We have rights enumerated in the bill of rights. It just isn't a complete list. What I was trying to get at is that even the rights explicitly stated in the bill of rights have been seriously compromised by the supreme court. Look at the right to bear arms. It used to extend to merchant warships and today it doesn't even cover all small arms.
I have far less problem with google than with the third party apps. Good luck installing three apps without three apps requesting access to data that isn't required for the app.
"or you're just spouting very tired 10-year-old anti-MS FUD"
10-year-old may be correct but the way you said it gives the false impression it ended 10yrs ago rather than that the problems have persisted for 10yrs or more.
"Congress keeps trying to wipe their asses in the constitution and the courts will keep knocking them down."
Why would the courts start knocking them down now? They generally haven't done so in the past. The supreme has interpreted away most of the rights enumerated in the constitution and allowed gross abuses of justice... especially within the judicial itself. Who puts the judicial in check when they decide the justices have the right to set aside jury verdicts, that juries are no longer allowed to decide if it is just to apply the law, that they can actually lie to the juries about their duties and rights during jury instruction (not just omit, actually lie), and that they can throw out juries if there is even a hint of evidence that the jurors have discovered they have the ability and duty to nullify the law where its application is unjust.
Ultimately it wasn't congress or the president that stole the power of the people. It was the judicial. The balance of powers is not balanced without a jury of the peers having the ability to decide on a case by case basis if what their government has put down on paper is actually representative of their will.
"Freedom of speech should be within the bounds of respect for others (as with any kind or right/priviledge)."
Of course not. You are perfectly free to have respect for some and disdain for others and nobody else is permitted for tell you the criteria on which to base that respect and disdain.
Just because I do not feel it is valid to base respect on race, disability, sexual preferences, etc doesn't mean you aren't perfectly within your rights to do so and to express your views. And yes, even to encourage violence. Otherwise it would be a bit tough to expression disdain for a group and organize a revolution to spit in the eye of tyranny or to organize opposition to such a group.
The Jewish people are originally from Africa/Ethiopia and black as black can be. A small minority of them migrated to the area known as modern day Israel where they married and converted Arabs to their faith. By the time of Jesus the Jews in Israel shared far more physical traits with Arabs than with their original African origin. So yeah, he was an Arab black guy being descended from both.
Find the tapes, find out how much they cost and where to get them. Whip up something invoice-like that tells them how much they need. Be prepared to give an assessment of the labor and cost that would be required to restore if disaster did hit. Then offer to go fetch the tapes yourself.
If they still say no then they are intentionally avoiding the expenditure. It has nothing to do with lack of clue.
"and banks willbe making damn sure they have good backup processes in place"
You'd like to think that eh? I did work for a bank once that asked me to install Norton Internet Security on one of the loan officers workstations to satisfy their auditors requirements for a firewall. The same place had a phone line hooked up to a modem with direct dial-in ras access to their financial network.
I only ran one service call there so I don't know what they were doing for backup but I suspect it involved backing up a blank excel sheet to a floppy on every pc and putting them in a cardboard box at the branch managers house. That way they could check the box 'Backup files on every computer'.
Seriously, "the cloud" is a fad and anyone who is putting their sensitive data there should be given a sec-idiot badge. It's no different than putting your backup server in the external dmz!
You realize that even congress and the supreme have to act through the executive and are doing nothing but blowing wind and killing trees without it. You've summarized every power of government as being military force, lawyers, and diplomats. The president literally has every power that our government possesses to act at his direct command.
I don't even completely disagree. At the end of the day all government power rests in physical force. The lawyers and diplomats are just there to try to talk you into doing as told. The physical force is to make you do as told if the talking didn't work.
The executive branch is quite a bit more than diplomats, lawyers, and military. It's also the DOJ, FBI, NSA, CIA, DHS, FCC, DOE, FDA, FEMA, BATF and the all powerful EPA to name a few. Yes the president can appoint people to lead these and those appointments have to be approved but his powers aren't limited to appointment but includes and supersedes the authority of those he is appointing and he needs no congressional sign-of to exercise it.
