From Victor Hou, prosecuting attorney on the case:
"The defendant operates a web site, or used to operate a web site, which advocated direct action, violent action, to stop different events; most specifically, the World Economic Forum which just happened in New York. He also advocated direct action, violent action, to stop the 2002 Olympics held now in Salt Lake City -- I believe the opening ceremonies are about to begin -- by all means necessary, is what the web site said.
"In fact, his web site, before it was dismantled by the FBI, indicated he wanted to burn the Olympics. And I ask the Court's indulgence. I'm going to have to use strong language which was inside the web site, but this is the language of the defendant. He indicated he wanted to burn the Olympics, and he wanted to fuck the corporate playground.
"Your Honor, the web site indicates -- the defendant indicated to others that were going to visit this web site that it was essential, essential reading, for anyone who was associated with the groups that advocate or utilize sabotage, theft, arson, and more militant tactics.
"The web site encouraged demonstrators to assault police, even encouraged them to use different-tactics, how to lure police so they could be more vulnerable to rioters and to more militant tactics; to use weapons of mass destruction; to use bombs, to explode bombs; to injure police and to blow up their cars, just like in the movies, the web site cautioned.
"The web site taught users and visitors how to make different types of bombs, as I mentioned before, including Molotov cocktails and fuel fertilizer bombs. Therefore, the FBI was quite alarmed, obviously, when bags of fertilizer in the defendant's car, the silver Toyota I mentioned earlier, were found in the back of his car, along with fuel canisters. Again, these are the key ingredients to the fuel fertilizer bombs the defendant instructed others how to make.
"That same car, that 1981 Toyota silver station wagon, made its way three thousand miles from California to New York, the same car, driven by the defendant, and he was arrested subsequently by the New York Police Department as he was demonstrating, as -- according to police reports, he was -- the defendant was part of a group of protestors that were about to attack what appeared to be the Plaza Hotel on 59th Street and Fifth Avenue, and he was arrested."
Yes, and all people who criticize the US should just go live somewhere else, every programmer who believes in Open Source should quit their closed-source day job, and everyone who is against pollution should give up oil use in every form, etc.
Remember the Slashdot interview with They Might Be Giants? They had some interesting remarks on this subject, specifically referring to Courtney Love:
3) Professional musicians
by yamla
These days, it seems that virtually no professional musicians actually make a decent living. Courtney Love has said that she is pretty much playing for free already. TLC declared bankruptcy. And these are just two examples. Yet during this time, the record industry is reporting record sales, record profits.
What do you think the answer is? Is the day of the professional artist over? Is it still possible to make the music you love and make enough to pay the bills? If so, how? How do you see the record industry changing over the next ten years?
John:
Being broke is not being poor, and one should be skeptical of such complaints, as they often reveal poor judgement more than poverty. In both of your examples, you are talking about people who generate huge amounts of revenue and conspicuously purchased very expensive things.
I don't think the era of the professional musical artist ever really existed. Through the course of the 20th Century from the birth of publishing to the explosion of rock as a mass market business, the business terrain has changed for the better, but long term professional employment remains an elusive reality. Musicians are always at the end of the food chain in the music business. It has never been easy making money.
When was the last time you browsed Salon? Today at their site I got a total of three pop-ups and two of the "watch this ad for 10 seconds while we redirect you to your story" ads -- all from opening only two links. Not to mention all the top and side banners they display.
In the last few weeks, the site has been overwhelmed by ads.
I agree with your point. I was simply taking the opportunity to respond to a sentiment I've seen expressed repeatedly on Slashdot, namely the idea that it's better for kids to see sex or nudity in movies than violence.
Just out of curiousity, why did my post come off as "heated" to you? Was it the Get it? at the end, or the graphic descriptions of violence? At any rate, I do have strong feelings on the subject, although I usually avoid trying to sound heated.:)
it's a screwed up world that deems it okay for a youngster to watch someone getting their brains blown out, but not someone taking their clothes off.
This tired old adage really needs to be addressed. Death and sex are facts of life. It's the context that's important. I would prefer not to have any explicit images of sex or murder in movies -- so heavy handed! But I'd rather have an image of a policeman blowing out the brains of a nasty serial killer than the image of a hedonistic orgy. Why? Context. And I'd rather have an image of a married couple having sex than an image of some "bad guy" hanging and disembowling a police officer. Again, it's the context.
In other words, all violence is not necessarily bad or evil -- and all sex/nudity is not necessarily representative of a healthy sexual life. Get it?
Obviously, the purpose is to block the explicit example, and not the knowledge thereof.
It's sort of like the door to your parents' bedroom -- you know what goes on behind that door, but the door blocks you from seeing something that you'd rather not.
Bin Laden will just be replaced by someone smarter. Smarter because he knows what he can expect.
And, if we pull this off correctly, they can expect to have their forces utterly destroyed and their regional countrymen turned against them.
More intelligent because he will probably use more sophisticated means, not nescesarily technologically sophisticated but sophisticated nonetheless.
