That's an exact parallel case. Surprisingly enough, not one of the arguments I've seen in the pages of the New York Times suggests that its writers are at all familiar with the case.
There's no evidence that he's done anything which the US could charge him with, otherwise our government would already be making headlines demanding that the UK hand him over to us.
Since when has that stopped the US government? Especially since the DoJ is being reported as looking for something to charge Assange with?
Alternately: 1. Mastercard does some not-quite-legal stuff to help politician get elected. 2. Politician tells Mastercard to do something, or the evidence of the not-quite-legal stuff will be forwarded to the appropriate Attorney General and the New York Times. 3. Mastercard complies.
Well, you see, the text of the First Amendment states "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech". In this case, instead of making a law, they're just suppressing speech by strongly suggesting to the corporations that it would be in their best interest to comply.
With the Wikileaks case, the powers that be have demonstrated quite clearly that they don't give a damn what's legal and what's not legal. They're going to do what they're going to do, and screw the Constitution if it gets in the way.
That's hardly news, and McNealy is far from the most powerful guy who loves Ayn Rand. For instance, former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan was a big fan of her as well.
The reason, I think, is that Ayn Rand's philosophy is that people become rich and powerful because they're better and more valuable people than those who don't. Compare that to, say, Karl Marx, who would argue that people become rich and powerful because they're scum-sucking leeches who like to steal from everybody else. Now, if you're rich and powerful, which philosophy would make you feel better about yourself and what you did to get to where you are?
Sun's biggest problem was that its various flagship products were out-competed or unprofitable. On the high end hardware, IBM could build better mainframes. On the lower end hardware, Dell could build cheaper workstations and servers. On their Unix, Linux became as good as or better than Solaris. And Java, while nifty, had no way of turning a profit.
By open-sourcing its software offerings, Sun ensured that while its business was screwed, its legacy lives on.
Another takeaway from this episode is also which politicians in the US are totalitarians. Unfortunately, it's clear that they have tons of support from both major parties: Sarah Palin called for Assange to be shot without trial, Joe Lieberman orchestrated site takedowns, Mitch McConnell stated his desire to pass a law to ensure that Wikileaks could be charged with something (in direct violation of Article I, Section 9, Clause 3 of the US Constitution, as well as the First Amendment issues), Hillary Clinton for pulling out all the stops to try to put a stop Wikileaks, and Barack Obama for either telling or allowing his administration to do what they did.
I might have chosen to say it this way (with apologies to Rogers and Hammerstein):
Ooooo-klahoma, where the news editors are speaking plain And their talking sense in my defense When the guv'mint starts to be my bane. Ooooo-klahoma, ev'ry night my honey lamb and I Stay at home all night and plan long drives To avoid a-trav'ling in the sky.
Some examples of empires that would typically and frequently take over other people's territories: Roman, Mongol, Russian, British, and Spanish.
A US empire that did similar to those guys would have had as official Territories places like the Philippines, Chile, Nicaragua, Iraq, Iran, and Guatemala. Those territories would have much the same role in the US government as Puerto Rico.
The story of the US empire isn't so much of officially taking over territory as it is one of making darn sure that the person in charge of other countries is under our control. That's why most of the bad guys we're fighting now are ex-CIA assets.
Central and South America are precisely the sort of thing I'm referring to. It would be reasonable to argue that the US empire had at its height control over the vast majority of Latin America as well as a good portion of Asia and Africa. For instance, you could consider Iran to be part of the US empire before 1979. Ditto for Chile before Pinochet was ousted. And so on.
Well, then, you've only made clear that you need to make your union international in scope. Your point is precisely the reason why various unionists, socialists and communists have always always believed that their ideas need to be spread worldwide.
The biggest challenge is that when corporations are faced with workers standing up for themselves, they move to countries where doing so is illegal in fact if not in name. For instance, in most countries currently with sweatshops, people who start trying to unionize are first fired, and then not infrequently shot by their employers.
Slashdot Mirror
Or the New York Times, for that matter. Eric Holder's in the process of looking for ways to prosecute them for publishing what Wikileaks gave them.
I have no idea if Assange et al broke any actual laws in acquiring the documents and releasing them.
That's relatively easy to answer, actually, assuming the current SCOTUS cares about precedent:
New York Times Co v United States
That's an exact parallel case. Surprisingly enough, not one of the arguments I've seen in the pages of the New York Times suggests that its writers are at all familiar with the case.
There's no evidence that he's done anything which the US could charge him with, otherwise our government would already be making headlines demanding that the UK hand him over to us.
Since when has that stopped the US government? Especially since the DoJ is being reported as looking for something to charge Assange with?
an adaptation of Frankenstein would seem appropriate.
