And I'm equally sure that you're quite possibly a complete moron and that you're very definitely someone who's never, ever had to deal with actual security issues for important visitors of any sort, much less for heads of state and their families.
Oh dear, you couldn't fallen into that any deeper. I have Govt Security Clearance and actually worked on some security related things for the G20 involving exactly that.
But keep believing whatever it is makes you feel better about your beliefs...
Yes and the trick is understanding those reasons. The incumbents use the law to protect their position, and the new guy uses tries to get new laws to protect theirs. Don't pretend that somehow existing laws are intrinsically better than new ones.
There is no problem. But that doesn't stop the people in the business of selling controversy making it one.
Our role as readers is to learn what is noise and ignore it.
Well considering that only Americans could be dumb enough to think this kind of low level data is "such sensitive information"
Apparently, you don't understand anything about the physical security of dignitaries and top officials.
Travel plans, routes, and details about the stops of heads of state are always considered highly sensitive security information.
I'm sure it's considered highly sensitive by the people whose job it is to make sure as many things fall under their scope of work as possible, but is it really? I mean this has now been leaked and what is the impact? No injuries or deaths, nothing. Maybe we shouldn't just believe these things are special because the people who are paid to look after special things say they are.
Whoa, really, Trump is going to bring back slavery?! How much will they cost?! I'll buy two!
Not the 18th century model of slavery deary, the two tier economy which he has spent his entire life building.
And you won't be on the buying side of the equation.
No you don't. You don't really, you only say things like that because it sounds cute. If you really prefer true freedom than you would seek it in places like Syria and Afghanistan and Somalia where true freedom exists. No rules everyone does what they like and the person with the biggest weapons wins. That is true freedom.
What you want is the security blanket of prosperity and convenience of a regulated society but live in denial that it is regulations that give you this life that you prefer.
What I'm quite sure of is that people are fleeing many of these "gun free zones" we call dictatorships. You can cherry pick a few nations where the people are disarmed and live generally happy lives but if I show you a hellhole of a nation I can be fairly certain the people were disarmed by their government.
I know your probably American and your geography lessons consisted of out there be dragons, but we don't have to cherry pick. If you don't know what the OECD is Google it. It's like the major league of developed countries. And if you're a sports fan, you appreciate the anomaly of having the richest club in the comp continually finishing around the bottom of the league. Why is that?
America was built on legal and controlled immigration.
Which part? The one where the Europeans came and took everything off the natives? Or the part where the Africans were kidnapped from their homes and used as slaves? Or when the Mexicans and Chinese could come as they wish but were given no rights and forced to work like slaves? Is this the great America you think Trump is bringing back?
He probably wants to, but what makes you think you will be the slave owner instead of the slave?
When you need your house renovated you hire a person who subcontracts the parts of the job out and I think that Trump is better at subcontracting than Clinton.
That's nice, but based on what? He has zero experience in public office.
A more accurate analogy would be you need you house renovated, and the choice is someone who has been renovating houses for the last 25 years with mixed success, or the guy up the street who drives a taxi and tells you all the time how stupid everyone else is and he'd do it better?
European immigrants from compatible cultures, and some very compliant "model immigrant" east asians.
I actually laughed out loud when I read this. These cultures are only relatively 'compatible' now. When they first came over they were killing each other in the street at a much higher rate than the Jihadis are today. You comments show an obscene lack of knowledge about history.
Bullshit. The slaves didn't build crap
Have you ever heard of the First Transcontinental Railway? Jesus, stop digging....
That "Great America" was built by white northerners.
Yes, using slave labour, just like Donald Trump wants to bring back, except the slaves won't just be black this time around. Him and his mates will be rich and everyone else can die in a ditch.
There is no way whatsoever that this decision does not violate both the first and second amendments to our constitution. Anyone who would violate the highest law of the land for political gain does not bear listening to.
Isn't this the same argument that religious people use?
What if your bible is wrong?
What if the process is flawed?
It seems you are putting the cart before the horse. The law is supposed to make the country a better place. If the law and processes around making new laws prevents this, how is this good thing?
The Constitution was a good effort at getting it right for it's time, but it really is getting dated now. If you can't even entertain the idea that 200 years later we might have a better way of doing things then your are right, there is no point discussing things further.