And perhaps these sophisticated means will include negotiations between heads-of-state, rather than terrorist attacks. Or striving to have one's country be a positive participant in the global community, rather than a supplier of ~80% of the world's heroin.
"Keep the perspective?" Killing people is the whole point! How could we possibly lose sight of it? The focus here is not on "how remote we can get from killing things with our machines," it's how remote we can get from being killed while killing things with our machines.
Then again, the whole point of your post may be "KILLING BAD!! BAD!!!", in which case I have nothing more to say to you.
By that logic, we shouldn't use age verification for anything (driver's license, alcohol, voting, etc.) since no system of verification is universal and 100% failproof. And why should the legality of a certain activity in another country dictate what our policy is?
Um, I can't name a Western European country I'd like to be emulating either, in this day and age. Capital punishment is just one of many issues that create the chasm.
You didn't laugh once during the whole orange frappucino latte "wake me up before you go-go" scene in the jeep? And yet you consider yourself a fan of Will Ferrell and Ben Stiller? What *do* you find funny?
Does anybody really think that it's "liberty and justice for all" in a place where a respected journalist [mumia.org] gets the death penalty and the courts won't even listen to an appeal WHEN SOMEONE COMES FORWARD AND COPS TO THE MURDER that the journalist was accused of?
When Bush was on TV, all I saw was a deer in the headlights, a small scared child reading off of a teleprompter.
In other words...you saw what you wanted to see. Don't pretend for a minute that you've ever admired a single thing Bush has ever done. You are one of those many people whose perception will never be changed, regardless of what takes place.
but I did because it seems like a really bizarre point to make the most important point.
This is what I mean. It's not the most important point, no one has tried to make it the most important point, it's simply a relevant point. As I understand it, you seem to think Canada is being picked on simply because US media commentators are mentioning that the terrorists may have come through Canada. That's silly. It's like saying rental car companies are being unfairly criticized since the media keeps mentioning how various rental cars and records are being investigated. I'm sure it makes you really nervous if you're an executive of Avis, but you have to put it in perspective.
"...every report has been making a BIG deal about 2 of the people possibly having come from Canada..."
Big deal? I hadn't even heard this until you mentioned it. Maybe you're so eager to "be a part of the situation," you're willing to claim relevance in any way possible, either negative or positive. In other words, get over yourself (or your country).
Secondly during the attack all attention was immediately placed on international flights despite the fact that the four flights were originating and destined in the US, but of course it's easy to think of foreign airports as lax versus the super secure impenetrable US airports.
Don't be an ass. It's not because people think internation security is lax compared to domestic. In fact, it's fairly common knowledge that security on domestic flights is WAY looser than international flights. It's not some big racist conspiracy to discriminate against foreigners. And last I heard, ALL planes were grounded, whether domestic or international. Don't you have something better to do than play the victim?
Slashdot Mirror
"The defendant operates a web site, or used to operate a web site, which advocated direct action, violent action, to stop different events; most specifically, the World Economic Forum which just happened in New York. He also advocated direct action, violent action, to stop the 2002 Olympics held now in Salt Lake City -- I believe the opening ceremonies are about to begin -- by all means necessary, is what the web site said.
"In fact, his web site, before it was dismantled by the FBI, indicated he wanted to burn the Olympics. And I ask the Court's indulgence. I'm going to have to use strong language which was inside the web site, but this is the language of the defendant. He indicated he wanted to burn the Olympics, and he wanted to fuck the corporate playground.
"Your Honor, the web site indicates -- the defendant indicated to others that were going to visit this web site that it was essential, essential reading, for anyone who was associated with the groups that advocate or utilize sabotage, theft, arson, and more militant tactics.
"The web site encouraged demonstrators to assault police, even encouraged them to use different-tactics, how to lure police so they could be more vulnerable to rioters and to more militant tactics; to use weapons of mass destruction; to use bombs, to explode bombs; to injure police and to blow up their cars, just like in the movies, the web site cautioned.
"The web site taught users and visitors how to make different types of bombs, as I mentioned before, including Molotov cocktails and fuel fertilizer bombs. Therefore, the FBI was quite alarmed, obviously, when bags of fertilizer in the defendant's car, the silver Toyota I mentioned earlier, were found in the back of his car, along with fuel canisters. Again, these are the key ingredients to the fuel fertilizer bombs the defendant instructed others how to make.
"That same car, that 1981 Toyota silver station wagon, made its way three thousand miles from California to New York, the same car, driven by the defendant, and he was arrested subsequently by the New York Police Department as he was demonstrating, as -- according to police reports, he was -- the defendant was part of a group of protestors that were about to attack what appeared to be the Plaza Hotel on 59th Street and Fifth Avenue, and he was arrested."
- They both have stupid names.
Yes, and all people who criticize the US should just go live somewhere else, every programmer who believes in Open Source should quit their closed-source day job, and everyone who is against pollution should give up oil use in every form, etc.
3) Professional musicians
by yamla
These days, it seems that virtually no professional musicians actually make a decent living. Courtney Love has said that she is pretty much playing for free already. TLC declared bankruptcy. And these are just two examples. Yet during this time, the record industry is reporting record sales, record profits.
