and Drake in particular felt his Oath to protect and defend the constitution (he was in the Air Force) was more important than any agreement between him and the NSA to not give out information.
besides, the information he gave out was not classified.
the House Un-American Activities Committee was originally started by self-styled liberals to root out 'fascists' from the american political scene after the business plot.
that kind of backfired, because after WWII, the HUAC was still around, but it started going after Communists and Liberals, with a vengeance. Some times if you read old conservative writings, you will find them bitter and angry about the 'unfairness' of HUAC in the 30s, i can only too easily imagine some 'payback' going on in the 50s.
when you start warping and bending the laws in order to attack political opponents, you should not be surprised when it comes back to haunt you.
under such a "racial hatred" law. which is why it is better to have freedom of speech, than to have a bunch of laws about 'inciting racial hatred' and so forth and so on. throwing X in jail over his speech would have been absolutely pointless and counterproductive.
we have a first amendment because the tradition in monarchies was to outlaw any "slandering of the king". . . i.e. the state was the master, and the 'servants' (people) were not allowed to 'talk back' to the master. in the new nation, this idea was reversed, and so the ideas about defamation was also reversed. (see Chaffee, Freedom of Speech in War Times, circa 1919)
governments can use these anti-free-speech laws to shut down political dissent, and that is generally what they do, rather than trying to use the laws to benefit society in some vague manner. when people "stop and think" before speaking, is this pause because they are worried about harming someone? or is it because they are worried that the government will persecute them for criticizing it? thats the problem with no-free-speech. you can't get honest criticism of the government.
the law against threatening to kill the president are a different ballgame. we have so many assassinated presidents that we have to take it seriously. and there is no legitimate criticism of a relatively democratically elected government, that requires someone to threaten the life of the president (or anyone really).
just another ten years is all they need before they finally eliminate terrorists from afghanistan.
if only it weren't for Wikileaks. i mean, look at how many innocent civilians have been killed in the war, then compare it to the millions killed by Julian Assange.
linuxrocks points out that Canadian courts will look at this precedent, even if American's don't.
however the DOJ has to deal with courts in other countries. especially in extradition cases, of course.
cases like this are embarassements. when other countries completely trash our justice system, it looks bad, it makes the US look bad, and it makes the president look bad. this is not some crazy anti-american judge in a dictatorship, this is an ordinary canadian judge, whose justice system largely derives from the same source (english common law) as ours does.
its not just about the precedent in US law... the DOJ has to look at what a Canadian court is likely to do, before it orders extradition. So the US prosecutors will be looking at the history of Canadian law, and deciding whether or not they have a chance of extraditing someone, before they spend all of the time and money, and risk embarassing losses, to actually try to do it.
if the 'linux community' would stop shitting a brick everytime somebody tries to introduce a micropayment system, OSS developers wouldn't have to sell out.
look at ubuntu's attempt to sell music. oh my god, youd think they stuck a baby in a microwave.
meanwhile, independent artists are fully integrating payment stuff into their websites, where you can buy albums and pay 'as much as you want'. or selling advertising on websites. or you know, asking people to give money.
Slashdot Mirror
could they go after the '1 secret to trim belly fat' or 'dermatologists hate this woman' ads first?
those are out and out fraud, but more than that, im sick of looking at them.
people are interesting
wasnt there an article on slashdot recently about how logic evolved purley to justify our own actions after we did them?
they were prosecuted for Espionage.
and Drake in particular felt his Oath to protect and defend the constitution (he was in the Air Force) was more important than any agreement between him and the NSA to not give out information.
besides, the information he gave out was not classified.
the House Un-American Activities Committee was originally started by self-styled liberals to root out 'fascists' from the american political scene after the business plot.
that kind of backfired, because after WWII, the HUAC was still around, but it started going after Communists and Liberals, with a vengeance. Some times if you read old conservative writings, you will find them bitter and angry about the 'unfairness' of HUAC in the 30s, i can only too easily imagine some 'payback' going on in the 50s.
when you start warping and bending the laws in order to attack political opponents, you should not be surprised when it comes back to haunt you.
under such a "racial hatred" law. which is why it is better to have freedom of speech, than to have a bunch of laws about 'inciting racial hatred' and so forth and so on. throwing X in jail over his speech would have been absolutely pointless and counterproductive.
