As far as that is concerned, our country is already a democracy, and we are in control of it. I would call it fair to say that by extension we are responsible for the actions of our government. In short, when we don't agree, it is not only acceptable, but our obligation to take matters into our own hands.
No idiot. Our country is a well managed republic. It is in no way, shape or form a democracy. But I agree, a well managed republic is a nice thing... for the managers.
We don't refrain from using nukes because they are "efficient". If we could mount conventional warheads with the explosive power of a tacnuke, but without the radioactive fallout, we'd use them in a second.
We already have them. They are called fuel-air explosives and the daisy cutter bombs we used in Afganistan are the approximate equivalent of a low yield tac nuke (even though they technically aren't fuel-air). And yes, we use them. They are quite effective from a psychological perspective. One of them was used on a minefield in Desert Storm, and some pamphlets were dropped on an Iraqi infantry battalion near the minefield indicating that if they didn't surrender, one would be dropped on them the next day. Guess what, they surrendered.
They key point in this that the pacifists don't ever seem to get is that it only takes ONE side to decide to start a war or commit an act of violence. The fact that the other side doesn't want to commit another act of violence to defend itself is NOT a hindrance to the perpetrators.
And, given that if the pacifists STICK to their beliefs, they wind up DEAD and the only one left to tell their side of the story are the perpetrators, then the pacifists might as well never existed. Pacifism in the face of violence is an evolutionary dead end.
Like it or not, violence is the ultimate arguement. If either side escalates to it, there is no bigger, badder arguement you can throw back in their faces other than more (and much more severe, violence). It's unfortunate, but true.
That's why if you don't want to be dead or forced to live under horrible conditions, it behooves you (or your country) be the best it can be at the ultimate arguement.
And that is what the United States does. Lots of people don't like it, but ask those people if they'd rather be speaking Russian and living in a "workers paradise", or speaking German and tossing folks into crematoriums....
You really think a standard mirror is going to take the energy pulse of a COIL laser? No. Getting hit by that much energy is not like bouncing a laser pointer off of a mirror. The mirror might save you for a quarter of a second before it fails catastrophically through thermal degredation (read melts, turns to plasma, etc.)
While you are certainly correct up through say Vietnam, I would argue that your "lead from the front" dogma is now somewhat invalidated. With the real-time command and control assets that now exist in a high tech military like the US Armed Forces, the commanding general no longer needs to be right on the front, and indeed this can be more of a hindrance than a help, since it is hard to supply all of the data he needs mobily.
Certainly Schwartzkopf was not at the front line directing Desert Storm, nor was Gen. Franks, the commander of the main armored corps in Desert Storm right at the front either, although he did go there as he felt needed.
The right high tech tools can put you "on the front line" without having to BE there... and the same thing is the case for Linus... but maybe the tools don't just exist yet.
Slashdot has a "liberal bias" only in some ways. Most on slashdot DON'T want the government thinking for them, don't want massive government and most importantly don't want the government telling them what to do, which is really more conservative thinking.
I'd say that really intelligent people, and there are a lot of these on slashdot (as well as a few idiots) accept the rational parts of both liberal thinking and conservative thinking. I for example am very liberal socially (i.e. I am pro-choice, anti-discrimination, etc.), but I am very anti-big government and pro-"strong military". Too bad there isn't a party that takes the best of both worlds and puts it together...
Yeah, but ranting to the government is like ranting to a wall unless you are :
A) Richer than hell
B) A corporations
C) A personal friend of a congressman
D) All of the above
Lets face it. With the legal bribing of our senators in full force, they no more represent us than the Roman Senate represented the people under Caesar.
Having written many letters to them, I KNOW this to be true. They could give a rats a$$ about what we think unless we are going to slip them some cash along with our thoughts.
Doesn't anyone in government ask themselves why some of our most productive citizens do this?
"Members of Warez includes corporate executives, computer-network administrators and students at major universities, government workers and employees of technology and computer firms, the Customs Service said today."
I mean, if all these people are doing this, should it even BE a crime?
I searched on google and the only information that I can find on his arrest says that the charges were contributory copyright infringement, not violation of the DMCA. I also can't find any evidence that he spent a single day in jail. You may be right on this one, but if so I find it hard to believe that the Dmitry case is getting so much more publicity, considering that Johanssen was not trying to profit off DeCSS.
I think he spent the night in jail from what I remember (he posted here after). However, the point is that you said I was being paranoid about people being arrested for violating the DMCA if they write DeCSS tools. This clearly shows I am not. It has happened and will continue to do so.