The point, you missed it. Or do I need to use small words and explain it?
Words are generally how we communicate, or is this how you think discussions work?
The Free speech debate is well understood. We have some people who believe freedom is like the jungle, except as soon as the lion comes knocking on their door for a meal then true freedom isn't so good. If you accept that law of the jungle is not ideal for a 'good society' then you have to accept some limits somewhere.
Your comment "you don't create good society by banning speech" is provably false. The measurements for 'good society' (health education, social mobility, low crime, life expectancy etc) are higher in countries like Canada and Australia than the most 'free' country, the USA, specifically because these limits are better adjusted to promoting such qualities.
You would not read, nor would you believe, the full list.
Yet you will vote for Trump even though his list is longer?
You're damned and determined to vote for Hillary no matter what and nothing we say or type will change your mind.
I haven't made up my mind, so it's odd that you would make such a rash assumption. I was merely commenting that if that is all the bad things after 25 years then its not so bad.
Why then should we bother giving you evidence?
Because if you're trying to convince someone you are right, then telling them to figure it out themselves isn't a good way to go about it.
If you wanted to, you could find it all with a simple Google search.
I did that now just for you, and it came up with a bunch of baseless crackpot opinions. As I said, if after 25 years that's as bad as it gets then it isn't so bad. Trump has only been playing this game for a year and already accumulated more fuck-ups in that short time, what do you think that will do to the country after 4 more years? I'll give you a hint, it won't be great.
There's a lot of places on Earth you can go where the right of self defense does not exist. I suggest you move there because those of us that like the US Constitution as it is have no other place to go, thanks to petty tyrants like yourself.
Many of those countries have a higher quality of life and lower violence rates then the US. None of them rely on a 1st or 2nd amendment to achieve this. How does that fit with your ideology?
It is the entirety of the legal basis of the federal government's existence. When the government violates it, the government acts illegally.
And then what?
Your government acts illegally all the time, this doesn't seem to have any impact on anything. Maybe this constitution thing isn't as effective as you think and needs be replaced?
Let's get this clear, you don't create a good society by banning speech.
Of course you do, this is what the free speech zealots seem to not understand. Just like you can't run into a theatre screaming fire when there isn't one, or yell bomb at an airport, or masturbate in front of kids, there are some restrictions on personal expression that are critical to a functioning society.
Once you accept that some things have to be restricted you are in the same boat as the rest of us.
He doesn't appear to understand the meaning of the word free trade because support for free trade were words out of his mouth after talking about implementing tariffs, though.
He has no idea what he is doing. And just because you are upset with your plumber, you don't get your Real Estate agent to do the job because he has a nice smile.
Hillary may not be ideal, but at least she's a plumber.
Zuck seems to think that just because he's brilliant with computers
Is he? I only know him for one thing, and that is shit. Sure it's making tonnes of cash, but so is Bieber or the Kardashians, and they have no talent at anything (apart from maybe making money)
OMG Constitution!!!
Are you able to think for yourself, or is this constitution thing like a bible that must be obeyed? Because whenever there are any American domestic issues being discussed, it seems as though this constitution thing is like a bible that cannot be argued with.
Alas when it comes to the subject of guns, you don't often encounter honest or thoughtful people. They all have a single goal in mind and ignore all of the existing regulation on the books today.
You forgot to include Clinton as unstable and delusional.
She believes that on a landing in the Middle East that her plane took sniper fire.
She believes that a vast right wind conspiracy is working against her and Bill.
Tim S.
A women who has lived in the public eye for 25 years and that's the best you've got? If that's as bad as things get in 25 years then she sounds pretty reliable.
I don't agree with everything Trump wants to do It's pretty obvious to anyone that knows anything Trumps position is way better for the internet than turning it over to an international panel that can start censoring the hell out of it. The U.S. is already not prefect in that regard but they are WAY better than, say, Iran, Saudi Arabia, or North Korea... or China.
Yes good work. So out of the 200 odd countries in the world, the US is better than the bottom four. What an achievement.
If we want an example of how international panels work, maybe instead of Kim Jong-un, we compare with actual ones that actually exist? The UN for example is the leading light in human rights, much more than the US with their Gitmo and waterboarding ideology.
