The fact you think the US legal system is fine and dandy means you really don't know what you're talking about. It's a cruel joke.
Compared to what other system? Russian courts? Mexico? Does anybody out there look around and compare us with other countries before they complain about our systems?
So you define a fair trial how? He gets found not guilty? I don't think so.
A fair trial would result in his conviction. Snowden knew what he was doing and what the punishments could be for it. Yet, you want to start by claiming he wouldn't have a fair trial because you don't think the outcome is fair? I think you are the one trying to pervert the legal system....
Snowden knew before he did it what penalty was possible.
Now you want to claim "No fair!" if he is convicted? Sorry, no sale. Clearly he broke the law, he did it knowingly. Now you can judge his motives or the morality of what he did differently than I do, but if his cause really is just and his actions really are moral the problem is that the law is wrong. Real rebels are willing to accept the consequences to bring to light their cause and argue for the law to be changed. People who run away and start complaining about how it isn't fair are not really rebels, but hooligans and criminals.
The fly in your ointment here is that like it or not our legal system is fair, especially in criminal cases. The bias in our country favors the accused and we let more guilty people walk than convict the innocent. But in this case, there is no real question. He broke the law, everybody knows it.
So this "he won't get a fair trial" is just garbage. Of course he will get a fair trial, especially given the public attention this case would get. Where I think the verdict would be a foregone conclusion that doesn't mean the trial wouldn't be fair, although folks like you would wrongly claim it was.
So I'm saying Snowden needs to come home and face the music for his actions, if for no other reason than it would advance "the cause" he claims was his motivation. He knew when he did this that his actions where criminal and could lead to punishment up to death, yet he decided to take the risk for what he thought was right. Well, has he changed his mind now or is he just a coward?
There is ZERO evidence that a trial would not be fair. Like it or not, our criminal legal system works just fine and generally produces the right results. If anything, our system favors the accused and we let a lot more people walk who did it than punish those who didn't. Snowden would be fairly tried.
This is just payment for all the secrets he has given them we dont know about. Dragging it out this way looks less suspicious.
damned traitor.
The Government of the United States of America is the only traitor in this saga.
Not really. Snowden's leaking aside, it's obvious to me he's being used as a willing propaganda tool of the Russians now. Could that be traitorous? One could argue it is.
Seriously? I'm betting Snowden didn't leak anything the Russians didn't already know or strongly suspect in the first place. He's been there over a year now so I'm betting *any* deficiencies in what they knew that Snowden could clear up have been dealt with.
Snowden's only value now is as a propaganda tool for the Russians.. They can keep poking the US in the eye over their surveillance programs by trotting Snowden out to make some inane statements or ask Putin scripted questions and basically stir up anti-US sentiment using the media coverage.
You don't go around Russia calling attention to the government's abuses, citizen or not. You manage to embarrass Putin in the media and you are in *serious* trouble. You do remember the "girls band" members that tried to desecrate the church right? Russia is not kind to it's detractors.
The Russians are not interested in Snowden for "information". Likely they already had any information that Snowden could have provided them, even before he leaked anything.
The Russian interest in Snowden is about propaganda. Snowden is tolerated because he is useful to gain media attention when they want/need too.
If we don't like the situation, nothing is stopping Obama from offering him a deal.
Oh yes there is. Snowden wouldn't take a deal, Putin wouldn't allow it and Obama would never offer it. Snowden won't because he is a coward and is unwilling to come home and face the music in support of his supposed "cause". Putin won't allow it because Snowden is still useful for taking jabs at the US, using Snowden to bludgeon Obama over a domestic political hot potato. Obama won't willingly take the domestic political hit of offering Snowden anything and having to weather the firestorm it would create from both his base and the right and basically have the potato explode in his own hands.
None of the major actors here are motivated to change the situation, so we are in a holding pattern until something changes. Maybe after the mid-terms things will change with Obama, but I'm guessing that we are looking out past the 2016 election before we see any political changes here in the USA. I'm not familiar with the election calendar in Russia, but unless something major happens in that country Putin is a shoe-in for the next decade so I don't expect any changes on that front. Snowden's perspective is the least important of them all. I'm guessing he will have no choice once Putin and the US get tired of playing with the pawn.
This would be a good time to use jury nullification, if the opportunity presents itself.
Which leads to the question, Why doesn't Snowden serve his cause and get his butt home to the USA and willingly stand trial? If his motive is to expose the misdeeds of his employer, this would serve his purpose much better than getting buried in Russia to be used as a pawn by a government with NO boundaries, legal, moral or otherwise.