I suspect that if he were here no criminal charges would have been filed.
Perhaps you should discuss this with Dmitry. While we're at it, perhaps we could discuss the futility of violence with the city fathers of Carthage....
But even on the amazingly far off chance you are right about criminal charges, he still would have been sued for every dime he's ever going to make by the MPAA (see various DeCSS lawsuits going on now, including 2600).
The bottom line is that the DMCA is a way for media corporations to make money off of their creations forever, in every format ever devised, with indefinate copyright and absolutely no fair use whatsoever. This is their utopia and this law is written (very cleverly) to acheive it. We, the citizens of the United States of America, are being screwed over by the corporations with the willing and paid help of our representatives.
Consider DeCSS. Neither has happened. You're being paranoid
Oh, yeah, you are right.. NOT! Ask Johanssen about whether or not he went to jail for writing DeCSS. He sure as $hit did!! They took all his PCs too. And he was in FINLAND (or some Scandavian country)!!!
Imagine if he'd been HERE. He'd have been bent over some sink and raped with a baton by some fascist police ba$tard like that Hatian immigrant.
I am not being paranoid (well, except maybe for the rape comment). I apparently know the facts, unlike you.
You're right. Possession isn't. Trafficking is. So if you are an uberhacker who has infinite understanding of all things and can code your own DeCSSes,etc., then you are COVERED. If you are a regular Joe, then you are screwed, because the uberhackers will go to jail or be sued into the poorhouse if they give you a tool to exercise your fair use rights.
This defacto makes possession illegal. Especially if you can be thought to be trafficking.
Welcome to the corporate republic, and don't give me any bull$hit about how much better off we are than Afganistan or some other 3rd world hellhole because I don't give a $hit. This is America and this $hit shouldn't happen here.
Oh well, I guess all good things must come to an end. Any bets on who our "Hitler" will wind up being? He'll have all these great surveillance tools with no oversight and no constitution to worry about because it is "content neutral". What a fscking joke.
Re:DeCSS decision now available on EFF site
on
DMCA 2, Freedom 0
·
· Score: 1
Did anyone else have problems with the way Acrobat rendered this thing? Bloody hell, it was like trying to read HAXOR crap. And we are supposed to believe this court knows ANYTHING about computers. What a fscking joke.
Welcome to the land of the fee and the home of the paid.
By the corporations and for the corporations and of the corporations.
So now we can't talk about religion, sex, etc. for fear that someone will take offense and call it "hate speech"? How insanely stupid. This is the problem with curtailing ANY speech. This is the path that leads to. This is why SMART people in the US through court cases have said that prior constraint of speech is to be avoided at all costs and only allowed where DIRECT and DAMAGING results will occur.
Besides, YOU think the speech of the white supremecists is false garbage. Who made YOU arbiter of the universe? YOU might think that the DMCA is beautiful and those who oppose it are spouting false garbage as well. Maybe it's "hate speech" to denounce the DMCA as the evil piece of $hit it is. Down this path leads madness.
The German government thinks the Scientologists are spouting false garbage, but the Scientologists say they are just practicing their religion. Who's right?
Let people hear it for themselves and make their own opinion. That is "openness". That is "Freedom". Freedom is protecting ALL speech. That doesn't mean that SOME speech can't have consequences, but it should only be speech where it can be proven to be DIRECT and DAMAGING.
Besides, the eventual end of this "don't discriminate" stuff being applied everywhere is where we have Arab terrorists killing 5000 people and the police unable to question Arabs because they are Arab and came from Afganistan/Saudi Arabia, etc., even though there is a high probability they know something about the attacks.
No one should be discriminated against unfairly, but we shouldn't let political correctness lead us to stupidity either.
No it's not. Racial hatred is abhorrent to most of us, but it is not like yelling "Fire" in a crowded theater as it does not put those hearing it in imminent danger of life and limb. Nor does it put those who it disparages in danger unless the person advocates violence toward them, in which case they are violating the law (in most countries).
Before you advocate banning speech that you hate, think about the absurd lengths that political correctness can take people to. Besides, "Free Speech" is exactly that. The ability to say whatever you want as long as it doesn't hurt others. And "hurt others" doesn't mean hurting their feelings. If they feel bad, tough $hit.
Curtailing anyone's right to say what they want is way to EVIL to do it unless someone will be badly injured or killed if what they want to say is said, and it has to be directly linked.
