But both actions are illegal and look at the sentence Mitnick got handed and this was back in time before the Internet was on any governments priority list. The laws and sentences have been increasing rapidly since then with little or no complaints from anyone except those who get caught.
And exactly what purpose is that? Launching indiscriminate DDOS attacks are child's play since almost everyone is vulnerable to this type of attack. The only purpose they are serving is to give the government more reasons to start trying to take control of content and access. These guys are nothing when compared against those responsible for Stuxnet. Now that required some intelligence and also served a good purpose.
"Right now the malware apps are obvious" Pray tell how can you determine something is obviously malware unless you actually download it? And wouldn't that pretty much make everyone a moron by your definition?
If you can't find a programming job today you are probably not looking very hard. There are literally thousands of jobs posted on job sites everyday. I made the mistake of posting my resume for 1 week last year and I still get 50 e-mails a week from people pitching open positions. Granted you might need to have more than 1 skill and you might have to work on something that you do not necessarily enjoy but at least an incoming paycheck can hold you over until you do find something you like.
China will not have any trouble dealing with Islam. They don't have to worry about being politically correct or have to deal with organizations like the ACLU, UN Human Rights Council, or CAIR. The Chinese government does not let outsiders dictate their internal policies. They routinely give the world community the finger and do anything they damn well please.
Yet when the US pursues policies aimed at maintaining social stability they get criticized for supporting tyrants and dictators like those in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Yemen, and a whole host of similar countries. How much social stability has the "Arab Spring" generated lately?
Ok this will be my last response. You dismissed my points throughout the exchange as government propaganda which they were clearly not. I made no great claims other than Iraq violated many of the cease fire terms from the first war. I did not say these violations justified the second war I just stated were undisputed facts and recognized as such in the UN deliberations leading up to the second war. The Kurds were most definitely Iraqi citizens by any legal standard and therefore they were Sadaam's people. If you want to go around and base your arguments on colonial border changes we could re-write the entire history of world conflict since every border on the planet has been drawn in the blood of conflict with some boarders changing hands more than a few times. The US did not supply the gas used against the Kurds. The US exported a small amount of common multi-use chemical compounds that could be used for a variety of agricultural, medical, and industrial applications. The accusation that the US supplied the weaponized gas is without merit. It was only stated that some of those chemical compounds COULD have been used but there was no proof for this accusation. It would be like blaming every cell phone manufacturer for supplying IED triggers to terrorist groups. The US government does some very questionable things but exporting chemical or biological weapons is not one of them. The US was also accused of supplying Iraq with weapons when they were at war with Iran but the US was only the source for 2% of the total amount of weapons supplied to Iraq. France, Germany, North Korea, and Russia supplied the bulk of the weapons for that conflict. And if you want to see real slaughter just look around the world right now. The US is slowly stepping down in the efforts to get involved in any more conflicts. They have taking a back seat in the Libya conflict and have refused to even consider getting militarily involved in Syria. The troops are leaving Iraq and Afghanistan in the very near future and after that happens you will really start seeing some real slaughter. The so called Arab spring will end up as just another cluster fuck that will end up creating more problems than they started with in the region. There is just so much hate embedded in the Arab and Muslim cultures that perpetuate the continued animosity and violence we see occurring every day. They fight amongst themselves more than they fight against outsiders. The only common goal they have is their unrelenting hate of Israel and the US. Once the US is removed from the equation they can really start pounding on one another. Tribal and religious based social structures are not a viable means of governing millions of people living in the area. I also have a bad feeling that some of those countries like Syria and Egypt along with the non-state terrorist groups are going to step over the line with Israel and ignite a full tilt war that Israel will use to take care of the Palestinian issue once and for all. I see no alternative at this point. Those wanting Israel to scarifice their state are wasting their time. The only way that conflict will end without wholesale destruction is for the Arab hate towards Israel to lessen and that is also never going to happen so that leaves violence as the only solution.