IMHO, he's not really interested in the "cause" except that it brings him fame and feeds his ego. He's all about Snowden and nobody else and cooked up this media angle to justify his self importance. In reality he is a coward who dropped and ran when the going got tough.
He can... Of course, if he moves to a place where the USA can extradite him the handcuffs will limit his movements. But that's the breaks when you violate a contract with the US government. Right now apparently he wants to live in Russia and Putin doesn't mind keeping him so he can keep jabbing the USA in a sore spot. Eventually, that will change.
Look, It doesn't matter if what he did was right or wrong morally, he violated his contract with the government and must answer for that, and unless he dies before the US gets their hands on him, he will. If you believe what he did is right, then like rebels of the past who broke the laws of the day he needs to be ready to stand up and face the consequences. and make his case to further the cause. IMHO, The longer he waits, the more he proves that he's really not interested in the cause, just in himself and getting his 15 min of fame. I'll bet he is pretty unhappy and unfulfilled being used as a pawn by Putin.
Surprised there wasn't a CHL holder in attendance in Texas, not that I'd whip out the firearm with a police officer in the room taking care of it.
Armed robbery is a really bad idea in Texas, there are way to many firearms out there being carried by CHL holders who are usually well trained and ready to make it into an ATTEMPTED robbery.
Have you ever considered that all the discussions in the PTA meetings might have at least SOME truth? After all, a lot of people seem to think the same way.
The whole thing is a huge waste anyway. But, given they have totally wrecked their 'hard" currency, why not do it virtually?
This is NOT a good example of a digital currency experiment because it is certain to fail, just like their current script. What matters is that they get out of default and I don't see that happening anytime soon. Launching a virtual currency isn't going to change this.
you don't get to be above the law when you're tasked to enforce it. Especially when you're tasked to enforce it.
Haven't had the privilege of meeting the "I'm the police, I have the power" officers in your local town yet eh? They are EVERY WHERE and they consider themselves above the law. I've had to interact with some of them a number of times on my front porch. I had an officer tell me about the curfew law in my town once and how he would enforce it, problem was, the law wasn't even close to what he was saying. I told him what the law was, he choose to press the issue so I shut up and took it up with the Chief of Police in private later. These guys with have attitudes and a little authority which has gone to their head and they don't mind using the "Police Grease" (the deference they get in public for wearing the uniform and side arm) to their personal gain.
Don't get me wrong, not all officers are this way. Many are selfless public servants who get paid a pittance to risk their lives every day. My hat goes off to all of them who are doing the job, regardless of their ego status. Just don't fool yourself, some of them have some serious ego issues.
No, we need "censorship". There are just some thing which legally must be limited in any society, even a free one like ours. You cannot legally incite riots, yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater and stuff like that.
You do understand the natural progression of this kind of thing right? You and I know that production of kiddie porn is wrong, it obviously harms children, emotionally, and sometimes physically. Most people find this to be unacceptable and recoil when they are confronted with it. It's obvious right? Not everybody thinks so, and there are those who start where you and I are but end up mixed up in this kind of thing. How does that happen?
It happens because people keep desensitizing themselves to the shock, a little bit at a time. First it's just viewing the images, perhaps by mistake. Shock! It happens again, a little less shock but interest too. Eventually the shock is gone from viewing images, but the interest remains. Collections grow and the local kids start looking interesting, but the thought shocks.... Where does this end up?
Now I'm not saying that everybody is going to not be able to stop the progression, most will. But there are a fraction that won't. These are the people that must be found and stopped, for the children. Problem is you don't know by looking who is in the fraction who will eventually harm kids, so you need to take a very tough stance with all of them for two reasons. 1. You might stop the progression in somebody who otherwise would continue by getting them to realize they have a problem and seek help.. 2. For the abuse you may prevent (for the children).
I'd add the distribution folks added to someplace in between "locked away for life to be Bubba's princess" and "go see a shrink" but I'm not going to argue with your approach. In any case, this stuff needs to be dealt with in a pretty harsh way and get those who are disposed to harm children off the streets. To me that means that we need to be taking a close look at the dude (or dudete) caught downloading this stuff, because if you are getting your jollies from it, it's a short distance from looking to doing, and doing to taking pictures.
I was thinking that taking it apart followed by sanding off the oxide layer from the platters would be good enough, but if you have a drill press, to each their own.
Oh no they don't destroy everything. They have tax records going back for a decade or more from both what you, your employer, and financial institutions reported and trust me they can pull these records out of the hat when it suits their purpose. (Such as when they decide to audit you.)