we have a first amendment because the tradition in monarchies was to outlaw any "slandering of the king". . . i.e. the state was the master, and the 'servants' (people) were not allowed to 'talk back' to the master. in the new nation, this idea was reversed, and so the ideas about defamation was also reversed. (see Chaffee, Freedom of Speech in War Times, circa 1919)
governments can use these anti-free-speech laws to shut down political dissent, and that is generally what they do, rather than trying to use the laws to benefit society in some vague manner. when people "stop and think" before speaking, is this pause because they are worried about harming someone? or is it because they are worried that the government will persecute them for criticizing it? thats the problem with no-free-speech. you can't get honest criticism of the government.
the law against threatening to kill the president are a different ballgame. we have so many assassinated presidents that we have to take it seriously. and there is no legitimate criticism of a relatively democratically elected government, that requires someone to threaten the life of the president (or anyone really).
Drake, etc, and all the other 'leakers' and whistleblowers who have been prosecuted for giving information to the media?
gotcha! check and mate my friend.
this drought is bigger than the one in the 80s.
its causing mass migration which could lead to social upheaval and support for terrorists.
of starvation is not on?
Ike was the commander of allied forces during WWII.
he warned us about the military industrial complex influencing our policy.
i think he knew what he was talking about.
whatever NATO is doing, its working perfectly!
just another ten years is all they need before they finally eliminate terrorists from afghanistan.
if only it weren't for Wikileaks. i mean, look at how many innocent civilians have been killed in the war, then compare it to the millions killed by Julian Assange.
somehow i dont think that killing a suicide bomber is going to get their allies to the negotiating table.
billions of innocent people got killed, all thanks to Julian Assange. i mean, evidence is all over the place. just go to JulianAssangeBodyCount.net
there you can watch video of a Wikileaks helicopter gunship killing a bunch of civilians.
embitters them and causes a wave of mass popular support for terrorist groups?
oh right i forgot. all of NATO's airstrikes are with 'smart bombs', nobody ever dies unless they are bad.
and the population loves NATO for doing this.
NATO is an international organization. what law do they operate under? what court system recognizes it?
what, exactly, is the alleged crime here?
NATO is not a part of the US government. Would NATO be covered under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act? I dont think so.
all the hardware is made by a handful of companies in China like FoxConn.
the problem with letting non-apple hardware run apple software is that it hurts their brand.
the CFAA (18 USC 1030) was the law they attempted to use against Adekeye
this law is seriously flawed and possibly unconstitutional.
Lori Drew, Thomas Drake, Peter Adekeye, George Hotz, all of them allegedly violated it. What kind of law outlaws such a broad range of things?
imho is far worse than goatse
linuxrocks points out that Canadian courts will look at this precedent, even if American's don't.
however the DOJ has to deal with courts in other countries. especially in extradition cases, of course.
cases like this are embarassements. when other countries completely trash our justice system, it looks bad, it makes the US look bad, and it makes the president look bad. this is not some crazy anti-american judge in a dictatorship, this is an ordinary canadian judge, whose justice system largely derives from the same source (english common law) as ours does.
its not just about the precedent in US law... the DOJ has to look at what a Canadian court is likely to do, before it orders extradition. So the US prosecutors will be looking at the history of Canadian law, and deciding whether or not they have a chance of extraditing someone, before they spend all of the time and money, and risk embarassing losses, to actually try to do it.
probably wouldn't fly in the linux kernel!
years from now, maybe 10, maybe 20, there will be other cases like this.
the defense attorneys will go "Look, what the courts already ruled in 2011. Look what the judge said."
Judges in the US often rely heavily on precedent, and the future judge will go "oh. . . wow. that judge was pissed. dismissed with prejudice!"
if the 'linux community' would stop shitting a brick everytime somebody tries to introduce a micropayment system, OSS developers wouldn't have to sell out.
look at ubuntu's attempt to sell music. oh my god, youd think they stuck a baby in a microwave.
meanwhile, independent artists are fully integrating payment stuff into their websites, where you can buy albums and pay 'as much as you want'. or selling advertising on websites. or you know, asking people to give money.
thats what Apple did with Darwin. the people trying to make an open source darwin based distro have been hobbled pretty badly.
so maybe Redhat just introduces a few interesting little tweaks to some meta-portion of their system
actual facts.
====
GE is GE Capital, which is a gigantic fucking hedge fund.
If the taxpayers had not bailed out big finance, almost all hedge funds would have collapsed overnight.
because then my interest rate would go to 0
which would be like getting free money
from the taxpayer.
if only there were some word to describe that phenomenon...