Two wrongs never, ever make a right, no matter how much one may try to justify it.
So, explain the death penalty then.
It's wrong - I know some people will bitch about the cost of lifetime imprisonment, but what those people fail to realize is A) it's actually more expensive to execute a prisoner than to keep them locked up for life, and B) if our nation didn't focus so much treasure on incarcerating non-violent drug offenders and the like, there'd be plenty of money for lifetime imprisonments.
the entire Iraq, er, 'conflict'
Also wrong, for so many reasons...
Some people believe god has told them that revenge is good (an eye for an eye).
People have used 'god told me to' as a justification for fucked up behavior for millennia. Still wrong.
It's a nice platitude, but it's far from universally applied.
Not being universally applied does not make it a "trite, meaningless statement." It just means that there are a lot of people out there who have absolutely no respect for one another.
It also has things like blacks being 3/5ths of a person
For the record, the Constitution says no such thing. It does (or did) state that, for voting and taxation purposes, slaves will (would) be counted as 3/5ths of a person, but at no point does the document specify the race of the slaves in question.
Also, you know - private group, no duty to 1st Amendment, they have the right to censor whatever they damn well please.
"“No, they’re here and they’re not leaving. They told me they’ll make it into a bigger problem if you do your talk.”
More like they want the right to make someone else censor whatever they damn well please in that someone else's private space.
That's what I don't understand about this situation; were I the event coordinators, I would have been far more inclined to throw the group making a fuss out, than to deny an invited speaker the chance to give the talk they were invited to give.
Here's how I imagine it would have gone down:
Them: "We're not leaving, and we're going to make a big ol' stink if you don't accommodate us!"
Me: "OK, well, since you've decided to attempt extortion, and I don't take well to being threatened, I'll make you a deal: I will refund your entry fee, revoke your passes, and have security escort you off the premises; OR, I can call the police and have you arrested for attempted blackmail, assault (FYI, just the act of making threats is legally considered assault), trespassing, and any other legitimate charge the cops think will stick. Your call."
If they want to try and sue me for exercising my rights as a business owner, let 'em waste their money.
FUCK CHINA !!!! A bunch of needle dick nerds that steal American ideas.
"Steal" implies that once they take the idea, the person who had it originally does not anymore. That's just silly hyperbole.
No, China "borrows" American ideas, then figures out how to mass produce them cheaper than we can. It's called capitalism, it is the basis of both the Chinese and American economies. Hell, if anything, we should be proud - American capitalism won out over Russian communism, isn't that what the Joe McCarthy's of this nation always wanted?
We should do all we can to destroy them.
Yea, because scorched earth policies always work out for the best, especially when nuclear-armed states are involved.
More facets of the Stuxnet story are slowly being unearthed and it now appears the thing was already under intense development in 2005. It makes one wonder how widespread this kind of thing really is and how early the various intelligence services started doing it... Post 9/11? In the early 90s?
Possibly earlier than that - it's a pretty well established idea that all the cool tech we see coming out today, was being designed and implemented by secretive government organizations for at least a decade prior. The SR-71, the internet, Stuxnet, and uncountable other technologies were used to wage war against the enemies of the US government long before the public even knew such things existed.
So it's wrong when they do it but not when the US does it, is that what you're saying?
That depends. Self-defense is not wrong, so if the US is doing it in self-defense, then yes.
Considering that our government is using the term "pre-emptive strike," even if they are using the term incorrectly, implies that even they don't consider it self-defense.
Otherwise, every bully in the nation can claim 'self-defense' when he shoves a future member of our ranks into a locker.
Awful things happen to people, in this world. That doesn't mean the rest of the world owes you a life-time of walking on eggshells
I'm not saying they do; I'm pointing out that wisnoskij is a self-absorbed prick for wanting to lock rape victims in "padded white room[s] in an asylum."
Repeat: I am specifically pointing out that the poster I replied to, wisnoskii, is a misogynistic prick.
For the love of Tux, would people please stop extrapolating this directed statement into a generalization!
No. But it also doesn't make it OK to be an unholy prick to people who have suffered such an abuse, just because you don't want to have to accommodate them.
But that's not the case here...
In reference to the post I was originally responding to, yes, it is.
Rather than ban the whole talk that many people might have been interested in, why didn't they just put a sign on the door to that hall warning someone not to go in if they have sexual talk issues.
Geez, I'd have thought the topic they posted for this talked would have clued in any one with a bit of intelligence (and I'd think most people at a hackers convention type thing would be smart) would guess if things like that bothered them, they'd be best served by not going to listen.
