I agree, but the U.S. government made no real attempt to recover it for that purpose. Bezos should donate it to a museum, and hopefully get a nice name plaque next to it, but if he doesn't I can't see the U.S. government having the moral standing to force him to.
Seriously? That's your argument? It's so incredibly stupid it's hard to know where to begin. The basic format of your argument is that because the government has abused other technologies, this arbitrary one shouldn't be allowed.
The government used military force in the past without sufficient justification? Intermodal's solution: completely disarm. The government has had allowed prison abuse in the past? Intermodal's solution: release all prisoners. The government has inappropriately audited someone in the past? Let tax cheats get away. The government has ruled questionably on a court case? Do away with courts, let people solve their problems with shootouts.
The solution to curtailing abuse is surprise: punishing the abusers, not dismantling the basic structures of society.
And there's certainly no legitimate uses for aerial devices besides spying on people. I'm given to understand that missing persons cases never crop up in rural Colorado. And I certainly can't envision using aerial drones to help with wildfire control. Or environmental surveys. Or mapping. Or weather. Or any number of legitimate government functions. It's all to spy on intermodal
We're going to suggest you attempt to damage or destroy property of the US federal government. This is in no way a serious crime that removes all free speech ambiguity by offering to pay people to do it.
Bombed suspected foreign terrorists::Bombed an entire foreign country, twice Used tax cuts as an ineffective stimulus::The same, but oriented entirely to the right, twice Used FISA courts to provide warrants to spy on Americans in excess of reason:: Intentionally bypassed FISA courts to spy on Americans without warrants Failed to shut down Guantanamo bay where prisoners were being kept illegally::Started Guantanamo with the intent of bypassing the right to a fair trial, while torturing innocent people
I don't exactly approve of Obama, he should have completely reversed a lot of the completely immoral Bush actions instead of taking them down a step, but "worse than Bush" can only come out of the mind of a crazy person.
I didn't even accuse Reagan of being a disaster. The point was that the Carter "disaster" is a very vague idea dependent on not looking at the details.
Horseshit. Carter was ineffective, bumbling idiot as a president, his economic policies where horible, inflation was rampant and interest rates were in the 20+ percentage area.
This is always everyone's top billing, and always the one with the least specificity. That's because it has absolutely nothing to do with policy, and everything to do with correcting runaway inflation caused by an oil embargo.
He was weak in foreign policy and our adversaries took advantage of that.
I'm glad you're specific about this, and I'll address the specific things below, but using "weak" in an discussion of foreign policy makes you seem like a neanderthal, man. It's really emotional, and in no way reflects a sensible view of the world.
The Soviets invaded Afghanistan and his response was to boycott the 80 Moscow games.
His replacement's plan of using military support to back the Taliban was a great idea that had no long term repercussions for the U.S.
His only shining foreign policy moment was getting Sadat and Begin to agree on peace of which I commend him. He and his cabinet failed to recognize the threat that Iran posed once the Shaw became ill and was thrown out of power.
Oh you mean how our direct support of the Shaw in his dictatorial games through the CIA prior to that in no way lead to the Islamic Republic Seizing power and creating the theocratic nightmare we face today, right?
Other than that he was a waste of 4 years for this country.
He and Dubya will always probably be in the bottom 5, Obama will be there soon enough, just keep watching.
Yeah, comparing Carter to the "let's invade a country for no reason" Bush is totally a false dilemma. For worse presidents than carter: Garfield(institutional corruption), Bush II(literally every criticism of Obama applies to him to a greater degree, and he killed hundreds of thousands for no reason), Reagan(you're going to disagree, but come on: savings and loan + Iran Contra + deficit explosion), Nixon(literally betrayed the country for first election, secretly spied on opponents with the CIA for re-election), Jackson(trail of tears), and Buchanan(essentially caused the civil war with all his moderately pro-slavery not-caring) all easily make the list.
To Cheney, "National Security Interests of the United States" means bandwidth of channels for money to Halliburton. I'm sure they provide some sort of "consulting" to the NSA.
As other have said, Carter has a fictitious legacy as a complete disaster for the US. So since it takes one to know one, I trust his opinion on Snowden.
There weren't really any policies that Carter set out that were bad. The oil crisis did, in fact, make life really terrible, but that was long-coming foreign policy chickens coming home to roost. Every criticism of carter seems to end up centering around how bad those 4 years were economically, which is a really hard thing to control over that time span, especially with a maliciously induced energy shortage.
Seriously, if there were a truly defining characteristic of cancer cells, we'd be in a lot better shape to cure it. Cancer has a multitude of causes and phenotypes.
Slashdot Mirror
Uh huh, it's a real logical fallacy to continue to apply a lame analogy.
I agree, but the U.S. government made no real attempt to recover it for that purpose. Bezos should donate it to a museum, and hopefully get a nice name plaque next to it, but if he doesn't I can't see the U.S. government having the moral standing to force him to.
Seriously? That's your argument? It's so incredibly stupid it's hard to know where to begin. The basic format of your argument is that because the government has abused other technologies, this arbitrary one shouldn't be allowed.
The government used military force in the past without sufficient justification? Intermodal's solution: completely disarm.
The government has had allowed prison abuse in the past? Intermodal's solution: release all prisoners.
The government has inappropriately audited someone in the past? Let tax cheats get away.
