The Constitution codifies certain natural rights, by way of government prohibitions, but this is not an exclusive list by any means. See the Declaration for more detail on the scope and origin of these rights, but it isn't anything to do with the Constitution.
You can tell by the way he claims not to know what he wrote, kind of like you always tell the officer that you don't know why he pulled you over or how fast you were driving.
I find it deeply quixotic that inside a discussion about the First Amendment, you're clearly illustrating the usefulness of the Fifth.
You're seeking to indict on the basis of his lack of participation with law enforcement, are you not?
He has earned the right to speak in support of those principles...
So has every American citizen. Sorry but having served in the armed forces doesn't give one extra special First Amendment rights with a cherry on top compared to those who haven't. You may give his opinion more weight but that is not the same thing.
In fact, I think you could just as easily argue that those who have served are less able to participate in a free democracy. They've all been programmed to obey authority without questioning. Maybe it didn't stick for all of them, or maybe it wears off over time, but I'd prefer the civilian point of view over the military one for just about every debate for this reason alone.
Further, if they joined at 18, they may have actually never lived as an adult in the culture that they're trying to modify. At least until they've been out a while, and back in the 'real world', so to speak.
The same arguments could be made for any other kind of mind-altering, highly-institutionalized scenarios, like prison.
The only possible reason that this particular item would have made it off the Firehose is the flame-inducing material within it. It makes me sad. While I'm no fan of Apple, per se, I feel sorry for the guy. He could have investigate the local laws and policy before challenging them, and will absolutely be returning to Japan at some point, but still this is genuinely trivial.
Maybe 'Idle' material, but 'Apple'? Trolling, plain and simple.
Which media can't my HTPC linux system play again? Oh yeah wait there isn't any.
Netflix
Though, to be fair, Boxee made both Netflix and Hulu worse than just using their 'native' interfaces. (On my livingroom PC, anyway.)
Maybe this box is magical, but I'd need to know just why this is so before springing for one. As others have said, you can get a cheap PC for that kind of money these days.
The economy in Afghanistan is 'improved' almost entirely via corruption, primarily in the form of opium. This is not an improvement.
Iraq's army was demolished inside of a week. That was several years ago. Clearly the army was not the force we ultimately needed to defeat during that conflict. In fact, Saddam may have been the only force keeping terrorism in check in Iraq. Once we deposed him, all hell broke loose. It is still in utter chaos today. Tell me again what impact the defeat of the army had in Iraq.
You're not being intellectually honest.
Vietnam is, I think, the best example because it was almost a conflict between armies. The people, however, turned out to be the force that decided which side was going to win. The vast majority wanted to be VC, and thus it came to pass. We poured a lot of blood and money into that country trying to change it, but failed to do so. The French saw the writing on the wall and suckered us into taking their place. And yet educated people today still refer to this popular uprising as an 'invasion by the North'. It's remarkable, but the fact remains that the effort was an utter waste.
In short, Vietnam proved that even under the very best of circumstances, it still won't work.
And so far as I have seen reported, none of them have had a drastically shortened life expectancy.
A whole lot of people saying "IF they are killed" but no reports that I can find of one of these named individuals being killed due to the Wikileaks leak.
-Rick
This. The United States is responsible for over one million Iraqi dead, and scads more diseased, and we're gnashing teeth over a minutia that MIGHT be in more danger, but who aren't actually dead yet?
Isn't the notion of 'landowners only' a bit more palatable during the colonial era? Back when they wrote that particular rule, all one had to do to be come a land owner was build a cabin. It's a tad more complex today, and I'm not at all sure that they would want it to have stayed the same.
Cannot work - how are you supposed to ever find out something was libel?
If it were illegal, then blowing the whistle on it would be legally protected. So there's the 'discovery' functionality. If you're referring to the 'determination' angle of 'find out', well that's what courts are for...
But countries like Iraq should not be allowed to exist in the modern world. And for that matter there's dozens of other countries we have all turned our back on and their citizens are forced to live in fear and ignorance of a brutal government.
This is patently false. Only the citizens living under that dictator have the right to rebel against him. Further only they will ever be able to actually succeed.
What we've witnessed/been witnessing in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan really should have taught us this lesson by now. This isn't a matter of just finding the right way to do it, this is a matter of logical incongruity.
In short, if the people aren't willing to rise up and overthrow this leader, then why are we? And what happens when we leave, and a new power takes over?
The entire premise is deeply, deeply flawed, and if this were our first failed experiment in it I might be more forgiving. But this clearly never, ever works.
If he's the one who leaked these documents, he frankly belongs in prison. He broke the law.