I think they would be less swayed by US special political interests or corporate lobbying than a UN style panel would.
Seriously, even Australia and Canada have gone down the insane rabbit hole of criminalizing basic free speech lately. So who else is left who even stands a CHANCE of preserving any semblance of free speech on the internet?
You need to stop reading the Internet and get out more. There more to life then not being allowed to call black people niggers. And I'm sure Canada an Australia are much better places for it.
but don't you want to let in 600,000 more refugees?
what's another 60,000 jihadis? Nothing bad will happen letting them in
What's funny is that the "Great America" that the Donald aspires to was built on immigrants and slavery. What Donald really means by making America great is do things that sound great to rednecks, but in practice throw the country down the toilet.
The solution to corrupt ineffectual government is not a sociopathic dictator, let's all agree on that.
Indeed. Nowhere else in the world has the robust guarantees of free speech that America has.
What guarantees are those then? You have your free speech, but you also have more people in prison per capita than pretty much every other country on earth, even the oppressive ones. You have free speech but you are more likely to be murdered either by crooks or cops. You have free speech but your political system is also one of the most corrupt in the western world
So yeah, on paper, America is "the land of the free", but that doesn't seem to have delivered real, actual, measurable freedom* for it's people.
*I'm not even sure how you measure "freedom"? For me personally it's about quality of life. If you are free like a bird only to be eaten in the nest by an apex predator, then that's isn't anything to aspire to. Things like infant mortality, access to health and education, social mobility, crime, corruption etc are measurable things that all contribute to quality of life, or ideals that people associate with "freedom". I think the US is not doing so well when you use things like these as a yardstick.
Note: I'm neither American or European so don't try to turn this into an us v them thing.
A few years ago I was responsible for the company proxy server. We blocked porn obviously, but over 80% of the traffic was just a few sites - Google, Facebook, the local real estate site, and the local online news etc.
Slashdot Mirror
And I'm equally sure that you're quite possibly a complete moron and that you're very definitely someone who's never, ever had to deal with actual security issues for important visitors of any sort, much less for heads of state and their families.
Oh dear, you couldn't fallen into that any deeper. I have Govt Security Clearance and actually worked on some security related things for the G20 involving exactly that.
But keep believing whatever it is makes you feel better about your beliefs...
these old laws were in place for a reason.
Yes and the trick is understanding those reasons. The incumbents use the law to protect their position, and the new guy uses tries to get new laws to protect theirs. Don't pretend that somehow existing laws are intrinsically better than new ones.
There is no problem. But that doesn't stop the people in the business of selling controversy making it one.
Our role as readers is to learn what is noise and ignore it.
Well considering that only Americans could be dumb enough to think this kind of low level data is "such sensitive information"
Apparently, you don't understand anything about the physical security of dignitaries and top officials.
Travel plans, routes, and details about the stops of heads of state are always considered highly sensitive security information.
I'm sure it's considered highly sensitive by the people whose job it is to make sure as many things fall under their scope of work as possible, but is it really? I mean this has now been leaked and what is the impact? No injuries or deaths, nothing. Maybe we shouldn't just believe these things are special because the people who are paid to look after special things say they are.
You mean that thing built entirely after the emancipation proclamation on which absolutely zero slaves worked?
http://railroads.unl.edu/blog/...
Seems the facts disagree with your opinion
Whoa, really, Trump is going to bring back slavery?! How much will they cost?! I'll buy two!
Not the 18th century model of slavery deary, the two tier economy which he has spent his entire life building. And you won't be on the buying side of the equation.
Oh wait you're pulling shit out of your ass.
Ironic....
I prefer freedom over the promise of safety.
No you don't. You don't really, you only say things like that because it sounds cute. If you really prefer true freedom than you would seek it in places like Syria and Afghanistan and Somalia where true freedom exists. No rules everyone does what they like and the person with the biggest weapons wins. That is true freedom.
What you want is the security blanket of prosperity and convenience of a regulated society but live in denial that it is regulations that give you this life that you prefer.
What I'm quite sure of is that people are fleeing many of these "gun free zones" we call dictatorships. You can cherry pick a few nations where the people are disarmed and live generally happy lives but if I show you a hellhole of a nation I can be fairly certain the people were disarmed by their government.