The government has ruled questionably on a court case? Do away with courts, let people solve their problems with shootouts.
The solution to curtailing abuse is surprise: punishing the abusers, not dismantling the basic structures of society.
No, but saying to do so could be argued to be if it were clearly satire or something similar.
And there's certainly no legitimate uses for aerial devices besides spying on people. I'm given to understand that missing persons cases never crop up in rural Colorado. And I certainly can't envision using aerial drones to help with wildfire control. Or environmental surveys. Or mapping. Or weather. Or any number of legitimate government functions. It's all to spy on intermodal
We're going to suggest you attempt to damage or destroy property of the US federal government. This is in no way a serious crime that removes all free speech ambiguity by offering to pay people to do it.
We promise we're not brain-dead morons.
I don't know about you, but for me fantasy is supposed to be fun, not high-concept.
Now that a famous person's name has gotten your attention, please use our website and give us money!
Didn't you notice that the titration device was made of glass and showed zero sign of change? That's because glass isn't an amorphous solid.
Nope, you didn't admit it. Done talking to you.
Really?
Things Obama did::Similar thing Bush did
Bombed suspected foreign terrorists::Bombed an entire foreign country, twice
Used tax cuts as an ineffective stimulus::The same, but oriented entirely to the right, twice
Used FISA courts to provide warrants to spy on Americans in excess of reason:: Intentionally bypassed FISA courts to spy on Americans without warrants
Failed to shut down Guantanamo bay where prisoners were being kept illegally::Started Guantanamo with the intent of bypassing the right to a fair trial, while torturing innocent people
I don't exactly approve of Obama, he should have completely reversed a lot of the completely immoral Bush actions instead of taking them down a step, but "worse than Bush" can only come out of the mind of a crazy person.
I'd consider acquitting Hoover, just because we hadn't yet learned how stupid laizes faire was.
Ok, so you just lied. Read the damn Wikipedia article, and admit you were wrong, please.
I didn't even accuse Reagan of being a disaster. The point was that the Carter "disaster" is a very vague idea dependent on not looking at the details.
How is the Watergate break-in worse than bugging the campaign office of Mitch McConnell?
Because that wasn't done by the government, much less Obama? That seems like a pretty tremendous degree of dissembling on your part.
Jackson did do some admirable things, but the genocidal actions that were the very template for the holocaust is a hard legacy to shake.
Stalking in public is illegal. You cannot follow someone around and learn about their travels in public. I'm not sure that analogy applies today.
Horseshit. Carter was ineffective, bumbling idiot as a president, his economic policies where horible, inflation was rampant and interest rates were in the 20+ percentage area.
This is always everyone's top billing, and always the one with the least specificity. That's because it has absolutely nothing to do with policy, and everything to do with correcting runaway inflation caused by an oil embargo.
He was weak in foreign policy and our adversaries took advantage of that.
I'm glad you're specific about this, and I'll address the specific things below, but using "weak" in an discussion of foreign policy makes you seem like a neanderthal, man. It's really emotional, and in no way reflects a sensible view of the world.
The Soviets invaded Afghanistan and his response was to boycott the 80 Moscow games.
His replacement's plan of using military support to back the Taliban was a great idea that had no long term repercussions for the U.S.
His only shining foreign policy moment was getting Sadat and Begin to agree on peace of which I commend him. He and his cabinet failed to recognize the threat that Iran posed once the Shaw became ill and was thrown out of power.
Oh you mean how our direct support of the Shaw in his dictatorial games through the CIA prior to that in no way lead to the Islamic Republic Seizing power and creating the theocratic nightmare we face today, right?
Other than that he was a waste of 4 years for this country.
He and Dubya will always probably be in the bottom 5, Obama will be there soon enough, just keep watching.
Yeah, comparing Carter to the "let's invade a country for no reason" Bush is totally a false dilemma. For worse presidents than carter: Garfield(institutional corruption), Bush II(literally every criticism of Obama applies to him to a greater degree, and he killed hundreds of thousands for no reason), Reagan(you're going to disagree, but come on: savings and loan + Iran Contra + deficit explosion), Nixon(literally betrayed the country for first election, secretly spied on opponents with the CIA for re-election), Jackson(trail of tears), and Buchanan(essentially caused the civil war with all his moderately pro-slavery not-caring) all easily make the list.
To Cheney, "National Security Interests of the United States" means bandwidth of channels for money to Halliburton. I'm sure they provide some sort of "consulting" to the NSA.
Because Ronald Reagan created that myth when he ran for office, and perpetuating myths is absolutely an expertise of the American people.
As other have said, Carter has a fictitious legacy as a complete disaster for the US. So since it takes one to know one, I trust his opinion on Snowden.
There weren't really any policies that Carter set out that were bad. The oil crisis did, in fact, make life really terrible, but that was long-coming foreign policy chickens coming home to roost. Every criticism of carter seems to end up centering around how bad those 4 years were economically, which is a really hard thing to control over that time span, especially with a maliciously induced energy shortage.
to calibrate
Calibration depends on having an objective measure in the first place.
It's still an unnecessary hassle to reduce the noise levels. Nobody asked for it.
Seriously, if there were a truly defining characteristic of cancer cells, we'd be in a lot better shape to cure it. Cancer has a multitude of causes and phenotypes.
No, I'm pretty sure there's a faction that has been actively trying to do exactly that for decades, irrespective of the existence of the internet.