For some reason Europeans seem to think that you can just draw a line and say "That's hate speech" and still have freedom to express yourself. Maybe you can do that, but at what point does hate speech stop being hate speech.
I mean, why ban Nazi items on Yahoo auctions? How "free" is that? The items aren't advocating racial hatred. That's just stupid.
Even in the People's Republic of China you have "Free Speech" if you define "free" speech as that which the powers at be don't find offensive.
Learn to listen to speech that you don't like. If it's as bogus as real racial hatred is, then you won't have to listen long, but the idiots spouting it will still have their rights intact.
You realize of course WHY she was re-elected? Because the people who live in Commiefornia wouldn't know world history if it came up and bit them on the ass. The Commiefornians are EXACTLY like the citizens of Rome in the 200-400 AD time period. All they want is their bread and circuses and to feel like their government is protecting them. They can't indentify with the reasons we fought the War of Indepedence. If asked, I'm sure they would say it was so they could buy SUV's without being bothered by the British. And these people, who have no concept of history and the VERY fragile state of democracies and republics are the ones who vote for Feinstein. Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes?
The Commiefornians hate guns and the thought of guns and the thought that anyone would ever have or need a gun because it offends their delicate sensibilities. Because the Commiefornians WANT the government to be their daddy and control their lives. They truly believe that the government knows best. And Ellison is a Commiefornian. Moron.
Feinstein keeps getting elected for the same reason that Ted Kennedy keeps getting elected in Massachusetts, even though he's killed more people than the average gun owner.
Incidentally, I love California. California would be a hell of a nice place without the Commiefornians.....
Are you trolling? Why don't you just give away every basic freedom a court has ever determined was implied by the 1st Amendment. In case you haven't noticed, the Bill of Rights is not exactly a detailed and unambigous piece of literature. It leaves considerable room for differences of opinion. The government always wants to err on the side of less personal freedom and more government freedom. We've seen how well they handle that. J. Edgar Hoover anyone? McCarthy? Eschelon?
Don't GIVE your rights away to the federal government, because you can be damn sure you will never get them back.
And for what it's worth, certainly corporations can track you on their servers. It's a requirement for the tech to work in some cases. But the FBI shouldn't know any more about you than they already can now without a warrant.
Can they get what phone numbers I've called without a warrant? If the answer is no, they sure
as shit shouldn't get my email headers or my website addresses without a warrant either.
Just once I wish the people who are so willing to give up their freedom for a POSSIBLE (but not very likely in this case) increase in security would think about all the people who died so that they could have those rights. I'm sure the guys who died on Omaha beach would love to know that you are willing to let their deaths be in vain just so you can feel a little more secure about a VERY unlikely death by terrorist action.
Yeah! That's what Chamberlain thought about Hitler. Just be nice to him. Maybe it's really everyone elses fault he's a baddie? Give him what he wants and don't rock the boat.
Guess what. It DOESN'T WORK!! The only thing these people understand is force. Their whole lives are nothing but brutal, brutalized events wherein the strongest have power over the weakest. The only way to stop them from attempting to exert their brutalizing power is to show them what real brutalizing power is!
Violence may not be "nice" and it may not be "civilized" but it solves problems. If you don't believe me, go ask the city fathers of Carthage about it.
I (like many others I'm sure) did send comments. They were rejected out of hand because they weren't in PDF format. Given that I did not have access to any thing able to write in PDF at that time, I decided that they obviously weren't going to listen anyway and just gave up.
I mean, plain text is as ubiquitous as you can get. Why the fsck would you need comments to be in PDF unless you are trying to limit the responses to those people or corporations who have the money to buy Adobe software to make PDFs?
Lets face it. Our government has been bought. It's not by the people and for the people and of the people, it's by the corporations and for the corporations and of the corporations. And that won't change until we stop allowing legalized bribing of the parties through soft money.
No, the proper place to try them is in Federal court. Investigating crimes across state boundaries is one of the (unfortunately few) things the FBI is supposedly good for.
Have you noticed how many successful foreign terrorist attacks have taken place on US soil?
Has it sunk in that 99% of them are caught BEFORE the attack takes place? Building or stealing a nuclear warhead would be almost impossible to pull off without generating a lot of traffic for Echelon to see and thus would be stopped. It's not just as simple as mailing a package from Afganistan to NYC.