The points I mentioned about Iraq violating the terms of the cease fire agreement were recognized by every country involved with the first Iraq war. Every country in the UN acknowledge these violations when debating the second war but there were countries who still did not want to enforce the terms of the agreement for various reasons. Both France and Germany had economic reasons to avoid another conflict and did not want to disrupt those ties. There was ample proof available to all that Iraq was re-building their air defense and tracking stations, plying hide and seek with weapons inspectors, and using air power (helicopters) to attack civilians in the north so Sadaam could put down dissenters and re-claim his power over the state. "wait a minute, you cannot give a shit if human beings are gassed" But I thought the gassing of civilians was just lies and propaganda to build a case for war? Are you now saying it did happen? You can't have it both ways. I included my statement about not caring just to see how you would respond and you didn't let me down.
.NET is also useful for creating wrappers for C++ native code modules to simplify the middle tier development for programmers who are not efficient with C++. I am currently working for a large corporation that has about 2 developers out of about 500 with no practical experience with C++. I was a little shocked when I found that out.
I never claimed the US was doing the right thing. I listed a series of events and the consequences of those events as they related to the terms of the cease fire agreement from the first Iraq war. The fact is the Iraqi government did use chemical weapons against their Kurdish citizens. The evidence is undeniable and has been documented by human rights group . Personally I could give a shit whether they did or not but for people like you who cannot for one instance accept any fact that upsets your preconcieved notion of the truth I regard you with nothing but contempt.
By massive bombing runs I assume you are talking about the US and allied airforces taking out the anti-air capabilities that Iraq continued to try and bring online which violated the terms of the cease fire agreement. Or are you talking about enforcement of the no-fly zone so Sadaam could not finish off gassing the Kurds up north? This was also included in the terms of the cease fire and the Iraqi government kept testing the boundaries. Any massive starvation you can lay soley at the feet of the Iraqi government. There were billions of dollars worth of food and supplies delivered to that country by not only governments but private groups but the distribution was up to the government. Iraq was not setup unless you are talking about how the feckless international community lets tyrannical leaders operate any way they chose with no fear of consequences or reprisals. Iraq invaded Kuwait because they were convinced no one would lift a finger to do anything about it after the conquest was finished. The dreaded UN resolutions don't seem to be a very effective means of changing anyones behavior but at least it looks like someone is doing something. I think the second war was unecessary and foolish but no one asked my opinion at the time so I couldn't talk them out of it. However the first war was a different story and the worst thing about that war was the allies not finishing the job which would have made a second war uneccessary in the first place.
My comment simply stated that Iraq violated the terms of the cease fire agreed upon at the end if the 1st war. You can't just ignore this fact and pretend it didn't occur just because you disagree with the second war. According to the terms of the cease fire military actions would be continued if the terms were violated. When these types of agreements are not enforced you have countries who will invade others, get their asses kicked, and right before total defeat they will surrender and agree to cease fire terms so they can have time to re-group and re-arm and pick up where they left off at a later date.
If you are referring to what I think you are you the generation protesting the government in that time period are the same people that have been running the country for the past 20 years. Both in goverrnment and private sector. It seems like those noble righters of wrongs in that era have re-evaluated their positions.I guess after they put down the bong they started looking at things a little differently.
The criticism was directed at Wiki-leaks not the entire Internet. And besides a lot of bluster the government has not taking action against Wiki-leaks besides making loud and boisterous threats and denunciation's but no followup actions to back up their dismay. The only one being prosecuted is the one who released the information in the first place. So I don't see any hypocritical behavior in starting this project.
Don't worry the don't have snowballs chance in hell of ever being admitted. The only reason they have not been shown the door yet was because the US was supporting them but that is no longer the case.
Boy I riled up a nest of bugs with no reading comprehension skills and probably no other characteristics that would indicate intelligence. Lets review some of your pearls of insight. The kids taking nude pictures were distributing them to their classmates. I never said they should be prosecuted as if they were out selling children for sexual pleasure. I never said anything about charging them as adults or minors. I never said the picture taking episode was heinous. I only said it would be a situation that could fall under child pornography statutes and it was dishonest to leave this detail out of the example given.
