Obama has continued and expanded many of the Bush era policies, such as: Indefinite detention without access to council, the assassination of people, including US citizens, without charge or trial, warrantless surveillance of communications and internet usage, and the continued use of the prison in Guantanamo Bay. All of this is easily verifiable by using the Google, so I'm not going to bother digging up links.
It's interesting to me that even though you had your sarcasm font on, what you typed is pretty much the line that Americans are fed by their government. And a lot of them still buy it somehow.
I see. So your position is that the official NIST report uses a crap measurement? The free-fall of Building 7 is acknowledged in the NIST report, so perhaps you should take it up with them. They say it conforms with their model. Of course, when they denied free-fall it also conformed to their model. You know, the model that they won't release to the public.
Thanks for appreciating that I have "moved on" to WTC7. I'm not sure that we have discussed this before (since you're an AC and all), so I'm not sure how you know I've moved on. I am not stopping you from discussing any other topic. And I agree that the growth of the military-intelligence-security-industrial complex is a major concern. I figure you'd like to investigate a bit more why and how it got this way. But I figure wrong, it seems.
The slashdot groupthink is to not trust the government, so why do you all believe their explanation of events on Sept. 11, 2001 without question?
Because to not believe the official account of an event of such magnitude would shake the very foundations of what they believe to be true. It would raise many, many uncomfortable questions about how we know what we know, and who is actually running the show, and imply that a mass manipulation is going on to sell the world on something that isn't true. Most people are not ready for that.
It has been shown that most people will ignore information that threatens their preconceived notions. This is no different. Most people, including most in the/. community, would rather be comfortable in their own heads than know the hard truth.
Forget radios - how many people would need be involved? How likely is it that NONE of them will talk? And none of them took pictures of the explosives being planted in the WTC? Oh, wait, maybe those who were about to talk were quietly censored (how exactly does that work) or were detained indefinitely in gulags. Maybe it was those hundreds of Blackwater contractors who went missing right around 9/11... oh wait, no one ever reported any such thing... OK, so their entire families were hauled off, too. That would explain those hundreds of families that simply disappeared from neighborhoods and schools and spousal jobs, etc. Wait, no one ever heard about that either? I guess those evil bastards kidnapped everyone who knew anyone in the families - and everyone THEY knew, too. Oh, and what about the hauler-offers? You can't have them telling embarrassing tales - best to tell THEM to report to the gulag as soon as they're done kidnapping tens of thousands of people.
What possible reason could someone with inside knowledge of such a plot have for coming forward? What's the upside? That you make an unprovable claim about something most people consider to be impossible? You would be a laughing stock, or worse lose your job and standing. Ever heard of Kevin Ryan from Underwriters Laboratories? See what happened to him.
Let's say someone did come forward, and was actually believed by anyone. What do you think one person could do against people who allegedly rigged three buildings to collapse, orchestrated a silent stand down of the military, and manipulated the media and investigative agencies to effectively cover it up? What possible hope could that person have of prevailing? I'm sorry to burst your bubble about how good and moral and altruistic you think people are. But if anyone had any actual inside knowledge of such a plot they would keep their fool mouth shut.
One more thing: Hundreds if not thousands of murders go unsolved in this country every year. To suggest that if witnesses were being knocked off you would hear about it is completely unrealistic.
I don't know what did or did not happen that day. But I do know that the roof line of WTC Building 7 achieved free-fall acceleration for 2.2 seconds as it collapsed. That implies that during that time all of the building's potential energy was being used for acceleration, and not for crushing the rest of the building below. Therefore the energy needed to crush the building must have come from somewhere else. Can you explain to me how that's possible?
While I do think that mankind is contributing to climate change, the fact that the vast majority consider something to be true does not in fact make it true.
Manned aircraft also have more down time for maintenance. If a drone fails, you are out the cost of the drone. If a manned aircraft fails, you lose the cost of the aircraft and the lives of the crew. Dead crews are bad PR.
Meh, they'd just do like they always do and either not tell anyone, or make up some story about how the plane was shot down while engaging in a 6 on 1 dog fight, heroically saving the nation from flying terrorists...
Read it again. The section you cite concerns the requirement to hold covered persons in military custody. This requirement is not extended to US citizens. Got that? It is not that US citizens cannot be held in military custody, it is that they are not required to be held in military custody. For other covered persons it is required; for US citizens it is optional. You are not exempt.