The President doesn't need to ask anyone before commandeering an FBI field office and ordering them to raid your home without a warrant and destroy all you possessions for instance. Or ordering them to the same to a supreme court justice or a congressman. Or ordering them to secretly detain a number of senators on suspicion of terrorism for a period of time that happens to coincide with a vote including an impeachment vote. Or ordering the IRS to take their sweet time in delivering collected funds at congresses request, or ordering the IRS to mistakenly distribute an extra billion dollars to the military and then ordering the military to use that billion to engage in a 'conflict'. What could they do? They could impeach him... but if the FBI warrantless FBI wiretaps on these suspected terrorists indicates they would vote for impeachment it's probably best if they be detained for questioning that day.
But the President of the US is the most powerful position on earth (according to the US only btw) because he has the ability to launch our nuclear weapons on his sole authority.
"The 1% had even stronger media control, and even stronger stranglehold on the government machinery in the past. They were broken."
When did this happen? The 1% and their counterparts have had and maintained their stranglehold from feudalism to today. Call them the nobles, the aristocracy, or just the rich. A tiny minority has always held all the wealth and stood on the backs of everyone else. They might not have titles and be appointed by a king anymore but they are still an exclusive club that most members are born into.
The OWS needs to come back now. There are no shortage of people who are outright PISSED about the blatantly illegal actions taken. This is no crackpot conspiracy theory. If the feds didn't organize it and it was the result of a bunch of mayors acting on their own (in coordination, its obvious that 40 cities didn't accidentally attack at once) that only makes it even more clear how universally widespread the corruption is.
This along with the bank boycotts is the first time I have seen the American people respond to their treatment from the powers at be by doing anything other than whimper a little while taking it up the arse. If the powers at be keep responding in a forceful and illegal manner in response the people might just get pissed enough to do more than gather and whimper as a group.
A sleeping person can't be engaging in speech but they can certainly be engaging in expression which has the same protection. Their very continued presence is an expression. As long as each individual is present their presence expresses their support for their petition to business and government.
"No, but just because you are protesting doesn't allow you to violate the law."
Actually it does. Your right to assemble isn't just your right, it is the law. It is a higher law than the park ordinances and trumps them. Additionally, there is a clear affirmative defense, which means that you have broken the law but you did so in order to prevent a greater evil. For example, if you tackle a gunman and hold him until the police arrive you've committed a number of crimes but did so in order to prevent a greater evil. You wouldn't even be charged because of the clear affirmative defense. The greater evil doesn't need to be a crime though. For example, a medical condition is considered an affirmative defense for marijuana use and it has been held up federally and in a number of states.
In the case of Occupy Wall Street, the greater evil is the crimes which are being protested.
"the President of the United States supposedly the most powerful position on EArth really only has three hammers with which to fix things"
He also has the entire executive branch under his direct command. I would much prefer to have a president lobbying on the reforms he will make within the executive than on laws he will propose. Veto power doesn't accomplish much in terms of passing laws. But the president can keep executive branch reform promises on his first day in office with a few phone calls.
No, actually your hypothetical baby isn't your creation. Its a natural result of your inborn programming. If you engineer self replicating cells are the replications the cells creations or your creations? They are your creations obviously.
Your baby is the creation of evolution and/or a diety/intelligent designer. So the question becomes not whether you have the right to kill your baby, but whether god does.
This hasn't changed that. Honeycomb was designed for tablet use. This is another phone OS. So far Google has yet to open a tablet release and has opened every phone release.
When you 'press' something the something resists, that resistance is friction. Although I was talking about the layer of fluid that is physically barring skin on skin contact to varying degrees and reducing friction and thus sensation. This is offset some by fluid friction and a thick lubricant actually adds a sensation of its own.
Anal sex is not merely more pleasurable due to increased pressure. There are muscle bands that actually provide more upraised points of contact.
Slashdot Mirror
We have rights enumerated in the bill of rights. It just isn't a complete list. What I was trying to get at is that even the rights explicitly stated in the bill of rights have been seriously compromised by the supreme court. Look at the right to bear arms. It used to extend to merchant warships and today it doesn't even cover all small arms.