Hey, pedophiles have serious mental issues and deserve a special place in prison . The people who take the pictures are a special kind of vile, and the people who distribute this stuff enable the takers. and the nut cases that pay for it have a SERIOUS problem and need help and monitoring of their sickness. In most states it is *required* that you report the existence of any of this kind of stuff because of the harm that is caused to the children.
So in this case, it IS for the children and it's hard to argue with the logic.
> they didn't exist prior to his fleeing the USA and he couldn't possibly have accessed them.
Why couldn't of he of created a back door to later access the system?
Because the system we are talking about is not connected to anything but itself. It's like having a "back door" that leads into a totally enclosed prison exercise yard made of reenforced concrete 2 feet think from the cell block and trying to break into the prison from outside the fence using the back door. Your biggest problem is going to be getting into the exercise yard.
Snowden has no way to access the system anymore and being physically in Russia pretty much insures that.
Little known fact electricity running through wires degrades the wires and the protective jacket on them.
This is not about the wiring in your house or the insulation on it. This was about the power grid, which uses very few insulated wires. Most of the power grid consists of aluminum and steel bare wires hanging from poles which is extremely durable and not degraded by the current passing though it.
Corrosion is not generally a big issue either, except in coastal areas or places where there is a lot of moisture. But like all things, the grid requires maintenance. You need to replace wooden poles, insulators, and transformers repair broken wires and such regularly. This should come as no surprise.
Just as a reference point.. My family used to own a farm which was serviced by a rural electric company. We where the last house on the branch that ran about 3 miles from the main highway. We moved into that house nearly 40 years ago and the wires which are there now, are EXACTLY the same ones that where there when we moved in. I'm told that the house had electric power prior to the previous owner's buying it and that was 10 years before we owned it, so it's pretty much certain that the wires are 50 years or more old and still going strong today (as are most of the poles that hold them up), which tells me they are very likely to be the original wires placed there way back with the rural electric push was on in the 50's.
I think you are making a mountain out of a mole hill here.. Wires don't really wear out... The insulation might, but the wires don't.
Slashdot Mirror
The fact you think the US legal system is fine and dandy means you really don't know what you're talking about. It's a cruel joke.
Compared to what other system? Russian courts? Mexico? Does anybody out there look around and compare us with other countries before they complain about our systems?
So you define a fair trial how? He gets found not guilty? I don't think so.
A fair trial would result in his conviction. Snowden knew what he was doing and what the punishments could be for it. Yet, you want to start by claiming he wouldn't have a fair trial because you don't think the outcome is fair? I think you are the one trying to pervert the legal system....
Snowden knew before he did it what penalty was possible.
Now you want to claim "No fair!" if he is convicted? Sorry, no sale. Clearly he broke the law, he did it knowingly. Now you can judge his motives or the morality of what he did differently than I do, but if his cause really is just and his actions really are moral the problem is that the law is wrong. Real rebels are willing to accept the consequences to bring to light their cause and argue for the law to be changed. People who run away and start complaining about how it isn't fair are not really rebels, but hooligans and criminals.
The fly in your ointment here is that like it or not our legal system is fair, especially in criminal cases. The bias in our country favors the accused and we let more guilty people walk than convict the innocent. But in this case, there is no real question. He broke the law, everybody knows it.
So this "he won't get a fair trial" is just garbage. Of course he will get a fair trial, especially given the public attention this case would get. Where I think the verdict would be a foregone conclusion that doesn't mean the trial wouldn't be fair, although folks like you would wrongly claim it was.
So I'm saying Snowden needs to come home and face the music for his actions, if for no other reason than it would advance "the cause" he claims was his motivation. He knew when he did this that his actions where criminal and could lead to punishment up to death, yet he decided to take the risk for what he thought was right. Well, has he changed his mind now or is he just a coward?
There is ZERO evidence that a trial would not be fair. Like it or not, our criminal legal system works just fine and generally produces the right results. If anything, our system favors the accused and we let a lot more people walk who did it than punish those who didn't. Snowden would be fairly tried.
This is just payment for all the secrets he has given them we dont know about. Dragging it out this way looks less suspicious.
damned traitor.
The Government of the United States of America is the only traitor in this saga.
Not really. Snowden's leaking aside, it's obvious to me he's being used as a willing propaganda tool of the Russians now. Could that be traitorous? One could argue it is.
Seriously? I'm betting Snowden didn't leak anything the Russians didn't already know or strongly suspect in the first place. He's been there over a year now so I'm betting *any* deficiencies in what they knew that Snowden could clear up have been dealt with.