Let's not forget that he's probably legally a whistleblower as well:
In the logs, Manning explains his growing disillusionment with the U.S. Army and foreign policy.[14] He gives one example of being assigned the task of evaluating the arrest of Iraqis for allegedly publishing "anti Iraq" literature, only to discover that the writings were in fact scholarly critique of corruption in the cabinet of Iraq Prime Minister Al-Maliki titled "Where Did the Money Go?".[18] He reportedly said to Lamo, "I immediately took that information and ran to the officer to explain what was going on. He didn’t want to hear any of it. He told me to shut up and explain how we could assist the FPs in finding MORE detainees."[14] Manning reportedly characterized some of the allegedly leaked cables to Lamo as, "explaining how the first world exploits the third, in detail, from an internal perspective."[9]
Before we hang him, let's pause to consider motive...
For better or for worse, this is going to seriously shake any confidence a person or country is going to have when offering sensitive information to the United States.
While this IS true, the upshot is, it should reduce bad will against the actual American citizens, and direct it towards the secret-keeps and decision-makers.
The inappropriate classification of documents is the reason Wikileaks does what it does. The government can only lie about the reasons for classifying documents so long before the people stop trusting the government, and we crossed that line a long time ago.
What if we made it a crime to over-classify documents, with identical punishments to disclosing classified material? Seems like an easy fix to me...
That's not quite the same thing, though, is it? The hosting provider isn't publishing anything at all. It isn't as if they have an interest that would be threatened by allowing this website to continue to use them as a host. Indeed, who would have even known that Rackspace was involved in this issue in anyway, barring action taken on their part?
They had no interests to protect, so the comparisons you draw aren't necessarily valid.
Your labels aside, either present some supporting evidence, or kindly shut the hell up. Surely you can find one person as an example, besides yourself?
Slashdot Mirror
It seems, from the analysis in this well-founded paper ("One-Click Download"), that Obama is indeed, a p**k. And an arrogant one, at that...
In all seriousness, though, it makes for an excellent read. Sorry about the clumsy segue...
The Constitution codifies certain natural rights, by way of government prohibitions, but this is not an exclusive list by any means. See the Declaration for more detail on the scope and origin of these rights, but it isn't anything to do with the Constitution.
You can tell by the way he claims not to know what he wrote, kind of like you always tell the officer that you don't know why he pulled you over or how fast you were driving.
I find it deeply quixotic that inside a discussion about the First Amendment, you're clearly illustrating the usefulness of the Fifth.
You're seeking to indict on the basis of his lack of participation with law enforcement, are you not?
He has earned the right to speak in support of those principles...
So has every American citizen. Sorry but having served in the armed forces doesn't give one extra special First Amendment rights with a cherry on top compared to those who haven't. You may give his opinion more weight but that is not the same thing.
In fact, I think you could just as easily argue that those who have served are less able to participate in a free democracy. They've all been programmed to obey authority without questioning. Maybe it didn't stick for all of them, or maybe it wears off over time, but I'd prefer the civilian point of view over the military one for just about every debate for this reason alone.
Further, if they joined at 18, they may have actually never lived as an adult in the culture that they're trying to modify. At least until they've been out a while, and back in the 'real world', so to speak.
The same arguments could be made for any other kind of mind-altering, highly-institutionalized scenarios, like prison.
Fox News is often full of abusive language towards the President. Can we ban them? :)
Not only is this not funny, nor informative, but shockingly dangerous.
Suggesting we ban press outlets is decidedly anti-American, whether you personally consider them of any value or not. Change the channel, not the law.
Oh you're not a moron. You're apparently a whaler in handheld format with two screens...
Visiting here is a privilege (in the legal sense of the word), not a right.
I don't intend to derail this conversation, but I'd like to point out that this seems to depend greatly on your nationality. Juxtapose these:
A) White kid from Britain wants to be here - Privilege, not a right.
B) Mexican wants to live and work here - Civil Rights issue.
Go figure...
The only possible reason that this particular item would have made it off the Firehose is the flame-inducing material within it. It makes me sad. While I'm no fan of Apple, per se, I feel sorry for the guy. He could have investigate the local laws and policy before challenging them, and will absolutely be returning to Japan at some point, but still this is genuinely trivial.
Maybe 'Idle' material, but 'Apple'? Trolling, plain and simple.
Which media can't my HTPC linux system play again? Oh yeah wait there isn't any.
Netflix
Though, to be fair, Boxee made both Netflix and Hulu worse than just using their 'native' interfaces. (On my livingroom PC, anyway.)
Maybe this box is magical, but I'd need to know just why this is so before springing for one. As others have said, you can get a cheap PC for that kind of money these days.
You might want to consider all the hormones and/or pharmaceuticals in it. "Sterile" does not necessarily mean "desirable".
Depends on where you want to live and own land. There are plenty of places in the country where you can get a house for under $50k.
Dig deeper. You're quite likely to find that those places do not offer work opportunities enough to recoup that $50k.