Regardless of what a lot of liberals like to think, the folks who are defending the country aren't all idiots. The ONLY nuclear attacks we really have to worry about now are ICBM based ones. We've got one nuclear defense hole and we are trying to close it, end of story. Why have ANY US citizens die from nuclear attacks if we don't need to?
Since I recall seeing a Patriot go from launcher to Isreali builing (BIG BOOM) in less than 10 seconds during live footage from the Gulf War, I'd be inclined to believe they were less effective than originally thought. However, they weren't designed for SRBM intercepts either.
Slashdot Mirror
No idiot. Our country is a well managed republic. It is in no way, shape or form a democracy. But I agree, a well managed republic is a nice thing... for the managers.
We don't refrain from using nukes because they are "efficient". If we could mount conventional warheads with the explosive power of a tacnuke, but without the radioactive fallout, we'd use them in a second.
We already have them. They are called fuel-air explosives and the daisy cutter bombs we used in Afganistan are the approximate equivalent of a low yield tac nuke (even though they technically aren't fuel-air). And yes, we use them. They are quite effective from a psychological perspective. One of them was used on a minefield in Desert Storm, and some pamphlets were dropped on an Iraqi infantry battalion near the minefield indicating that if they didn't surrender, one would be dropped on them the next day. Guess what, they surrendered.
And, given that if the pacifists STICK to their beliefs, they wind up DEAD and the only one left to tell their side of the story are the perpetrators, then the pacifists might as well never existed. Pacifism in the face of violence is an evolutionary dead end.
Like it or not, violence is the ultimate arguement. If either side escalates to it, there is no bigger, badder arguement you can throw back in their faces other than more (and much more severe, violence). It's unfortunate, but true.
That's why if you don't want to be dead or forced to live under horrible conditions, it behooves you (or your country) be the best it can be at the ultimate arguement.
And that is what the United States does. Lots of people don't like it, but ask those people if they'd rather be speaking Russian and living in a "workers paradise", or speaking German and tossing folks into crematoriums....
You really think a standard mirror is going to take the energy pulse of a COIL laser? No. Getting hit by that much energy is not like bouncing a laser pointer off of a mirror. The mirror might save you for a quarter of a second before it fails catastrophically through thermal degredation (read melts, turns to plasma, etc.)
Certainly Schwartzkopf was not at the front line directing Desert Storm, nor was Gen. Franks, the commander of the main armored corps in Desert Storm right at the front either, although he did go there as he felt needed.
The right high tech tools can put you "on the front line" without having to BE there... and the same thing is the case for Linus... but maybe the tools don't just exist yet.
I'd say that really intelligent people, and there are a lot of these on slashdot (as well as a few idiots) accept the rational parts of both liberal thinking and conservative thinking. I for example am very liberal socially (i.e. I am pro-choice, anti-discrimination, etc.), but I am very anti-big government and pro-"strong military". Too bad there isn't a party that takes the best of both worlds and puts it together...
Yeah, but ranting to the government is like ranting to a wall unless you are :
A) Richer than hell
B) A corporations
C) A personal friend of a congressman
D) All of the above
Lets face it. With the legal bribing of our senators in full force, they no more represent us than the Roman Senate represented the people under Caesar.
Having written many letters to them, I KNOW this to be true. They could give a rats a$$ about what we think unless we are going to slip them some cash along with our thoughts.
Doesn't anyone in government ask themselves why some of our most productive citizens do this?
"Members of Warez includes corporate executives, computer-network administrators and students at major universities, government workers and employees of technology and computer firms, the Customs Service said today."
I mean, if all these people are doing this, should it even BE a crime?
I think he spent the night in jail from what I remember (he posted here after). However, the point is that you said I was being paranoid about people being arrested for violating the DMCA if they write DeCSS tools. This clearly shows I am not. It has happened and will continue to do so.
I suspect that if he were here no criminal charges would have been filed.
Perhaps you should discuss this with Dmitry. While we're at it, perhaps we could discuss the futility of violence with the city fathers of Carthage....
But even on the amazingly far off chance you are right about criminal charges, he still would have been sued for every dime he's ever going to make by the MPAA (see various DeCSS lawsuits going on now, including 2600).
The bottom line is that the DMCA is a way for media corporations to make money off of their creations forever, in every format ever devised, with indefinate copyright and absolutely no fair use whatsoever. This is their utopia and this law is written (very cleverly) to acheive it. We, the citizens of the United States of America, are being screwed over by the corporations with the willing and paid help of our representatives.