What do you think the answer is? Is the day of the professional artist over? Is it still possible to make the music you love and make enough to pay the bills? If so, how? How do you see the record industry changing over the next ten years?
John:
Being broke is not being poor, and one should be skeptical of such complaints, as they often reveal poor judgement more than poverty. In both of your examples, you are talking about people who generate huge amounts of revenue and conspicuously purchased very expensive things.
I don't think the era of the professional musical artist ever really existed. Through the course of the 20th Century from the birth of publishing to the explosion of rock as a mass market business, the business terrain has changed for the better, but long term professional employment remains an elusive reality. Musicians are always at the end of the food chain in the music business. It has never been easy making money.
In the last few weeks, the site has been overwhelmed by ads.
Both of you. Please.
That pretty much sums up my feelings on the subject.
Actually, it's "kit and caboodle."
Just out of curiousity, why did my post come off as "heated" to you? Was it the Get it? at the end, or the graphic descriptions of violence? At any rate, I do have strong feelings on the subject, although I usually avoid trying to sound heated. :)
This tired old adage really needs to be addressed. Death and sex are facts of life. It's the context that's important. I would prefer not to have any explicit images of sex or murder in movies -- so heavy handed! But I'd rather have an image of a policeman blowing out the brains of a nasty serial killer than the image of a hedonistic orgy. Why? Context. And I'd rather have an image of a married couple having sex than an image of some "bad guy" hanging and disembowling a police officer. Again, it's the context.
In other words, all violence is not necessarily bad or evil -- and all sex/nudity is not necessarily representative of a healthy sexual life. Get it?
It's sort of like the door to your parents' bedroom -- you know what goes on behind that door, but the door blocks you from seeing something that you'd rather not.
You may think it's flamebait, but I still am curious why people get so fired up about silly things like quotas.
...all the whiny questions about the number of female executives at the company? Good grief!
Then say "Set up us the me," not "Set us up the me." That way you can have your funny *and* stay true to the original joke.
Not necessarily.
Bin Laden will just be replaced by someone smarter. Smarter because he knows what he can expect.
And, if we pull this off correctly, they can expect to have their forces utterly destroyed and their regional countrymen turned against them.
More intelligent because he will probably use more sophisticated means, not nescesarily technologically sophisticated but sophisticated nonetheless.
And perhaps these sophisticated means will include negotiations between heads-of-state, rather than terrorist attacks. Or striving to have one's country be a positive participant in the global community, rather than a supplier of ~80% of the world's heroin.
"As technology advances, every activity has the potential to be more efficient, whether it's killing people or mowing the lawn."
There! Saved you a few dozen words, too! Or, if you prefer reductio ad absurdum:
"When your method of doing something advances, you do more of it faster."
Then again, the whole point of your post may be "KILLING BAD!! BAD!!!", in which case I have nothing more to say to you.
By that logic, we shouldn't use age verification for anything (driver's license, alcohol, voting, etc.) since no system of verification is universal and 100% failproof. And why should the legality of a certain activity in another country dictate what our policy is?
Um, I can't name a Western European country I'd like to be emulating either, in this day and age. Capital punishment is just one of many issues that create the chasm.
You didn't laugh once during the whole orange frappucino latte "wake me up before you go-go" scene in the jeep? And yet you consider yourself a fan of Will Ferrell and Ben Stiller? What *do* you find funny?
Does anybody really think that it's "liberty and justice for all" in a place where a respected journalist [mumia.org] gets the death penalty and the courts won't even listen to an appeal WHEN SOMEONE COMES FORWARD AND COPS TO THE MURDER that the journalist was accused of?
Oops, see ya!
In other words...you saw what you wanted to see. Don't pretend for a minute that you've ever admired a single thing Bush has ever done. You are one of those many people whose perception will never be changed, regardless of what takes place.
This is what I mean. It's not the most important point, no one has tried to make it the most important point, it's simply a relevant point. As I understand it, you seem to think Canada is being picked on simply because US media commentators are mentioning that the terrorists may have come through Canada. That's silly. It's like saying rental car companies are being unfairly criticized since the media keeps mentioning how various rental cars and records are being investigated. I'm sure it makes you really nervous if you're an executive of Avis, but you have to put it in perspective.
"...every report has been making a BIG deal about 2 of the people possibly having come from Canada..."
Big deal? I hadn't even heard this until you mentioned it. Maybe you're so eager to "be a part of the situation," you're willing to claim relevance in any way possible, either negative or positive. In other words, get over yourself (or your country).
Secondly during the attack all attention was immediately placed on international flights despite the fact that the four flights were originating and destined in the US, but of course it's easy to think of foreign airports as lax versus the super secure impenetrable US airports.
Don't be an ass. It's not because people think internation security is lax compared to domestic. In fact, it's fairly common knowledge that security on domestic flights is WAY looser than international flights. It's not some big racist conspiracy to discriminate against foreigners. And last I heard, ALL planes were grounded, whether domestic or international. Don't you have something better to do than play the victim?
Was your post supposed to be a rebuttal to the parent post? If so, you failed miserably.