And we're to assume you're completely oblivious to the degree of risk?
In fact, any reasonable observer would have to conclude the risk of Iraqi death has greatly increased post-invasion.
The economy in Afghanistan is 'improved' almost entirely via corruption, primarily in the form of opium. This is not an improvement.
Iraq's army was demolished inside of a week. That was several years ago. Clearly the army was not the force we ultimately needed to defeat during that conflict. In fact, Saddam may have been the only force keeping terrorism in check in Iraq. Once we deposed him, all hell broke loose. It is still in utter chaos today. Tell me again what impact the defeat of the army had in Iraq.
You're not being intellectually honest.
Vietnam is, I think, the best example because it was almost a conflict between armies. The people, however, turned out to be the force that decided which side was going to win. The vast majority wanted to be VC, and thus it came to pass. We poured a lot of blood and money into that country trying to change it, but failed to do so. The French saw the writing on the wall and suckered us into taking their place. And yet educated people today still refer to this popular uprising as an 'invasion by the North'. It's remarkable, but the fact remains that the effort was an utter waste.
In short, Vietnam proved that even under the very best of circumstances, it still won't work.
Those were governments with standing armies. That era is over.
And so far as I have seen reported, none of them have had a drastically shortened life expectancy.
A whole lot of people saying "IF they are killed" but no reports that I can find of one of these named individuals being killed due to the Wikileaks leak.
-Rick
This. The United States is responsible for over one million Iraqi dead, and scads more diseased, and we're gnashing teeth over a minutia that MIGHT be in more danger, but who aren't actually dead yet?
Really?
Really??
Isn't the notion of 'landowners only' a bit more palatable during the colonial era? Back when they wrote that particular rule, all one had to do to be come a land owner was build a cabin. It's a tad more complex today, and I'm not at all sure that they would want it to have stayed the same.
Are you honestly advocating American forces being involved in suppression of a free press? All in the name of some ambiguous 'advantage'?
That's monstrous.
Insiders, leaks, etc.
We should outlaw libel
Cannot work - how are you supposed to ever find out something was libel?
If it were illegal, then blowing the whistle on it would be legally protected. So there's the 'discovery' functionality. If you're referring to the 'determination' angle of 'find out', well that's what courts are for...
But countries like Iraq should not be allowed to exist in the modern world. And for that matter there's dozens of other countries we have all turned our back on and their citizens are forced to live in fear and ignorance of a brutal government.
This is patently false. Only the citizens living under that dictator have the right to rebel against him. Further only they will ever be able to actually succeed.
What we've witnessed/been witnessing in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan really should have taught us this lesson by now. This isn't a matter of just finding the right way to do it, this is a matter of logical incongruity.
In short, if the people aren't willing to rise up and overthrow this leader, then why are we? And what happens when we leave, and a new power takes over?
The entire premise is deeply, deeply flawed, and if this were our first failed experiment in it I might be more forgiving. But this clearly never, ever works.
If he's the one who leaked these documents, he frankly belongs in prison. He broke the law.
Let's not forget that he's probably legally a whistleblower as well:
In the logs, Manning explains his growing disillusionment with the U.S. Army and foreign policy.[14] He gives one example of being assigned the task of evaluating the arrest of Iraqis for allegedly publishing "anti Iraq" literature, only to discover that the writings were in fact scholarly critique of corruption in the cabinet of Iraq Prime Minister Al-Maliki titled "Where Did the Money Go?".[18] He reportedly said to Lamo, "I immediately took that information and ran to the officer to explain what was going on. He didn’t want to hear any of it. He told me to shut up and explain how we could assist the FPs in finding MORE detainees."[14] Manning reportedly characterized some of the allegedly leaked cables to Lamo as, "explaining how the first world exploits the third, in detail, from an internal perspective."[9]
Before we hang him, let's pause to consider motive...
For better or for worse, this is going to seriously shake any confidence a person or country is going to have when offering sensitive information to the United States.
While this IS true, the upshot is, it should reduce bad will against the actual American citizens, and direct it towards the secret-keeps and decision-makers.
The inappropriate classification of documents is the reason Wikileaks does what it does. The government can only lie about the reasons for classifying documents so long before the people stop trusting the government, and we crossed that line a long time ago.
What if we made it a crime to over-classify documents, with identical punishments to disclosing classified material? Seems like an easy fix to me...
That's not quite the same thing, though, is it? The hosting provider isn't publishing anything at all. It isn't as if they have an interest that would be threatened by allowing this website to continue to use them as a host. Indeed, who would have even known that Rackspace was involved in this issue in anyway, barring action taken on their part?
They had no interests to protect, so the comparisons you draw aren't necessarily valid.
Your labels aside, either present some supporting evidence, or kindly shut the hell up. Surely you can find one person as an example, besides yourself?