A Wall Street Journal blog points out that even if this program's goals are met, we will be worse off by 2030 in terms of jet kerosene released into the atmosphere, assuming that the rapid growth in the aviation sector continues apace. IOW, idiots are still allowed to post on the internet.
If 30% of the demand is met from biomass, that's *still* 30% less kerosene used and released into the atmosphere. What an idiot.
There is a huge difference between getting mad at someone and telling them to go kill themselves and purposefully manipulating the feelings of a 3-year old into actually committing the act.
EVERY action has consequences. If you're going to be a fucked-up bitch to a 13 year-old, you should face the consequences.
"Sorry I blew your face off, I was only joking!"
What a messed-up world we live in when there are ZERO consequences. This woman purposefully and methodically TORTURED Megan. Emotional torture is torture too.
If I kidnap someone and torture them with the intent to release them, but they die under torture, am I not still guilty of murder?
That's not true. A law which states "do not murder" protects exactly no one and nothing. The purpose of a specifc law is to deter people from taking a specific action.
A law which states "commit murder and face jail time" presumes to deter people from committing murder. Such laws have not prevented any murder committed in the past, nor will it prevent all murder from this day forward.
The punishment is an integral part of the law. It is the deterrence. If the punishment is not seen as a consequence worse than the perceived benefits of the action, the action is not prevented.
By necessity, the punishment must be worse than the crime in order to be a deterrence. Why do you think corporations flout laws all the time? Because the fines imposed are dwarfed by the profits made.
There is *NO* requirement for any given person to believe a person is innocent of anything unless evidence is presented. The only requirement is that a Jury not convict without evidence. They may all believe he is guilty, but they must not convict without evidence. If they do, any competent defense attorney *will* get the conviction overturned in appeals.
Causing someone to kill themselves is pretty much murder. I'm pretty sure that if I herd you to the edge of a roof on a 10-story building and you fall off, that I'll be charged with murder.
If Drew is guilty of creating the MySpace account, she *should* be punished by being tortured to death in front of her relatives. Of course the US Injustice System is too scared to do the right thing.
The name is rather more appropriate than it might seem at first glance when you realize the purpose of the bill is to identify and remove any and all patriots.
Voting today is playing right into the hands of the traitors who have abducted the US Federal Government. They *want* you to vote because they know it changes absolutely *NOTHING*. It will NEVER matter who you vote for, and voting makes it feel like your fault for whatever happens. You feel *involved*.
Dealing with evil is dealing with evil, even if the act you perform is not evil in and of its self. Voting in a Federal election is supporting pure evil.
That analogy is completely flawed. People have been renting videos for decades. People are well aware that when they stop paying, the video goes away. I really doubt there are any Netflix subscribers who believe that Netflix are selling the movies to them.
Any elected official who places the party ahead of the people he supposedly represents deserves death. The fact that it's tolerated, even expected, by the people is a travesty. As Ben Franklin might have said, the citizens of the United States truly deserve no freedom.
because the Senate rules force third party and independent members to pick one or the other And this is exactly why every Democrat and every Republican should be killed in as gruesome a way as possible. The two-party system is a complete abomination and it is impossible to get rid of it without bloodshed. The very people who can change it never will. There is no greater evil in this world.
I don't care about the legality nearly as much as I care about the morality. I believe that no moral person could believe that spying on innocent people is in any way correct or responsible.
There is no difference between what Bush wants and what the KGB did in the USSR. It was legal for the KGB to spy on their citizens and perfectly legal for people to disappear or to be killed by KGB agents. Are you really going to argue that it's perfectly OK to head in EXACTLY the same direction because it's "legal"?
Anyone who agrees with McCarthy is a traitor to the human race and aught to be removed from it forever.
Retaining control of the usage
on
Who Owns Software?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Retaining control of software usage is semantically identical to a book publisher claiming that using a book they published as a prop for an uneven table leg is violating copyright.
If a precedent is set to this effect, I would gladly advocate violating the "rights" of everyone involved in this decision. I really cannot understand why people like this are tolerated. Deport them. Imprison them. Kill them. But get rid of them.
I have no problem with granting immunity to the Telecom operators. But only if the actual criminals (Bush and his administration) are immediately executed for treason.
Slashdot Mirror
You're on slashdot. Of course you're against human reproduction! :)
So basically team sports are bad?