"When did he propose that we should scrap all laws and let murderers go free?" I never said anything like this. Are you sure you were reading what I wrote? Condemnation does not mean destroying anything. I can see where you got confused since the word condemnation is sometimes used in executions but condemning also means spouting negative appellations against an object or idea to draw attention and suggest a remedy. But here is the thing. If you condemn something you should not use misleading statements such as people getting arrested for merely looking at a comic book with no mention that it wasn't just a normal comic book but one with questionable imagery that rises to the level of child pornography. Purposely using inaccurate and misleading statements like this revels nothing but unthinking zealousness disguised as truth . Using lies of omission, regurgitating patently flawed reasoning, repeating falsehoods, on purpose or in ignorance over and over to the point where the actual facts have all been forgotten and you are left with nothing but animosity. Attacking those who do not share your simplistic world view also spreads like a virus all over the world which then leads people in this situation to actually believe people were being arrested for owning comic books. On top of everything you then go on to attack things I never said or implied. I clearly admitted there were unjust laws on the books and that there is a system in place to deal with it. It is also a system that is continually tested and modified over time. But of course that would be meaningless to you because you probably think history started when you were born 10 years ago. It is not a perfect system nor will it ever be 100% perfect but name something that is. Your other mutterings and insults touch on a subject that I also never commented on or specified an opinion on whether those involved in the incident should be charged as an adult or minor.
"But apparently for idiots like you, the laws are an end to themselves and cannot be questioned"
I never said anything at all about not questioning laws. I did specifically say that there are unjust or misguided laws that should be removed or modified. You might want to brush up on your reading comprehension abilities. I hear they really push that skill starting in the 6th grade so it will only be a few more months till you can take advantage if this.
"But world is probably better off with nutcases like you locked up in mental asylums rather than kids being jailed." This beauty does nothing but shine the spotlight on your immaturity and no doubt feeds you self righteousness illusion you walk around with.
OK the examples you referenced all fall under child pornography statutes. Which is a little more involved than just "possessing a comic book" or stating "Teenagers have been arrested for photographing themselves" while leaving out the small detail that the pictures were of naked minors in your argument. You started this thread off bitching about unjust laws while purposely slanting your accusations and leaving out some pretty important details and contextual information to make your argument. And the story about the Orchids is disturbing but anecdotal evidence does not render the entire system of laws invalid or unjust. And you were condemning the system using misleading descriptions and 1 example of an unjust prosecution based on the seriousness of the offense. There are all kinds of laws that should be removed entirely or at least updated to reflect the values and morals of an ever changing society. But there are legal remedies in place that allow the accused of any crime to challenge the charges in leveled against them and there have been a lot of instances where a law was invalidated by the court system. The legislative and judicial branches of government are designed just for situations like this. No system of law is perfect and there will always be cases of injustice but that is no reason to condemn the entire system.
OK,so since you know these kids there is nothing wrong with them breaking the law for a good cause? Apply that logic to governments free wheeling wire tapping. After all it's for a good cause. And I never claimed they were a danger to free society. They are a danger because their actions give those in power with more reasons to lock down the Internet to the point of uselessness.
What the hell does this mean "go to prison for possession of certain comic books" . Explain how you came to this conclusion. Please include the context of accusation and all the other facts you have conveniently ignored. Again I think you are leaving out a couple of facts with this beauty "Teenagers have been arrested for photographing themselves". And "intent" is a key provision in many laws. Laws like killing someone. The intent can decide whether the person is convicted of murder or manslaughter which have clear differences in sentencing guidelines. This "people who break the law should not have any doubt as to whether or not what they are doing is illegal" assertion says more about idiots committing the crime than it does about the law.
Progressives are the worst group of blowhards on the planet and I'd rather attend a "Death To America" festival in downtown Iran than listen to progressives attack everything and anyone who happens to contradict their version of reality. Progressive are the epitome of "throwing out the baby with the bath water" types who have no regard for the destruction and deaths that would occur if their grandiose solutions where to be implemented.
