliban wanting to kill them excuses pushing them over it. I think faced with the task of explaining to children and wife that their father/husband being be-headed by the Taliban was a necessary sacrifice so you could cut down on the "excesses" of the united States Government you'd feel much different. It's as if the pro-war and anti-war people have suddenly done a Chinese fire drill and now they're the ones driving the "It's OK if some innocents get killed for what I believe is the greater good" car.
So the democratically elected government of Afghanistan has told us to get out and we're now there illegally against their wishes? That's news to me.
There's a big difference between "I think this is wrong" and "This is illegal"
Since when did being wrong make anyone LESS American? ;)
I'm not sure how the concept that old news with new details can elude you but the two are not incompatible arguments. For example, if you read in the newspaper that "Coalition forces caught 4 insurgents while they were planting an IED device" and then read in the wiki reports that "4 AIQ members were picked up while planting 2 EFP (Explosively Formed Penetrators) disguised as concrete blocks using RF detonators on frequency XXX after being tipped of by O'Gonna GetItInThe'Face" then one could accurately claim that the release is old news (there was no relevant new information) but contains details that one would not want out (the informant, the fact that they know the RF frequency, ect..)
I'm not purporting a stance one way or another on the righteousness of the leak here, just the viability of your argument that the "old news - new details" argument is logically incompatible.
And yet MS and Apple make shit-tons of money from them
You left the door open so wide there using that as a metric for success in your example that even I want to put on somebody's crazy hat and make crap up about how the goal of the war is to generate money. My God, they must have all short circuited their keyboards while salivating to have not responded yet =P
You do realize every story currently on the front page is just a quote-box with text taken directly from the article in question?
If you read the original forum, his real problem is he admitted he was a telemarketing manager. After that he was pretty much fucked.
No, he was speeding as a result of pressing the accelerator down until his car reached a speed over the speed limit. He was caught due to bragging online with specifics which allowed witnesses to corroborate.
Yes, and fingerprints can be manufactured, hairs can be stolen from a hairbrush and placed at the scene and the witnesses might have just seen someone wearing a movie-set quality mask that made them look like you carrying the body out to a different car that's the same make and model as yours with fake plates. But it's called reasonable doubt for a reason. In addition, that level of doubt is only needed for a jury to convict and this never got that far. It's a much lower standard to simply charge someone with something. And you don't require much proof at all if someone is willing to plead guilty.
Yes, generally if you admit to a crime in writing it is enough to arrest you. It is then up to the courts to decide whether there is enough evidence to try you. And when you plead guilty as this guy did, it's generally consider enough evidence to convict and punish you. People don't generally plead guilty because they think it looks cool and all those reasoning you provided are defenses that could be brought up in court when the case is tried. If someone is in a public place shouting to the world that they committed a crime it's the police's job to arrest them and then the court's job to determine guilt based on evidence collected.
Yea, not everyone has the money and machinery to saturate the market with books and pamphlets dominating free speech and under the guise of witty little titles like "Common Sense" so we need to enact laws in order to restrict this. We can't let this elitist plutocracy use their machines and wealth to spread these dangerous ideas in text that will drown out the voice of us God fearing and King loving common people. God save the King!
I can see the Ad campaign now with Captain Reynolds driving a volvo:
For the last 3 year Volvo drivers have experienced ZERO fatalities. You know why? Because we are so... very... pretty. We are just too pretty for God to let us die. Huh? Look at that chiseled jaw!