Because I can choose what corporations (or individuals, or used item venues, or barter events, etc.) I do business with (or not), and how much business to do if I decide to do business at all. I can't choose to do business with the government; they take my money by threat and coercion, they use it for things I would never stand behind, they make laws that force people to do things I would never have them forced to do, and in the end, they set the rules the corporations have to abide by -- and they have done so very poorly. So corporations are definitely quite a ways down the list of my concerns from a government operating well out of its authorized sphere. Getting government into constitutional compliance is far more important. Once there, it would be reasonable to revisit what the constitution allows, and perhaps make a few legitimate changes. Until then, I am not worried about Apple; I am really, really concerned about the federal and state governments.
While I agree with your general view, it is actually difficult to decide which corporations you do business with. There is so much cross ownership and hidden parent companies that there is an illusion of choice. I don't like the way Coca Cola does business, so I'm going to drink fruit juice instead. That Odwalla stuff is pretty good. That'll show Coca Cola!
Next thing you know there is a huge uproar and demands for the government to make sure nothing like it happens again.
Where? I don't remember anyone demanding that outside the government and media.
Exactly. I don't think The People are actually clamoring for any of this. Everyone is being told The People are clamoring for this, so it seems like it is the case. But it is really that the government and the compliant media are clamoring for this. We should all go back and re-watch Manufacturing Consent.
This is an attempt to deceive voters or at the very least prevent Newt from registering the domain he in any fairness has a right to.
I don't see how anyone's being deceived here. The address points to a number of sites that are obviously not Gingrich's campaign. So people might not get what they expected, but they won't be deceived. And yes, Newt (such a cute name) has a right to the domain name. So where's he been for the past year? If he wanted it, he had ample time to register it.
Slashdot Mirror
Obama has continued and expanded many of the Bush era policies, such as: Indefinite detention without access to council, the assassination of people, including US citizens, without charge or trial, warrantless surveillance of communications and internet usage, and the continued use of the prison in Guantanamo Bay. All of this is easily verifiable by using the Google, so I'm not going to bother digging up links.
Manhattan project also sounded pretty evil, but it turned out to be pretty good.
I'd say that really depends on your point of view.
It's interesting to me that even though you had your sarcasm font on, what you typed is pretty much the line that Americans are fed by their government. And a lot of them still buy it somehow.
Someone's been reading "How to Lie with Statistics"!
Just FYI, it is also a crime to lie to federal agents whether you are under oath or not. Good to know! http://library.findlaw.com/2004/May/11/147945.html
I see. So your position is that the official NIST report uses a crap measurement? The free-fall of Building 7 is acknowledged in the NIST report, so perhaps you should take it up with them. They say it conforms with their model. Of course, when they denied free-fall it also conformed to their model. You know, the model that they won't release to the public.
Thanks for appreciating that I have "moved on" to WTC7. I'm not sure that we have discussed this before (since you're an AC and all), so I'm not sure how you know I've moved on. I am not stopping you from discussing any other topic. And I agree that the growth of the military-intelligence-security-industrial complex is a major concern. I figure you'd like to investigate a bit more why and how it got this way. But I figure wrong, it seems.
Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman? Just sayin'...
You're bad at this Internet thing. Here, let me Google that for you: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=TSA+Highway+stops
The slashdot groupthink is to not trust the government, so why do you all believe their explanation of events on Sept. 11, 2001 without question?
Because to not believe the official account of an event of such magnitude would shake the very foundations of what they believe to be true. It would raise many, many uncomfortable questions about how we know what we know, and who is actually running the show, and imply that a mass manipulation is going on to sell the world on something that isn't true. Most people are not ready for that.
It has been shown that most people will ignore information that threatens their preconceived notions. This is no different. Most people, including most in the /. community, would rather be comfortable in their own heads than know the hard truth.
Really? So there is absolutely no metric by which to gauge the effectiveness of the TSA? Wow, sign me up for that! I'll do a great job, I swear!
Best Carlin Rant Ever
The difference being, when a private business does so they go away.
Not if they're a politically connected Wall Street firm.
Forget radios - how many people would need be involved? How likely is it that NONE of them will talk? And none of them took pictures of the explosives being planted in the WTC? Oh, wait, maybe those who were about to talk were quietly censored (how exactly does that work) or were detained indefinitely in gulags. Maybe it was those hundreds of Blackwater contractors who went missing right around 9/11... oh wait, no one ever reported any such thing... OK, so their entire families were hauled off, too. That would explain those hundreds of families that simply disappeared from neighborhoods and schools and spousal jobs, etc. Wait, no one ever heard about that either? I guess those evil bastards kidnapped everyone who knew anyone in the families - and everyone THEY knew, too. Oh, and what about the hauler-offers? You can't have them telling embarrassing tales - best to tell THEM to report to the gulag as soon as they're done kidnapping tens of thousands of people.