Snowden's only value now is as a propaganda tool for the Russians.. They can keep poking the US in the eye over their surveillance programs by trotting Snowden out to make some inane statements or ask Putin scripted questions and basically stir up anti-US sentiment using the media coverage.
You don't go around Russia calling attention to the government's abuses, citizen or not. You manage to embarrass Putin in the media and you are in *serious* trouble. You do remember the "girls band" members that tried to desecrate the church right? Russia is not kind to it's detractors.
The Russians are not interested in Snowden for "information". Likely they already had any information that Snowden could have provided them, even before he leaked anything.
The Russian interest in Snowden is about propaganda. Snowden is tolerated because he is useful to gain media attention when they want/need too.
If we don't like the situation, nothing is stopping Obama from offering him a deal.
Oh yes there is. Snowden wouldn't take a deal, Putin wouldn't allow it and Obama would never offer it. Snowden won't because he is a coward and is unwilling to come home and face the music in support of his supposed "cause". Putin won't allow it because Snowden is still useful for taking jabs at the US, using Snowden to bludgeon Obama over a domestic political hot potato. Obama won't willingly take the domestic political hit of offering Snowden anything and having to weather the firestorm it would create from both his base and the right and basically have the potato explode in his own hands.
None of the major actors here are motivated to change the situation, so we are in a holding pattern until something changes. Maybe after the mid-terms things will change with Obama, but I'm guessing that we are looking out past the 2016 election before we see any political changes here in the USA. I'm not familiar with the election calendar in Russia, but unless something major happens in that country Putin is a shoe-in for the next decade so I don't expect any changes on that front. Snowden's perspective is the least important of them all. I'm guessing he will have no choice once Putin and the US get tired of playing with the pawn.
Not doing that makes a mockery of our laws.
Our laws make a mockery of themselves.
This would be a good time to use jury nullification, if the opportunity presents itself.
Which leads to the question, Why doesn't Snowden serve his cause and get his butt home to the USA and willingly stand trial? If his motive is to expose the misdeeds of his employer, this would serve his purpose much better than getting buried in Russia to be used as a pawn by a government with NO boundaries, legal, moral or otherwise.
IMHO, he's not really interested in the "cause" except that it brings him fame and feeds his ego. He's all about Snowden and nobody else and cooked up this media angle to justify his self importance. In reality he is a coward who dropped and ran when the going got tough.
He should be able to live wherever he wants!
He can... Of course, if he moves to a place where the USA can extradite him the handcuffs will limit his movements. But that's the breaks when you violate a contract with the US government. Right now apparently he wants to live in Russia and Putin doesn't mind keeping him so he can keep jabbing the USA in a sore spot. Eventually, that will change.
Look, It doesn't matter if what he did was right or wrong morally, he violated his contract with the government and must answer for that, and unless he dies before the US gets their hands on him, he will. If you believe what he did is right, then like rebels of the past who broke the laws of the day he needs to be ready to stand up and face the consequences. and make his case to further the cause. IMHO, The longer he waits, the more he proves that he's really not interested in the cause, just in himself and getting his 15 min of fame. I'll bet he is pretty unhappy and unfulfilled being used as a pawn by Putin.
Surprised there wasn't a CHL holder in attendance in Texas, not that I'd whip out the firearm with a police officer in the room taking care of it.
Armed robbery is a really bad idea in Texas, there are way to many firearms out there being carried by CHL holders who are usually well trained and ready to make it into an ATTEMPTED robbery.
Have you ever considered that all the discussions in the PTA meetings might have at least SOME truth? After all, a lot of people seem to think the same way.
There I go trolling myself...
The whole thing is a huge waste anyway. But, given they have totally wrecked their 'hard" currency, why not do it virtually?
This is NOT a good example of a digital currency experiment because it is certain to fail, just like their current script. What matters is that they get out of default and I don't see that happening anytime soon. Launching a virtual currency isn't going to change this.
you don't get to be above the law when you're tasked to enforce it. Especially when you're tasked to enforce it.
Haven't had the privilege of meeting the "I'm the police, I have the power" officers in your local town yet eh? They are EVERY WHERE and they consider themselves above the law. I've had to interact with some of them a number of times on my front porch. I had an officer tell me about the curfew law in my town once and how he would enforce it, problem was, the law wasn't even close to what he was saying. I told him what the law was, he choose to press the issue so I shut up and took it up with the Chief of Police in private later. These guys with have attitudes and a little authority which has gone to their head and they don't mind using the "Police Grease" (the deference they get in public for wearing the uniform and side arm) to their personal gain.