From what I've read about the situation, it's a lot simpler than it seems: Violet Blue was to give a talk about, essentially, drugs and sexuality; a (let's call a duck a duck) liberal group, who is probably far more concerned with their own image than with protecting women's rights, found out about it. So, the liberal group decided to harass the event coordinators with vague threats and bullshit claims, until they (the ECs) finally gave in and pressured Violet Blue into not giving the talk (from what I've read, VB was quite gracious in not blaming the event staff for the actions of a small group of assholes).
It had nothing to do with the nature or gender of the attendees, and everything to do with a small group of like-minded political hacks forcing their ideology down everyone else's throat, which is inherently a "not cool" action.
HOWEVER - the actions of this small group of zealots does not excuse folks like wisnoskij, to whom my original response was directed, from their fucked up, narcissistic world view that apparently involves locking rape victims in asylums.
It's funny how many on Slashdot claim to be politically interested but aren't politically active enough to have written even a single letter to a congressman.
Killing an enemy combatant on the battleground, regardless of his citizenship, is not considered a "summary execution... denying due process".
Right; because if the government tells you that a person is an 'enemy combatant,' then they most definitely are, because no one in the government would ever tell a lie to justify their crimes, would they?
Let me guess - National Socialist Party member? It shows.
It would be useful to know which content owners do and don't subscribe to this scheme, so I know which to boycott and which to support.
The only 2 I know of for sure are Fat Wreck Chords and Epitaph Records, though it seems Epitaph has been moving in the 'corporate whore' direction for a number of years (ironic, considering that the anti-establishment punk sensation Bad Religion is one of their top artists).
Slashdot Mirror
Will it blend?
(wonder how many entendre we can generate with that one...)
So, explain the death penalty then.
It's wrong - I know some people will bitch about the cost of lifetime imprisonment, but what those people fail to realize is A) it's actually more expensive to execute a prisoner than to keep them locked up for life, and B) if our nation didn't focus so much treasure on incarcerating non-violent drug offenders and the like, there'd be plenty of money for lifetime imprisonments.
the entire Iraq, er, 'conflict'
Also wrong, for so many reasons...
Some people believe god has told them that revenge is good (an eye for an eye).
People have used 'god told me to' as a justification for fucked up behavior for millennia. Still wrong.
It's a nice platitude, but it's far from universally applied.
Not being universally applied does not make it a "trite, meaningless statement." It just means that there are a lot of people out there who have absolutely no respect for one another.
I thought rule #1 was, "don't give top secret access to a damn Private"
Seriously, which higher-up thought that was a good idea, and why isn't his ass in the sling as well?
No need for me to prove....
Spoken like a true federal prosecutor.
I hope you're not making an allusion to the previous slashdot article, because that was debunked by both snopes and factcheck:
http://www.factcheck.org/2007/12/bush-the-constitution-a-goddamned-piece-of-paper/
You are correct - Bush never actually said those words, in that order.
However, actions speak louder than words, and the intent of his actions are quite clear, IMO.
It also has things like blacks being 3/5ths of a person
For the record, the Constitution says no such thing. It does (or did) state that, for voting and taxation purposes, slaves will (would) be counted as 3/5ths of a person, but at no point does the document specify the race of the slaves in question.
"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial ..."
Yea, about that...
Guess who gets to determine what qualifies as "speedy?" Hint: It ain't the accused.
And I thought Brazil and the United States belonged to the same continent...
Yea, that can happen when you sleep through geography.
Also, you know - private group, no duty to 1st Amendment, they have the right to censor whatever they damn well please.
"“No, they’re here and they’re not leaving. They told me they’ll make it into a bigger problem if you do your talk.”
More like they want the right to make someone else censor whatever they damn well please in that someone else's private space.
That's what I don't understand about this situation; were I the event coordinators, I would have been far more inclined to throw the group making a fuss out, than to deny an invited speaker the chance to give the talk they were invited to give.
Here's how I imagine it would have gone down:
Them: "We're not leaving, and we're going to make a big ol' stink if you don't accommodate us!"
Me: "OK, well, since you've decided to attempt extortion, and I don't take well to being threatened, I'll make you a deal: I will refund your entry fee, revoke your passes, and have security escort you off the premises; OR, I can call the police and have you arrested for attempted blackmail, assault (FYI, just the act of making threats is legally considered assault), trespassing, and any other legitimate charge the cops think will stick. Your call."
If they want to try and sue me for exercising my rights as a business owner, let 'em waste their money.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivocation
I'll let you figure it out for yourself.
Seriously, what is it going to take before people in our government are willing to publicly accuse China of acts of war?
A sudden and marked decrease in free-trade lobbying dollars.