Ah, you must be a Bush supporter. Democracy is great! As long as you vote my way.
Nader
If 30% of the demand is met from biomass, that's *still* 30% less kerosene used and released into the atmosphere. What an idiot.
There is a huge difference between getting mad at someone and telling them to go kill themselves and purposefully manipulating the feelings of a 3-year old into actually committing the act.
EVERY action has consequences. If you're going to be a fucked-up bitch to a 13 year-old, you should face the consequences.
"Sorry I blew your face off, I was only joking!"
What a messed-up world we live in when there are ZERO consequences. This woman purposefully and methodically TORTURED Megan. Emotional torture is torture too.
If I kidnap someone and torture them with the intent to release them, but they die under torture, am I not still guilty of murder?
That's not true. A law which states "do not murder" protects exactly no one and nothing. The purpose of a specifc law is to deter people from taking a specific action.
A law which states "commit murder and face jail time" presumes to deter people from committing murder. Such laws have not prevented any murder committed in the past, nor will it prevent all murder from this day forward.
The punishment is an integral part of the law. It is the deterrence. If the punishment is not seen as a consequence worse than the perceived benefits of the action, the action is not prevented.
By necessity, the punishment must be worse than the crime in order to be a deterrence. Why do you think corporations flout laws all the time? Because the fines imposed are dwarfed by the profits made.
If she was responsible for the MySpace page, she deserves far worse than death.
She tortured a 13 year old to death.
There is no justice in this country.
There is *NO* requirement for any given person to believe a person is innocent of anything unless evidence is presented. The only requirement is that a Jury not convict without evidence. They may all believe he is guilty, but they must not convict without evidence. If they do, any competent defense attorney *will* get the conviction overturned in appeals.
Causing someone to kill themselves is pretty much murder. I'm pretty sure that if I herd you to the edge of a roof on a 10-story building and you fall off, that I'll be charged with murder.
If Drew is guilty of creating the MySpace account, she *should* be punished by being tortured to death in front of her relatives. Of course the US Injustice System is too scared to do the right thing.
What Syrian territory has Israel invaded that was not done during a war started by Syria?
You make it seem like organizing assassination attempts against Assad should be a crime.
Some Debian guy removed the seed code so Red Hat would be slower!
The US hasn't been threatened since Pearl Harbor. Every other conflict directly involving us was instigated by the US (at least in part).
The name is rather more appropriate than it might seem at first glance when you realize the purpose of the bill is to identify and remove any and all patriots.
Voting today is playing right into the hands of the traitors who have abducted the US Federal Government. They *want* you to vote because they know it changes absolutely *NOTHING*. It will NEVER matter who you vote for, and voting makes it feel like your fault for whatever happens. You feel *involved*.
Dealing with evil is dealing with evil, even if the act you perform is not evil in and of its self. Voting in a Federal election is supporting pure evil.
Politics IS "Terrorism" and crime.
But you were close.
That analogy is completely flawed. People have been renting videos for decades. People are well aware that when they stop paying, the video goes away. I really doubt there are any Netflix subscribers who believe that Netflix are selling the movies to them.
As I posted before, I am all for immunity for the Telcos. BUT, only if Bush and his Administration are executed for their crimes.
Any elected official who places the party ahead of the people he supposedly represents deserves death. The fact that it's tolerated, even expected, by the people is a travesty. As Ben Franklin might have said, the citizens of the United States truly deserve no freedom.
We certainly have no security.
I don't care about the legality nearly as much as I care about the morality. I believe that no moral person could believe that spying on innocent people is in any way correct or responsible.
There is no difference between what Bush wants and what the KGB did in the USSR. It was legal for the KGB to spy on their citizens and perfectly legal for people to disappear or to be killed by KGB agents. Are you really going to argue that it's perfectly OK to head in EXACTLY the same direction because it's "legal"?
Anyone who agrees with McCarthy is a traitor to the human race and aught to be removed from it forever.
Retaining control of software usage is semantically identical to a book publisher claiming that using a book they published as a prop for an uneven table leg is violating copyright.
If a precedent is set to this effect, I would gladly advocate violating the "rights" of everyone involved in this decision. I really cannot understand why people like this are tolerated. Deport them. Imprison them. Kill them. But get rid of them.
I have no problem with granting immunity to the Telecom operators. But only if the actual criminals (Bush and his administration) are immediately executed for treason.