Describe to me an example where the Rule of Law and Constitution has been discarded. Hounding whistleblowers, surveillance, and criminal investigations are challenged everyday in courts around the country. Care to name one person who has ben convicted using illegally obtained evidence in a US court? Just because you disagree with something doesn't make it illegal. Amazon closed the Wikileaks account because they specifically broke the terms of the account contract. The government did not force them to drop them. The same thing for the other public companies where Wikileaks also violated their contract terms. The government didn't make those terms and the government did not enforce those terms either. The Wikileaks fiasco needed to be scrutinized by the government to determine if anything was illegal under current laws. There is only one person arrested over this and he was in a unique situation being an active member of the US military at the time of the leak and subject to military laws which are different than civilian law. I have not seen any sign of more arrests in the future. The government can huff and puff all they want but according to law they do not have any legal means to charge anyone else, especially foreign nationals. If the US was un-democratic or worse they would have had Assange and anyone else they wanted in custody in a blink of an eye, extradition treaties be damned, and then used national security perogatives to basically do anything they wanted with them.
Not entirely. The government does have the responsibilty to help subsidize some industries without necessarily becoming operationally involved. The government subsidizes industries for various reasons which includes making sure the country benefits from possible employeement opportunities and to ensure competitiveness with non-US based actors. However, this practice should be audited regulary to make sure the subsidies are still required. The oil company subsidies come immediately to mind. If there is one industry on the planet that is more than capable of funding itself it is the oil companies. It is insane that these companies come to Washington with their hands out proclaiming their inability to survive without help. The recent congressional hearings with the CEOS of the 5 largest oil companies is a national disgrace. The congressmen participating in that farce should be publicly ridiculed and removed from any position of power and prevented from running for any office in the future. You could not find a clearer example of politicians shamelessly working for the benefit of the companies instead of the people they were elected to represent.
Slashdot Mirror
What civil liberties have we lost? These attacks are just the electroinc version of vandalism.
The vast number of malware attacks today are Social Engineered.
But both actions are illegal and look at the sentence Mitnick got handed and this was back in time before the Internet was on any governments priority list. The laws and sentences have been increasing rapidly since then with little or no complaints from anyone except those who get caught.
The FBI might have limitations but the NSA certainly does not.
And exactly what purpose is that? Launching indiscriminate DDOS attacks are child's play since almost everyone is vulnerable to this type of attack. The only purpose they are serving is to give the government more reasons to start trying to take control of content and access. These guys are nothing when compared against those responsible for Stuxnet. Now that required some intelligence and also served a good purpose.
"Right now the malware apps are obvious" Pray tell how can you determine something is obviously malware unless you actually download it? And wouldn't that pretty much make everyone a moron by your definition?
Why sever when you can just tap and manipulate when necessary?
If you can't find a programming job today you are probably not looking very hard. There are literally thousands of jobs posted on job sites everyday. I made the mistake of posting my resume for 1 week last year and I still get 50 e-mails a week from people pitching open positions. Granted you might need to have more than 1 skill and you might have to work on something that you do not necessarily enjoy but at least an incoming paycheck can hold you over until you do find something you like.
China will not have any trouble dealing with Islam. They don't have to worry about being politically correct or have to deal with organizations like the ACLU, UN Human Rights Council, or CAIR. The Chinese government does not let outsiders dictate their internal policies. They routinely give the world community the finger and do anything they damn well please.
Yet when the US pursues policies aimed at maintaining social stability they get criticized for supporting tyrants and dictators like those in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Yemen, and a whole host of similar countries. How much social stability has the "Arab Spring" generated lately?