I have far less problem with google than with the third party apps. Good luck installing three apps without three apps requesting access to data that isn't required for the app.
"or you're just spouting very tired 10-year-old anti-MS FUD"
10-year-old may be correct but the way you said it gives the false impression it ended 10yrs ago rather than that the problems have persisted for 10yrs or more.
"Congress keeps trying to wipe their asses in the constitution and the courts will keep knocking them down."
Why would the courts start knocking them down now? They generally haven't done so in the past. The supreme has interpreted away most of the rights enumerated in the constitution and allowed gross abuses of justice... especially within the judicial itself. Who puts the judicial in check when they decide the justices have the right to set aside jury verdicts, that juries are no longer allowed to decide if it is just to apply the law, that they can actually lie to the juries about their duties and rights during jury instruction (not just omit, actually lie), and that they can throw out juries if there is even a hint of evidence that the jurors have discovered they have the ability and duty to nullify the law where its application is unjust.
Ultimately it wasn't congress or the president that stole the power of the people. It was the judicial. The balance of powers is not balanced without a jury of the peers having the ability to decide on a case by case basis if what their government has put down on paper is actually representative of their will.
"Freedom of speech should be within the bounds of respect for others (as with any kind or right/priviledge)."
Of course not. You are perfectly free to have respect for some and disdain for others and nobody else is permitted for tell you the criteria on which to base that respect and disdain.
Just because I do not feel it is valid to base respect on race, disability, sexual preferences, etc doesn't mean you aren't perfectly within your rights to do so and to express your views. And yes, even to encourage violence. Otherwise it would be a bit tough to expression disdain for a group and organize a revolution to spit in the eye of tyranny or to organize opposition to such a group.
If only we could develop a device that targets the cells and delivers peroxide to destroy them... somehow it sounds familiar.
Keep in mind that from Darpa's standpoint a 100 million dollar a year company is a small business.
"but neither are hemp clothing"
srsly? hemp clothing is underrated if anything.
The Jewish people are originally from Africa/Ethiopia and black as black can be. A small minority of them migrated to the area known as modern day Israel where they married and converted Arabs to their faith. By the time of Jesus the Jews in Israel shared far more physical traits with Arabs than with their original African origin. So yeah, he was an Arab black guy being descended from both.
Find the tapes, find out how much they cost and where to get them. Whip up something invoice-like that tells them how much they need. Be prepared to give an assessment of the labor and cost that would be required to restore if disaster did hit. Then offer to go fetch the tapes yourself.
If they still say no then they are intentionally avoiding the expenditure. It has nothing to do with lack of clue.
"and banks willbe making damn sure they have good backup processes in place"
You'd like to think that eh? I did work for a bank once that asked me to install Norton Internet Security on one of the loan officers workstations to satisfy their auditors requirements for a firewall. The same place had a phone line hooked up to a modem with direct dial-in ras access to their financial network.
I only ran one service call there so I don't know what they were doing for backup but I suspect it involved backing up a blank excel sheet to a floppy on every pc and putting them in a cardboard box at the branch managers house. That way they could check the box 'Backup files on every computer'.
Seriously, "the cloud" is a fad and anyone who is putting their sensitive data there should be given a sec-idiot badge. It's no different than putting your backup server in the external dmz!
You realize that even congress and the supreme have to act through the executive and are doing nothing but blowing wind and killing trees without it. You've summarized every power of government as being military force, lawyers, and diplomats. The president literally has every power that our government possesses to act at his direct command.
I don't even completely disagree. At the end of the day all government power rests in physical force. The lawyers and diplomats are just there to try to talk you into doing as told. The physical force is to make you do as told if the talking didn't work.
The executive branch is quite a bit more than diplomats, lawyers, and military. It's also the DOJ, FBI, NSA, CIA, DHS, FCC, DOE, FDA, FEMA, BATF and the all powerful EPA to name a few. Yes the president can appoint people to lead these and those appointments have to be approved but his powers aren't limited to appointment but includes and supersedes the authority of those he is appointing and he needs no congressional sign-of to exercise it.