Oh, yeah, you are right.. NOT! Ask Johanssen about whether or not he went to jail for writing DeCSS. He sure as $hit did!! They took all his PCs too. And he was in FINLAND (or some Scandavian country)!!!
Imagine if he'd been HERE. He'd have been bent over some sink and raped with a baton by some fascist police ba$tard like that Hatian immigrant.
I am not being paranoid (well, except maybe for the rape comment). I apparently know the facts, unlike you.
You're right. Possession isn't. Trafficking is. So if you are an uberhacker who has infinite understanding of all things and can code your own DeCSSes,etc., then you are COVERED. If you are a regular Joe, then you are screwed, because the uberhackers will go to jail or be sued into the poorhouse if they give you a tool to exercise your fair use rights.
This defacto makes possession illegal. Especially if you can be thought to be trafficking.
Welcome to the corporate republic, and don't give me any bull$hit about how much better off we are than Afganistan or some other 3rd world hellhole because I don't give a $hit. This is America and this $hit shouldn't happen here.
Oh well, I guess all good things must come to an end. Any bets on who our "Hitler" will wind up being? He'll have all these great surveillance tools with no oversight and no constitution to worry about because it is "content neutral". What a fscking joke.
Did anyone else have problems with the way Acrobat rendered this thing? Bloody hell, it was like trying to read HAXOR crap. And we are supposed to believe this court knows ANYTHING about computers. What a fscking joke.
Welcome to the land of the fee and the home of the paid.
By the corporations and for the corporations and of the corporations.
So now we can't talk about religion, sex, etc. for fear that someone will take offense and call it "hate speech"? How insanely stupid. This is the problem with curtailing ANY speech. This is the path that leads to. This is why SMART people in the US through court cases have said that prior constraint of speech is to be avoided at all costs and only allowed where DIRECT and DAMAGING results will occur.
Besides, YOU think the speech of the white supremecists is false garbage. Who made YOU arbiter of the universe? YOU might think that the DMCA is beautiful and those who oppose it are spouting false garbage as well. Maybe it's "hate speech" to denounce the DMCA as the evil piece of $hit it is. Down this path leads madness.
The German government thinks the Scientologists are spouting false garbage, but the Scientologists say they are just practicing their religion. Who's right?
Let people hear it for themselves and make their own opinion. That is "openness". That is "Freedom". Freedom is protecting ALL speech. That doesn't mean that SOME speech can't have consequences, but it should only be speech where it can be proven to be DIRECT and DAMAGING.
Besides, the eventual end of this "don't discriminate" stuff being applied everywhere is where we have Arab terrorists killing 5000 people and the police unable to question Arabs because they are Arab and came from Afganistan/Saudi Arabia, etc., even though there is a high probability they know something about the attacks.
No one should be discriminated against unfairly, but we shouldn't let political correctness lead us to stupidity either.
No it's not. Racial hatred is abhorrent to most of us, but it is not like yelling "Fire" in a crowded theater as it does not put those hearing it in imminent danger of life and limb. Nor does it put those who it disparages in danger unless the person advocates violence toward them, in which case they are violating the law (in most countries).
Before you advocate banning speech that you hate, think about the absurd lengths that political correctness can take people to. Besides, "Free Speech" is exactly that. The ability to say whatever you want as long as it doesn't hurt others. And "hurt others" doesn't mean hurting their feelings. If they feel bad, tough $hit.
Curtailing anyone's right to say what they want is way to EVIL to do it unless someone will be badly injured or killed if what they want to say is said, and it has to be directly linked.
For some reason Europeans seem to think that you can just draw a line and say "That's hate speech" and still have freedom to express yourself. Maybe you can do that, but at what point does hate speech stop being hate speech.
I mean, why ban Nazi items on Yahoo auctions? How "free" is that? The items aren't advocating racial hatred. That's just stupid.
Even in the People's Republic of China you have "Free Speech" if you define "free" speech as that which the powers at be don't find offensive.
Learn to listen to speech that you don't like. If it's as bogus as real racial hatred is, then you won't have to listen long, but the idiots spouting it will still have their rights intact.
You realize of course WHY she was re-elected? Because the people who live in Commiefornia wouldn't know world history if it came up and bit them on the ass. The Commiefornians are EXACTLY like the citizens of Rome in the 200-400 AD time period. All they want is their bread and circuses and to feel like their government is protecting them. They can't indentify with the reasons we fought the War of Indepedence. If asked, I'm sure they would say it was so they could buy SUV's without being bothered by the British. And these people, who have no concept of history and the VERY fragile state of democracies and republics are the ones who vote for Feinstein. Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes?