Ok this will be my last response. You dismissed my points throughout the exchange as government propaganda which they were clearly not. I made no great claims other than Iraq violated many of the cease fire terms from the first war. I did not say these violations justified the second war I just stated were undisputed facts and recognized as such in the UN deliberations leading up to the second war. The Kurds were most definitely Iraqi citizens by any legal standard and therefore they were Sadaam's people. If you want to go around and base your arguments on colonial border changes we could re-write the entire history of world conflict since every border on the planet has been drawn in the blood of conflict with some boarders changing hands more than a few times. The US did not supply the gas used against the Kurds. The US exported a small amount of common multi-use chemical compounds that could be used for a variety of agricultural, medical, and industrial applications. The accusation that the US supplied the weaponized gas is without merit. It was only stated that some of those chemical compounds COULD have been used but there was no proof for this accusation. It would be like blaming every cell phone manufacturer for supplying IED triggers to terrorist groups. The US government does some very questionable things but exporting chemical or biological weapons is not one of them. The US was also accused of supplying Iraq with weapons when they were at war with Iran but the US was only the source for 2% of the total amount of weapons supplied to Iraq. France, Germany, North Korea, and Russia supplied the bulk of the weapons for that conflict. And if you want to see real slaughter just look around the world right now. The US is slowly stepping down in the efforts to get involved in any more conflicts. They have taking a back seat in the Libya conflict and have refused to even consider getting militarily involved in Syria. The troops are leaving Iraq and Afghanistan in the very near future and after that happens you will really start seeing some real slaughter. The so called Arab spring will end up as just another cluster fuck that will end up creating more problems than they started with in the region. There is just so much hate embedded in the Arab and Muslim cultures that perpetuate the continued animosity and violence we see occurring every day. They fight amongst themselves more than they fight against outsiders. The only common goal they have is their unrelenting hate of Israel and the US. Once the US is removed from the equation they can really start pounding on one another. Tribal and religious based social structures are not a viable means of governing millions of people living in the area. I also have a bad feeling that some of those countries like Syria and Egypt along with the non-state terrorist groups are going to step over the line with Israel and ignite a full tilt war that Israel will use to take care of the Palestinian issue once and for all. I see no alternative at this point. Those wanting Israel to scarifice their state are wasting their time. The only way that conflict will end without wholesale destruction is for the Arab hate towards Israel to lessen and that is also never going to happen so that leaves violence as the only solution.
The points I mentioned about Iraq violating the terms of the cease fire agreement were recognized by every country involved with the first Iraq war. Every country in the UN acknowledge these violations when debating the second war but there were countries who still did not want to enforce the terms of the agreement for various reasons. Both France and Germany had economic reasons to avoid another conflict and did not want to disrupt those ties. There was ample proof available to all that Iraq was re-building their air defense and tracking stations, plying hide and seek with weapons inspectors, and using air power (helicopters) to attack civilians in the north so Sadaam could put down dissenters and re-claim his power over the state. "wait a minute, you cannot give a shit if human beings are gassed" But I thought the gassing of civilians was just lies and propaganda to build a case for war? Are you now saying it did happen? You can't have it both ways. I included my statement about not caring just to see how you would respond and you didn't let me down.
.NET is also useful for creating wrappers for C++ native code modules to simplify the middle tier development for programmers who are not efficient with C++. I am currently working for a large corporation that has about 2 developers out of about 500 with no practical experience with C++. I was a little shocked when I found that out.
I never claimed the US was doing the right thing. I listed a series of events and the consequences of those events as they related to the terms of the cease fire agreement from the first Iraq war. The fact is the Iraqi government did use chemical weapons against their Kurdish citizens. The evidence is undeniable and has been documented by human rights group . Personally I could give a shit whether they did or not but for people like you who cannot for one instance accept any fact that upsets your preconcieved notion of the truth I regard you with nothing but contempt.