The President doesn't need to ask anyone before commandeering an FBI field office and ordering them to raid your home without a warrant and destroy all you possessions for instance. Or ordering them to the same to a supreme court justice or a congressman. Or ordering them to secretly detain a number of senators on suspicion of terrorism for a period of time that happens to coincide with a vote including an impeachment vote. Or ordering the IRS to take their sweet time in delivering collected funds at congresses request, or ordering the IRS to mistakenly distribute an extra billion dollars to the military and then ordering the military to use that billion to engage in a 'conflict'. What could they do? They could impeach him... but if the FBI warrantless FBI wiretaps on these suspected terrorists indicates they would vote for impeachment it's probably best if they be detained for questioning that day.
But the President of the US is the most powerful position on earth (according to the US only btw) because he has the ability to launch our nuclear weapons on his sole authority.
"The 1% had even stronger media control, and even stronger stranglehold on the government machinery in the past. They were broken."
When did this happen? The 1% and their counterparts have had and maintained their stranglehold from feudalism to today. Call them the nobles, the aristocracy, or just the rich. A tiny minority has always held all the wealth and stood on the backs of everyone else. They might not have titles and be appointed by a king anymore but they are still an exclusive club that most members are born into.
The OWS needs to come back now. There are no shortage of people who are outright PISSED about the blatantly illegal actions taken. This is no crackpot conspiracy theory. If the feds didn't organize it and it was the result of a bunch of mayors acting on their own (in coordination, its obvious that 40 cities didn't accidentally attack at once) that only makes it even more clear how universally widespread the corruption is.
This along with the bank boycotts is the first time I have seen the American people respond to their treatment from the powers at be by doing anything other than whimper a little while taking it up the arse. If the powers at be keep responding in a forceful and illegal manner in response the people might just get pissed enough to do more than gather and whimper as a group.
A sleeping person can't be engaging in speech but they can certainly be engaging in expression which has the same protection. Their very continued presence is an expression. As long as each individual is present their presence expresses their support for their petition to business and government.
"No, but just because you are protesting doesn't allow you to violate the law."
Actually it does. Your right to assemble isn't just your right, it is the law. It is a higher law than the park ordinances and trumps them. Additionally, there is a clear affirmative defense, which means that you have broken the law but you did so in order to prevent a greater evil. For example, if you tackle a gunman and hold him until the police arrive you've committed a number of crimes but did so in order to prevent a greater evil. You wouldn't even be charged because of the clear affirmative defense. The greater evil doesn't need to be a crime though. For example, a medical condition is considered an affirmative defense for marijuana use and it has been held up federally and in a number of states.
In the case of Occupy Wall Street, the greater evil is the crimes which are being protested.
They have a right to use the park and there is no time limit. I doubt they are refusing other citizens access to the park if they attempt to enter.
No, the issue IS if the local coppers break up the protest. We a right to protest and most of these groups were camped in public parks.
Obama didn't promise to end the wars. It is one of the reasons I didn't support him in the first place.
"the President of the United States supposedly the most powerful position on EArth really only has three hammers with which to fix things"
He also has the entire executive branch under his direct command. I would much prefer to have a president lobbying on the reforms he will make within the executive than on laws he will propose. Veto power doesn't accomplish much in terms of passing laws. But the president can keep executive branch reform promises on his first day in office with a few phone calls.
No, actually your hypothetical baby isn't your creation. Its a natural result of your inborn programming. If you engineer self replicating cells are the replications the cells creations or your creations? They are your creations obviously.
Your baby is the creation of evolution and/or a diety/intelligent designer. So the question becomes not whether you have the right to kill your baby, but whether god does.
This hasn't changed that. Honeycomb was designed for tablet use. This is another phone OS. So far Google has yet to open a tablet release and has opened every phone release.
When you 'press' something the something resists, that resistance is friction. Although I was talking about the layer of fluid that is physically barring skin on skin contact to varying degrees and reducing friction and thus sensation. This is offset some by fluid friction and a thick lubricant actually adds a sensation of its own.
Anal sex is not merely more pleasurable due to increased pressure. There are muscle bands that actually provide more upraised points of contact.