I know your probably American and your geography lessons consisted of out there be dragons, but we don't have to cherry pick. If you don't know what the OECD is Google it. It's like the major league of developed countries. And if you're a sports fan, you appreciate the anomaly of having the richest club in the comp continually finishing around the bottom of the league. Why is that?
America was built on legal and controlled immigration.
Which part? The one where the Europeans came and took everything off the natives? Or the part where the Africans were kidnapped from their homes and used as slaves? Or when the Mexicans and Chinese could come as they wish but were given no rights and forced to work like slaves? Is this the great America you think Trump is bringing back?
He probably wants to, but what makes you think you will be the slave owner instead of the slave?
When you need your house renovated you hire a person who subcontracts the parts of the job out and I think that Trump is better at subcontracting than Clinton.
That's nice, but based on what? He has zero experience in public office. A more accurate analogy would be you need you house renovated, and the choice is someone who has been renovating houses for the last 25 years with mixed success, or the guy up the street who drives a taxi and tells you all the time how stupid everyone else is and he'd do it better?
European immigrants from compatible cultures, and some very compliant "model immigrant" east asians.
I actually laughed out loud when I read this. These cultures are only relatively 'compatible' now. When they first came over they were killing each other in the street at a much higher rate than the Jihadis are today. You comments show an obscene lack of knowledge about history.
Bullshit. The slaves didn't build crap
Have you ever heard of the First Transcontinental Railway? Jesus, stop digging....
That "Great America" was built by white northerners.
Yes, using slave labour, just like Donald Trump wants to bring back, except the slaves won't just be black this time around. Him and his mates will be rich and everyone else can die in a ditch.
There is no way whatsoever that this decision does not violate both the first and second amendments to our constitution. Anyone who would violate the highest law of the land for political gain does not bear listening to.
Isn't this the same argument that religious people use?
What if your bible is wrong?
What if the process is flawed?
It seems you are putting the cart before the horse. The law is supposed to make the country a better place. If the law and processes around making new laws prevents this, how is this good thing?
The Constitution was a good effort at getting it right for it's time, but it really is getting dated now. If you can't even entertain the idea that 200 years later we might have a better way of doing things then your are right, there is no point discussing things further.
The point, you missed it. Or do I need to use small words and explain it?
Words are generally how we communicate, or is this how you think discussions work?
The Free speech debate is well understood. We have some people who believe freedom is like the jungle, except as soon as the lion comes knocking on their door for a meal then true freedom isn't so good. If you accept that law of the jungle is not ideal for a 'good society' then you have to accept some limits somewhere.
Your comment "you don't create good society by banning speech" is provably false. The measurements for 'good society' (health education, social mobility, low crime, life expectancy etc) are higher in countries like Canada and Australia than the most 'free' country, the USA, specifically because these limits are better adjusted to promoting such qualities.
You would not read, nor would you believe, the full list.
Yet you will vote for Trump even though his list is longer?
You're damned and determined to vote for Hillary no matter what and nothing we say or type will change your mind.
I haven't made up my mind, so it's odd that you would make such a rash assumption. I was merely commenting that if that is all the bad things after 25 years then its not so bad.
Why then should we bother giving you evidence?
Because if you're trying to convince someone you are right, then telling them to figure it out themselves isn't a good way to go about it.
If you wanted to, you could find it all with a simple Google search.
I did that now just for you, and it came up with a bunch of baseless crackpot opinions. As I said, if after 25 years that's as bad as it gets then it isn't so bad. Trump has only been playing this game for a year and already accumulated more fuck-ups in that short time, what do you think that will do to the country after 4 more years? I'll give you a hint, it won't be great.
There's a lot of places on Earth you can go where the right of self defense does not exist. I suggest you move there because those of us that like the US Constitution as it is have no other place to go, thanks to petty tyrants like yourself.
Many of those countries have a higher quality of life and lower violence rates then the US. None of them rely on a 1st or 2nd amendment to achieve this. How does that fit with your ideology?
It is the entirety of the legal basis of the federal government's existence. When the government violates it, the government acts illegally.
And then what?