By massive bombing runs I assume you are talking about the US and allied airforces taking out the anti-air capabilities that Iraq continued to try and bring online which violated the terms of the cease fire agreement. Or are you talking about enforcement of the no-fly zone so Sadaam could not finish off gassing the Kurds up north? This was also included in the terms of the cease fire and the Iraqi government kept testing the boundaries. Any massive starvation you can lay soley at the feet of the Iraqi government. There were billions of dollars worth of food and supplies delivered to that country by not only governments but private groups but the distribution was up to the government. Iraq was not setup unless you are talking about how the feckless international community lets tyrannical leaders operate any way they chose with no fear of consequences or reprisals. Iraq invaded Kuwait because they were convinced no one would lift a finger to do anything about it after the conquest was finished. The dreaded UN resolutions don't seem to be a very effective means of changing anyones behavior but at least it looks like someone is doing something. I think the second war was unecessary and foolish but no one asked my opinion at the time so I couldn't talk them out of it. However the first war was a different story and the worst thing about that war was the allies not finishing the job which would have made a second war uneccessary in the first place.
My comment simply stated that Iraq violated the terms of the cease fire agreed upon at the end if the 1st war. You can't just ignore this fact and pretend it didn't occur just because you disagree with the second war. According to the terms of the cease fire military actions would be continued if the terms were violated. When these types of agreements are not enforced you have countries who will invade others, get their asses kicked, and right before total defeat they will surrender and agree to cease fire terms so they can have time to re-group and re-arm and pick up where they left off at a later date.
If you are referring to what I think you are you the generation protesting the government in that time period are the same people that have been running the country for the past 20 years. Both in goverrnment and private sector. It seems like those noble righters of wrongs in that era have re-evaluated their positions.I guess after they put down the bong they started looking at things a little differently.
The criticism was directed at Wiki-leaks not the entire Internet. And besides a lot of bluster the government has not taking action against Wiki-leaks besides making loud and boisterous threats and denunciation's but no followup actions to back up their dismay. The only one being prosecuted is the one who released the information in the first place. So I don't see any hypocritical behavior in starting this project.
Don't worry the don't have snowballs chance in hell of ever being admitted. The only reason they have not been shown the door yet was because the US was supporting them but that is no longer the case.
Boy I riled up a nest of bugs with no reading comprehension skills and probably no other characteristics that would indicate intelligence. Lets review some of your pearls of insight. The kids taking nude pictures were distributing them to their classmates. I never said they should be prosecuted as if they were out selling children for sexual pleasure. I never said anything about charging them as adults or minors. I never said the picture taking episode was heinous. I only said it would be a situation that could fall under child pornography statutes and it was dishonest to leave this detail out of the example given. "When did he propose that we should scrap all laws and let murderers go free?" I never said anything like this. Are you sure you were reading what I wrote? Condemnation does not mean destroying anything. I can see where you got confused since the word condemnation is sometimes used in executions but condemning also means spouting negative appellations against an object or idea to draw attention and suggest a remedy. But here is the thing. If you condemn something you should not use misleading statements such as people getting arrested for merely looking at a comic book with no mention that it wasn't just a normal comic book but one with questionable imagery that rises to the level of child pornography. Purposely using inaccurate and misleading statements like this revels nothing but unthinking zealousness disguised as truth . Using lies of omission, regurgitating patently flawed reasoning, repeating falsehoods, on purpose or in ignorance over and over to the point where the actual facts have all been forgotten and you are left with nothing but animosity. Attacking those who do not share your simplistic world view also spreads like a virus all over the world which then leads people in this situation to actually believe people were being arrested for owning comic books. On top of everything you then go on to attack things I never said or implied. I clearly admitted there were unjust laws on the books and that there is a system in place to deal with it. It is also a system that is continually tested and modified over time. But of course that would be meaningless to you because you probably think history started when you were born 10 years ago. It is not a perfect system nor will it ever be 100% perfect but name something that is. Your other mutterings and insults touch on a subject that I also never commented on or specified an opinion on whether those involved in the incident should be charged as an adult or minor. "But apparently for idiots like you, the laws are an end to themselves and cannot be questioned" I never said anything at all about not questioning laws. I did specifically say that there are unjust or misguided laws that should be removed or modified. You might want to brush up on your reading comprehension abilities. I hear they really push that skill starting in the 6th grade so it will only be a few more months till you can take advantage if this. "But world is probably better off with nutcases like you locked up in mental asylums rather than kids being jailed." This beauty does nothing but shine the spotlight on your immaturity and no doubt feeds you self righteousness illusion you walk around with.