The Commiefornians hate guns and the thought of guns and the thought that anyone would ever have or need a gun because it offends their delicate sensibilities. Because the Commiefornians WANT the government to be their daddy and control their lives. They truly believe that the government knows best. And Ellison is a Commiefornian. Moron.
Feinstein keeps getting elected for the same reason that Ted Kennedy keeps getting elected in Massachusetts, even though he's killed more people than the average gun owner.
Incidentally, I love California. California would be a hell of a nice place without the Commiefornians.....
They can have my GNU/Linux when they pry it from my cold dead fingers.
:)
Same thing with my encryption too.
Are you trolling? Why don't you just give away every basic freedom a court has ever determined was implied by the 1st Amendment. In case you haven't noticed, the Bill of Rights is not exactly a detailed and unambigous piece of literature. It leaves considerable room for differences of opinion. The government always wants to err on the side of less personal freedom and more government freedom. We've seen how well they handle that. J. Edgar Hoover anyone? McCarthy? Eschelon?
Don't GIVE your rights away to the federal government, because you can be damn sure you will never get them back.
And for what it's worth, certainly corporations can track you on their servers. It's a requirement for the tech to work in some cases. But the FBI shouldn't know any more about you than they already can now without a warrant.
Can they get what phone numbers I've called without a warrant? If the answer is no, they sure
as shit shouldn't get my email headers or my website addresses without a warrant either.
Just once I wish the people who are so willing to give up their freedom for a POSSIBLE (but not very likely in this case) increase in security would think about all the people who died so that they could have those rights. I'm sure the guys who died on Omaha beach would love to know that you are willing to let their deaths be in vain just so you can feel a little more secure about a VERY unlikely death by terrorist action.
Yeah! That's what Chamberlain thought about Hitler. Just be nice to him. Maybe it's really everyone elses fault he's a baddie? Give him what he wants and don't rock the boat.
Guess what. It DOESN'T WORK!! The only thing these people understand is force. Their whole lives are nothing but brutal, brutalized events wherein the strongest have power over the weakest. The only way to stop them from attempting to exert their brutalizing power is to show them what real brutalizing power is!
Violence may not be "nice" and it may not be "civilized" but it solves problems. If you don't believe me, go ask the city fathers of Carthage about it.
How would reading OUR email have stopped middle-eastern terrorists? It wouldn't. And the NSA ALREADY reads THEIR email.
Curtailing the liberties of the many for the transgressions of the few is more evil than flying airplanes into buildings.
If the NSA and the FBI need to read all email to catch criminals now, then how come they never needed to read all US mail before?
"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin
I (like many others I'm sure) did send comments. They were rejected out of hand because they weren't in PDF format. Given that I did not have access to any thing able to write in PDF at that time, I decided that they obviously weren't going to listen anyway and just gave up.
I mean, plain text is as ubiquitous as you can get. Why the fsck would you need comments to be in PDF unless you are trying to limit the responses to those people or corporations who have the money to buy Adobe software to make PDFs?
Lets face it. Our government has been bought. It's not by the people and for the people and of the people, it's by the corporations and for the corporations and of the corporations. And that won't change until we stop allowing legalized bribing of the parties through soft money.
No, the proper place to try them is in Federal court. Investigating crimes across state boundaries is one of the (unfortunately few) things the FBI is supposedly good for.
Because it's a CIVIL case.... not a criminal one.
There is no 5th Amendment right in a civil trial.
IANAL
This is the END.....
Have you noticed how many successful foreign terrorist attacks have taken place on US soil?
Has it sunk in that 99% of them are caught BEFORE the attack takes place? Building or stealing a nuclear warhead would be almost impossible to pull off without generating a lot of traffic for Echelon to see and thus would be stopped. It's not just as simple as mailing a package from Afganistan to NYC.
Regardless of what a lot of liberals like to think, the folks who are defending the country aren't all idiots. The ONLY nuclear attacks we really have to worry about now are ICBM based ones. We've got one nuclear defense hole and we are trying to close it, end of story. Why have ANY US citizens die from nuclear attacks if we don't need to?
Since I recall seeing a Patriot go from launcher to Isreali builing (BIG BOOM) in less than 10 seconds during live footage from the Gulf War, I'd be inclined to believe they were less effective than originally thought. However, they weren't designed for SRBM intercepts either.