Your government acts illegally all the time, this doesn't seem to have any impact on anything. Maybe this constitution thing isn't as effective as you think and needs be replaced?
Let's get this clear, you don't create a good society by banning speech.
Of course you do, this is what the free speech zealots seem to not understand. Just like you can't run into a theatre screaming fire when there isn't one, or yell bomb at an airport, or masturbate in front of kids, there are some restrictions on personal expression that are critical to a functioning society.
Once you accept that some things have to be restricted you are in the same boat as the rest of us.
He doesn't appear to understand the meaning of the word free trade because support for free trade were words out of his mouth after talking about implementing tariffs, though.
He has no idea what he is doing. And just because you are upset with your plumber, you don't get your Real Estate agent to do the job because he has a nice smile.
Hillary may not be ideal, but at least she's a plumber.
Zuck seems to think that just because he's brilliant with computers
Is he? I only know him for one thing, and that is shit. Sure it's making tonnes of cash, but so is Bieber or the Kardashians, and they have no talent at anything (apart from maybe making money)
OMG Constitution!!!
Are you able to think for yourself, or is this constitution thing like a bible that must be obeyed? Because whenever there are any American domestic issues being discussed, it seems as though this constitution thing is like a bible that cannot be argued with.
Alas when it comes to the subject of guns, you don't often encounter honest or thoughtful people. They all have a single goal in mind and ignore all of the existing regulation on the books today.
FTFY.
You forgot to include Clinton as unstable and delusional. She believes that on a landing in the Middle East that her plane took sniper fire. She believes that a vast right wind conspiracy is working against her and Bill. Tim S.
A women who has lived in the public eye for 25 years and that's the best you've got? If that's as bad as things get in 25 years then she sounds pretty reliable.
I don't agree with everything Trump wants to do It's pretty obvious to anyone that knows anything Trumps position is way better for the internet than turning it over to an international panel that can start censoring the hell out of it. The U.S. is already not prefect in that regard but they are WAY better than, say, Iran, Saudi Arabia, or North Korea... or China.
Yes good work. So out of the 200 odd countries in the world, the US is better than the bottom four. What an achievement.
If we want an example of how international panels work, maybe instead of Kim Jong-un, we compare with actual ones that actually exist? The UN for example is the leading light in human rights, much more than the US with their Gitmo and waterboarding ideology.
I think they would be less swayed by US special political interests or corporate lobbying than a UN style panel would.
Seriously, even Australia and Canada have gone down the insane rabbit hole of criminalizing basic free speech lately. So who else is left who even stands a CHANCE of preserving any semblance of free speech on the internet?
You need to stop reading the Internet and get out more. There more to life then not being allowed to call black people niggers. And I'm sure Canada an Australia are much better places for it.
but don't you want to let in 600,000 more refugees? what's another 60,000 jihadis? Nothing bad will happen letting them in
What's funny is that the "Great America" that the Donald aspires to was built on immigrants and slavery. What Donald really means by making America great is do things that sound great to rednecks, but in practice throw the country down the toilet.
The solution to corrupt ineffectual government is not a sociopathic dictator, let's all agree on that.
Indeed. Nowhere else in the world has the robust guarantees of free speech that America has.
What guarantees are those then? You have your free speech, but you also have more people in prison per capita than pretty much every other country on earth, even the oppressive ones. You have free speech but you are more likely to be murdered either by crooks or cops. You have free speech but your political system is also one of the most corrupt in the western world
So yeah, on paper, America is "the land of the free", but that doesn't seem to have delivered real, actual, measurable freedom* for it's people.
*I'm not even sure how you measure "freedom"? For me personally it's about quality of life. If you are free like a bird only to be eaten in the nest by an apex predator, then that's isn't anything to aspire to. Things like infant mortality, access to health and education, social mobility, crime, corruption etc are measurable things that all contribute to quality of life, or ideals that people associate with "freedom". I think the US is not doing so well when you use things like these as a yardstick.
Note: I'm neither American or European so don't try to turn this into an us v them thing.
A few years ago I was responsible for the company proxy server. We blocked porn obviously, but over 80% of the traffic was just a few sites - Google, Facebook, the local real estate site, and the local online news etc.