OK the examples you referenced all fall under child pornography statutes. Which is a little more involved than just "possessing a comic book" or stating "Teenagers have been arrested for photographing themselves" while leaving out the small detail that the pictures were of naked minors in your argument. You started this thread off bitching about unjust laws while purposely slanting your accusations and leaving out some pretty important details and contextual information to make your argument. And the story about the Orchids is disturbing but anecdotal evidence does not render the entire system of laws invalid or unjust. And you were condemning the system using misleading descriptions and 1 example of an unjust prosecution based on the seriousness of the offense. There are all kinds of laws that should be removed entirely or at least updated to reflect the values and morals of an ever changing society. But there are legal remedies in place that allow the accused of any crime to challenge the charges in leveled against them and there have been a lot of instances where a law was invalidated by the court system. The legislative and judicial branches of government are designed just for situations like this. No system of law is perfect and there will always be cases of injustice but that is no reason to condemn the entire system.
OK ,so since you know these kids there is nothing wrong with them breaking the law for a good cause? Apply that logic to governments free wheeling wire tapping. After all it's for a good cause. And I never claimed they were a danger to free society. They are a danger because their actions give those in power with more reasons to lock down the Internet to the point of uselessness.
What the hell does this mean "go to prison for possession of certain comic books" . Explain how you came to this conclusion. Please include the context of accusation and all the other facts you have conveniently ignored. Again I think you are leaving out a couple of facts with this beauty "Teenagers have been arrested for photographing themselves". And "intent" is a key provision in many laws. Laws like killing someone. The intent can decide whether the person is convicted of murder or manslaughter which have clear differences in sentencing guidelines. This "people who break the law should not have any doubt as to whether or not what they are doing is illegal" assertion says more about idiots committing the crime than it does about the law.
Progressives are the worst group of blowhards on the planet and I'd rather attend a "Death To America" festival in downtown Iran than listen to progressives attack everything and anyone who happens to contradict their version of reality. Progressive are the epitome of "throwing out the baby with the bath water" types who have no regard for the destruction and deaths that would occur if their grandiose solutions where to be implemented. Describe to me an example where the Rule of Law and Constitution has been discarded. Hounding whistleblowers, surveillance, and criminal investigations are challenged everyday in courts around the country. Care to name one person who has ben convicted using illegally obtained evidence in a US court? Just because you disagree with something doesn't make it illegal. Amazon closed the Wikileaks account because they specifically broke the terms of the account contract. The government did not force them to drop them. The same thing for the other public companies where Wikileaks also violated their contract terms. The government didn't make those terms and the government did not enforce those terms either. The Wikileaks fiasco needed to be scrutinized by the government to determine if anything was illegal under current laws. There is only one person arrested over this and he was in a unique situation being an active member of the US military at the time of the leak and subject to military laws which are different than civilian law. I have not seen any sign of more arrests in the future. The government can huff and puff all they want but according to law they do not have any legal means to charge anyone else, especially foreign nationals. If the US was un-democratic or worse they would have had Assange and anyone else they wanted in custody in a blink of an eye, extradition treaties be damned, and then used national security perogatives to basically do anything they wanted with them.
Not entirely. The government does have the responsibilty to help subsidize some industries without necessarily becoming operationally involved. The government subsidizes industries for various reasons which includes making sure the country benefits from possible employeement opportunities and to ensure competitiveness with non-US based actors. However, this practice should be audited regulary to make sure the subsidies are still required. The oil company subsidies come immediately to mind. If there is one industry on the planet that is more than capable of funding itself it is the oil companies. It is insane that these companies come to Washington with their hands out proclaiming their inability to survive without help. The recent congressional hearings with the CEOS of the 5 largest oil companies is a national disgrace. The congressmen participating in that farce should be publicly ridiculed and removed from any position of power and prevented from running for any office in the future. You could not find a clearer example of politicians shamelessly working for the benefit of the companies instead of the people they were elected to represent.