What about this so-called "Great Firewall"
Built out of minnow traps, apparently.
Don't make me have to stop this car and separate you two!
This is far more profound a commentary that it appears.
Two wrongs never, ever make a right, no matter how much one may try to justify it.
George Washington could TOTALLY beat up Mao Zedong.
Wooden teeth do make excellent fist-packs.
FUCK CHINA !!!! A bunch of needle dick nerds that steal American ideas.
"Steal" implies that once they take the idea, the person who had it originally does not anymore. That's just silly hyperbole.
No, China "borrows" American ideas, then figures out how to mass produce them cheaper than we can. It's called capitalism, it is the basis of both the Chinese and American economies. Hell, if anything, we should be proud - American capitalism won out over Russian communism, isn't that what the Joe McCarthy's of this nation always wanted?
We should do all we can to destroy them.
Yea, because scorched earth policies always work out for the best, especially when nuclear-armed states are involved.
More facets of the Stuxnet story are slowly being unearthed and it now appears the thing was already under intense development in 2005. It makes one wonder how widespread this kind of thing really is and how early the various intelligence services started doing it... Post 9/11? In the early 90s?
Possibly earlier than that - it's a pretty well established idea that all the cool tech we see coming out today, was being designed and implemented by secretive government organizations for at least a decade prior. The SR-71, the internet, Stuxnet, and uncountable other technologies were used to wage war against the enemies of the US government long before the public even knew such things existed.
So it's wrong when they do it but not when the US does it, is that what you're saying?
That depends. Self-defense is not wrong, so if the US is doing it in self-defense, then yes.
Considering that our government is using the term "pre-emptive strike," even if they are using the term incorrectly, implies that even they don't consider it self-defense.
Otherwise, every bully in the nation can claim 'self-defense' when he shoves a future member of our ranks into a locker.
Awful things happen to people, in this world. That doesn't mean the rest of the world owes you a life-time of walking on eggshells
I'm not saying they do; I'm pointing out that wisnoskij is a self-absorbed prick for wanting to lock rape victims in "padded white room[s] in an asylum."
Repeat: I am specifically pointing out that the poster I replied to, wisnoskii, is a misogynistic prick.
For the love of Tux, would people please stop extrapolating this directed statement into a generalization!
We didn't spend 7000 years trying to educate everyone, we've been trying to educate everyone for maybe 400.
For extremely small values of "everyone."
But that's not the case here...
In reference to the post I was originally responding to, yes, it is.
Rather than ban the whole talk that many people might have been interested in, why didn't they just put a sign on the door to that hall warning someone not to go in if they have sexual talk issues.
Geez, I'd have thought the topic they posted for this talked would have clued in any one with a bit of intelligence (and I'd think most people at a hackers convention type thing would be smart) would guess if things like that bothered them, they'd be best served by not going to listen.
From what I've read about the situation, it's a lot simpler than it seems: Violet Blue was to give a talk about, essentially, drugs and sexuality; a (let's call a duck a duck) liberal group, who is probably far more concerned with their own image than with protecting women's rights, found out about it. So, the liberal group decided to harass the event coordinators with vague threats and bullshit claims, until they (the ECs) finally gave in and pressured Violet Blue into not giving the talk (from what I've read, VB was quite gracious in not blaming the event staff for the actions of a small group of assholes).
It had nothing to do with the nature or gender of the attendees, and everything to do with a small group of like-minded political hacks forcing their ideology down everyone else's throat, which is inherently a "not cool" action.
HOWEVER - the actions of this small group of zealots does not excuse folks like wisnoskij, to whom my original response was directed, from their fucked up, narcissistic world view that apparently involves locking rape victims in asylums.
I have already explained my position in earlier replies to other posters, see for reference.
It's funny how many on Slashdot claim to be politically interested but aren't politically active enough to have written even a single letter to a congressman.
Funny sad, as opposed to funny 'ha ha.'
Killing an enemy combatant on the battleground, regardless of his citizenship, is not considered a "summary execution ... denying due process".
Right; because if the government tells you that a person is an 'enemy combatant,' then they most definitely are, because no one in the government would ever tell a lie to justify their crimes, would they?
Let me guess - National Socialist Party member? It shows.
It would be useful to know which content owners do and don't subscribe to this scheme, so I know which to boycott and which to support.
The only 2 I know of for sure are Fat Wreck Chords and Epitaph Records, though it seems Epitaph has been moving in the 'corporate whore' direction for a number of years (ironic, considering that the anti-establishment punk sensation Bad Religion is one of their top artists).
I wonder what sort of advantages there are to being a high-tech anything in Kansas.
Ask Google.