Alternately:
1. Mastercard does some not-quite-legal stuff to help politician get elected.
2. Politician tells Mastercard to do something, or the evidence of the not-quite-legal stuff will be forwarded to the appropriate Attorney General and the New York Times.
3. Mastercard complies.
Well, you see, the text of the First Amendment states "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech". In this case, instead of making a law, they're just suppressing speech by strongly suggesting to the corporations that it would be in their best interest to comply.
With the Wikileaks case, the powers that be have demonstrated quite clearly that they don't give a damn what's legal and what's not legal. They're going to do what they're going to do, and screw the Constitution if it gets in the way.
Maybe when they really get serious about finding life they will send a probe down to Europa and sniff around.
The NASA guys probably got the message "All these worlds are yours except Europa. Attempt no landing there."
That's hardly news, and McNealy is far from the most powerful guy who loves Ayn Rand. For instance, former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan was a big fan of her as well.
The reason, I think, is that Ayn Rand's philosophy is that people become rich and powerful because they're better and more valuable people than those who don't. Compare that to, say, Karl Marx, who would argue that people become rich and powerful because they're scum-sucking leeches who like to steal from everybody else. Now, if you're rich and powerful, which philosophy would make you feel better about yourself and what you did to get to where you are?
Sun's biggest problem was that its various flagship products were out-competed or unprofitable. On the high end hardware, IBM could build better mainframes. On the lower end hardware, Dell could build cheaper workstations and servers. On their Unix, Linux became as good as or better than Solaris. And Java, while nifty, had no way of turning a profit.
By open-sourcing its software offerings, Sun ensured that while its business was screwed, its legacy lives on.
Another takeaway from this episode is also which politicians in the US are totalitarians. Unfortunately, it's clear that they have tons of support from both major parties: Sarah Palin called for Assange to be shot without trial, Joe Lieberman orchestrated site takedowns, Mitch McConnell stated his desire to pass a law to ensure that Wikileaks could be charged with something (in direct violation of Article I, Section 9, Clause 3 of the US Constitution, as well as the First Amendment issues), Hillary Clinton for pulling out all the stops to try to put a stop Wikileaks, and Barack Obama for either telling or allowing his administration to do what they did.
Bank closed his account, but Julian is free to pick up his money and make deposit in another bank.
How? He's in jail.
If he's from the US, then he's been exposed to Fox News and other Murdoch-controlled media. It's a wash which is less reputable.
He's pining for the fjords! Or was it fnords?
No, that's exactly the money I'm referring to, because Michael Chertoff has investments in the company that made the backscatter scanners.
Somehow telling my wife, "Hey, it's in my DNA, I just can't help it!" doesn't make her any less pissed off...
Yeah, she was telling me all about it yesterday while you were at work!
I might have chosen to say it this way (with apologies to Rogers and Hammerstein):
Ooooo-klahoma, where the news editors are speaking plain
And their talking sense in my defense
When the guv'mint starts to be my bane.
Ooooo-klahoma, ev'ry night my honey lamb and I
Stay at home all night and plan long drives
To avoid a-trav'ling in the sky.
The money trail ends at former DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff. That's public knowledge by now.
That FTFY is factually incorrect.
Some examples of empires that would typically and frequently take over other people's territories: Roman, Mongol, Russian, British, and Spanish.
A US empire that did similar to those guys would have had as official Territories places like the Philippines, Chile, Nicaragua, Iraq, Iran, and Guatemala. Those territories would have much the same role in the US government as Puerto Rico.
The story of the US empire isn't so much of officially taking over territory as it is one of making darn sure that the person in charge of other countries is under our control. That's why most of the bad guys we're fighting now are ex-CIA assets.
Central and South America are precisely the sort of thing I'm referring to. It would be reasonable to argue that the US empire had at its height control over the vast majority of Latin America as well as a good portion of Asia and Africa. For instance, you could consider Iran to be part of the US empire before 1979. Ditto for Chile before Pinochet was ousted. And so on.
Ok, welcome to the no-fly list and every other bureaucratic annoyance they can think of to harass you.
To quote a great philosopher George Carlin: "I've got a lot of good ideas. Trouble is, most of 'em suck."
Well, then, you've only made clear that you need to make your union international in scope. Your point is precisely the reason why various unionists, socialists and communists have always always believed that their ideas need to be spread worldwide.
The biggest challenge is that when corporations are faced with workers standing up for themselves, they move to countries where doing so is illegal in fact if not in name. For instance, in most countries currently with sweatshops, people who start trying to unionize are first fired, and then not infrequently shot by their employers.
You're trying to trick me into giving away something. T'won't work.
Lazy lexographers lacking letter?
I picked on Dole because he's retired, but illustrated the point.