What possible reason could someone with inside knowledge of such a plot have for coming forward? What's the upside? That you make an unprovable claim about something most people consider to be impossible? You would be a laughing stock, or worse lose your job and standing. Ever heard of Kevin Ryan from Underwriters Laboratories? See what happened to him.
Let's say someone did come forward, and was actually believed by anyone. What do you think one person could do against people who allegedly rigged three buildings to collapse, orchestrated a silent stand down of the military, and manipulated the media and investigative agencies to effectively cover it up? What possible hope could that person have of prevailing? I'm sorry to burst your bubble about how good and moral and altruistic you think people are. But if anyone had any actual inside knowledge of such a plot they would keep their fool mouth shut.
One more thing: Hundreds if not thousands of murders go unsolved in this country every year. To suggest that if witnesses were being knocked off you would hear about it is completely unrealistic.
I don't know what did or did not happen that day. But I do know that the roof line of WTC Building 7 achieved free-fall acceleration for 2.2 seconds as it collapsed. That implies that during that time all of the building's potential energy was being used for acceleration, and not for crushing the rest of the building below. Therefore the energy needed to crush the building must have come from somewhere else. Can you explain to me how that's possible?
Damn that chorus of 'true believers' - aka, 97% of the worlds scientists:
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/sciencefair/post/2010/06/scientists-overwhelmingly-believe-in-man-made-climate-change/1
http://articles.cnn.com/2009-01-19/world/eco.globalwarmingsurvey_1_global-warming-climate-science-human-activity?_s=PM:WORLD
While I do think that mankind is contributing to climate change, the fact that the vast majority consider something to be true does not in fact make it true.
Manned aircraft also have more down time for maintenance. If a drone fails, you are out the cost of the drone. If a manned aircraft fails, you lose the cost of the aircraft and the lives of the crew. Dead crews are bad PR.
Meh, they'd just do like they always do and either not tell anyone, or make up some story about how the plane was shot down while engaging in a 6 on 1 dog fight, heroically saving the nation from flying terrorists...
Maybe he works at Kodak.
(consider how often you change the oil in your car vs how often you get your blood removed and filtered).
Twice a week. I'm on dialysis you insensitive clod!
Read it again. The section you cite concerns the requirement to hold covered persons in military custody. This requirement is not extended to US citizens. Got that? It is not that US citizens cannot be held in military custody, it is that they are not required to be held in military custody. For other covered persons it is required; for US citizens it is optional. You are not exempt.
Is it okay to buy something you know was stolen?
Because I can choose what corporations (or individuals, or used item venues, or barter events, etc.) I do business with (or not), and how much business to do if I decide to do business at all. I can't choose to do business with the government; they take my money by threat and coercion, they use it for things I would never stand behind, they make laws that force people to do things I would never have them forced to do, and in the end, they set the rules the corporations have to abide by -- and they have done so very poorly. So corporations are definitely quite a ways down the list of my concerns from a government operating well out of its authorized sphere. Getting government into constitutional compliance is far more important. Once there, it would be reasonable to revisit what the constitution allows, and perhaps make a few legitimate changes. Until then, I am not worried about Apple; I am really, really concerned about the federal and state governments.
While I agree with your general view, it is actually difficult to decide which corporations you do business with. There is so much cross ownership and hidden parent companies that there is an illusion of choice. I don't like the way Coca Cola does business, so I'm going to drink fruit juice instead. That Odwalla stuff is pretty good. That'll show Coca Cola!
Next thing you know there is a huge uproar and demands for the government to make sure nothing like it happens again.
Where? I don't remember anyone demanding that outside the government and media.
Exactly. I don't think The People are actually clamoring for any of this. Everyone is being told The People are clamoring for this, so it seems like it is the case. But it is really that the government and the compliant media are clamoring for this. We should all go back and re-watch Manufacturing Consent.
Shhhh... Everything is just as it seems.
and they had a situation going on
Little Shop of Horrors?
Worse, Michael Sorrentino.
A gun is a weapon, not a neutral method of data transport. Unless the next step up from fiber-optic cable is bullets.
I don't know, I think shooting someone conveys a message...
This is an attempt to deceive voters or at the very least prevent Newt from registering the domain he in any fairness has a right to.
I don't see how anyone's being deceived here. The address points to a number of sites that are obviously not Gingrich's campaign. So people might not get what they expected, but they won't be deceived. And yes, Newt (such a cute name) has a right to the domain name. So where's he been for the past year? If he wanted it, he had ample time to register it.