Don't get me wrong, not all officers are this way. Many are selfless public servants who get paid a pittance to risk their lives every day. My hat goes off to all of them who are doing the job, regardless of their ego status. Just don't fool yourself, some of them have some serious ego issues.
The last thing we need is censorship.
No, we need "censorship". There are just some thing which legally must be limited in any society, even a free one like ours. You cannot legally incite riots, yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater and stuff like that.
You do understand the natural progression of this kind of thing right? You and I know that production of kiddie porn is wrong, it obviously harms children, emotionally, and sometimes physically. Most people find this to be unacceptable and recoil when they are confronted with it. It's obvious right? Not everybody thinks so, and there are those who start where you and I are but end up mixed up in this kind of thing. How does that happen?
It happens because people keep desensitizing themselves to the shock, a little bit at a time. First it's just viewing the images, perhaps by mistake. Shock! It happens again, a little less shock but interest too. Eventually the shock is gone from viewing images, but the interest remains. Collections grow and the local kids start looking interesting, but the thought shocks.... Where does this end up?
Now I'm not saying that everybody is going to not be able to stop the progression, most will. But there are a fraction that won't. These are the people that must be found and stopped, for the children. Problem is you don't know by looking who is in the fraction who will eventually harm kids, so you need to take a very tough stance with all of them for two reasons. 1. You might stop the progression in somebody who otherwise would continue by getting them to realize they have a problem and seek help.. 2. For the abuse you may prevent (for the children).
I'd add the distribution folks added to someplace in between "locked away for life to be Bubba's princess" and "go see a shrink" but I'm not going to argue with your approach. In any case, this stuff needs to be dealt with in a pretty harsh way and get those who are disposed to harm children off the streets. To me that means that we need to be taking a close look at the dude (or dudete) caught downloading this stuff, because if you are getting your jollies from it, it's a short distance from looking to doing, and doing to taking pictures.
Drill press. 'nuf said.
I was thinking that taking it apart followed by sanding off the oxide layer from the platters would be good enough, but if you have a drill press, to each their own.
So much for taking decommissioned drives home and putting them into the NAS to store my video archives....
(No, I'm not serious about taking stuff home from work... Never a good idea, even out of the trash can...)
Contract with them. They destroy everything.
Oh no they don't destroy everything. They have tax records going back for a decade or more from both what you, your employer, and financial institutions reported and trust me they can pull these records out of the hat when it suits their purpose. (Such as when they decide to audit you.)
Hey, pedophiles have serious mental issues and deserve a special place in prison . The people who take the pictures are a special kind of vile, and the people who distribute this stuff enable the takers. and the nut cases that pay for it have a SERIOUS problem and need help and monitoring of their sickness. In most states it is *required* that you report the existence of any of this kind of stuff because of the harm that is caused to the children.
So in this case, it IS for the children and it's hard to argue with the logic.
> they didn't exist prior to his fleeing the USA and he couldn't possibly have accessed them. Why couldn't of he of created a back door to later access the system?
Because the system we are talking about is not connected to anything but itself. It's like having a "back door" that leads into a totally enclosed prison exercise yard made of reenforced concrete 2 feet think from the cell block and trying to break into the prison from outside the fence using the back door. Your biggest problem is going to be getting into the exercise yard.
Snowden has no way to access the system anymore and being physically in Russia pretty much insures that.
Little known fact electricity running through wires degrades the wires and the protective jacket on them.
This is not about the wiring in your house or the insulation on it. This was about the power grid, which uses very few insulated wires. Most of the power grid consists of aluminum and steel bare wires hanging from poles which is extremely durable and not degraded by the current passing though it.
Corrosion is not generally a big issue either, except in coastal areas or places where there is a lot of moisture. But like all things, the grid requires maintenance. You need to replace wooden poles, insulators, and transformers repair broken wires and such regularly. This should come as no surprise.
Just as a reference point.. My family used to own a farm which was serviced by a rural electric company. We where the last house on the branch that ran about 3 miles from the main highway. We moved into that house nearly 40 years ago and the wires which are there now, are EXACTLY the same ones that where there when we moved in. I'm told that the house had electric power prior to the previous owner's buying it and that was 10 years before we owned it, so it's pretty much certain that the wires are 50 years or more old and still going strong today (as are most of the poles that hold them up), which tells me they are very likely to be the original wires placed there way back with the rural electric push was on in the 50's.
I think you are making a mountain out of a mole hill here.. Wires don't really wear out... The insulation might, but the wires don't.