Since when does free speech include the right to advocate the slaughter of innocents? Since when does free speech involve the right to tell people "convert to Islam, or be killed"?
I don't know. Perhaps always, hence the term 'free'. Free speech does not mean speech that we like, or even speech without consequences. It simply means the right to speak freely (whatever your idiotic opinion is).
If you want to start defining what is, and what is not free speech, then you may as well not have free speech at all.
A previous poster mentioned that free speech does not include being able to yell "Fire" in a crowded theatre, but in fact it does. It is not the word "Fire" that is prohibited, but in fact the behaviour of deliberately creating a panic in a dangerous location. This is a distinction that we should make when talking about "free speech".
Certainly, we don't want people to engage in the behaviour of advocating violence (although we seem happy for our own governments to engage in it), but generally to censure is more effective than to censor.
If all they were doing was 'voicing dissent' then most Western governments would allow that. It's when they go a step further, and start killing people, that it becomes a problem.
How do you kill someone with a web site? Or is that classified?
The people of the United States of America have a moral compass that only points in one direction; away from themselves.
Using this compass, they are able to ignore (or be ignorant of), deny, justify or rationalise the equally despicable behaviour that certain members of their society carry out on their behalf.
But let's hand-wave that behaviour away by comparing it with Stalin's or Mao's purges, or Hitler's ethnic cleansing. Of course, the huge magnitude of these acts overshadow America's long history of pogroms and massacres.
But, lest it seem that I think Americans are particularly evil, I do not. I think they are as evil as the rest of the human race. But if only you could stand in someone else's shoes and see how hilarious your piety is.
i'm much more interested in who manufactured (not to mention fired) that little guided missile that went through the window 18" off the ground at the Pentagon. Pretty good logistics for a guy living in a cave on the Afghani-Pakistan border, no?
-Supply an initial velocity to a steel javelin so that it is accelerated towards the surface of the planet in a targeted manner.
How can you have an intitial velocity and acceleration?
As the javelin conintues on it's course, it gains speed due to the increasing force of Earth's pull
The Earth's pull (also known as Gravity), is a constant, based on it's mass. The force increases because the distance decreases, but not by much. Gravity decreases by the square of the distance. The radius of the Earth is ~6000km, so 6000km into space, the force of gravity would be the square root of the force at the surface (9.8) which is 3.3 m/s/s
It's spike-like shape(look up the word javelin in the dictionary) would greatly ease resistance due to atmospheric re-entry.
Friction is also a constant. I think you mean that it's javelin-like shape would decrease air resistance due to it's small surface area?
As it enters the earth, it starts accelerating at =roughly= 9.8 m/s squared.
Once it enters the earth, it pretty much comes to a complete halt. But if you mean, once it enters the earth's atmosphere, it does indeed accelerate at 9.8m/s/s until it reaches terminal velocity. Terminal velocity is also a constant, and as such there are no minimal terminal velocitys. If your amazing javelin were to enter a trans-dimensional flux field and accelerated past terminal velocity, then it still wouldn't accelerate past the sound barrier (unless it was one of those special whisper-quiet, no sound javelins). At which point, it would be travelling about as fast as a bullet, but not as fast as a missile.
Stick out your hand, you'll see what I mean.
| oo|o You're right!
Of course, this type of explanation is probably too much for someone just now learning the word "microgravity".
What is this "microgravity" of which you speak that can defy the laws of physics?
Thank you for explicitly outlining why the human race is doomed.
I'm heading off to snort some cocaine off a hooker's tit's, and if someone tries to stop me, I'll kill them!
Because we all know that terrorists hate our freedom to snort cocaine off a hooker's tits and that's why they attacked the WTC because that building was full of both whores and cocaine, and if those terrorists think that we will forget about it, then we'll just bomb civillians in their general area until they start importing cocaine and make prostitution legal (and beer for our troops so that they can relax with a few cold ones after a hard days liberating).
And the next time some whiney brown person claims that their family was tortured and murdered by some 'death squad', trained and armed by the CIA, well we'll just explain that we have to torture and murder their family because we knew 9/11 was going to happen sooner or later, and so we simply inverted the space-time causal continium, and killed them before they even thought of hurting our great nation.
3. Fire a pulse light right over someones head and assasinate them.
4. End war on terror.
I'm just trying to imagine how having some buzzcutt American at the controls of a weapon in space that can fry you at any time will somehow reduce the level of terror in the world.
Question: How do you tell one rag-head camel jocky from all the rest when viewing them from above?
Presumably, the American way would be just to simple kill all of them. They're all terrorists underneath the rags anyway, right? Besides which, they are all going to your christian hell, so this way you get twice punishment for the same price. Why don't you write the Pentagon with your excellent idea?
Yes, and many real wars have been preceeded by trade wars. Think, then step carefully. I hate to say it, but the real authority here may be the history majors...
The First Opium War began in 1839 as a result of a trade embargo on Opium that was enforced by Lin Zexu, an official of the Qing government. The British exchequer was being drained of silver as it was the only tradeable item that the Qing would accept as trade for tea. To redress this imbalance, it was vital that British traders were able to sell Opium in southern China. So you could say that this was the first 'War On Drugs'.
The 'War in the Pacific' began when the US imposed an Oil embargo on the Japanese in the Pacific. This was presumably to protect American interests in the Phillipines and China.
The pretext for the war in Vietnam was that that, at the time, Vietnam was the world's largest rubber producer. To lose the rubber trade from Vietnam was considered an economic risk to the US (and to the incorrigably corrupt government of South Vietnam, who had been screwing the population for years). The fact that Malaysia quickly replaced Vietnam's rubber production, and the later discovery that rubbers and plastics could be synthesized from crude oil, completely negated the economic argument for the war in Vietnam. But hey, only 55,000 Americans and 2 million Vietnamese had to die to prove that economists are idiots.
When the Federal reserve noticed that the cash receipts in Florida were consistently short by millions of dollars, the US government began the War On Drugs. Not because they gave a shit about people taking drugs, but because brown people south of the border were obtaining millions of their money. Unfortunately, turning the United States into a police state, with the highest incarceration rate in the developed world, only served to increase both the volume and price of drugs imported into North America, thus enriching the brown people even further, and destabilising their governments.
And in the present. A certain dictator of one of the largest Oil producing countries in the world, under the thumb of UN for 11 years, decides to sell Oil in Euros, rather than US dollars. The effect of which would be to severely discount nearly a trillion dollars of US debt. And so to prevent this from happening, a 'War of Liberation' is declared, and the US dollar is (almost) saved from it's inevitable fate.
The Chinese government was allowed into the WTO several years ago on the condition that they would open their economy up to other nations of the world.
Well, if you had ANY idea of the terms of that agreement, perhaps you wouldn't be prattling on like an imbecile.
However, this new policy...
This new policy is retalitory for the US govt threatening textile quotas.
as well as others (such as pegging the yuan to the US$)
There are actually very important fiscal reasons for continuing that practice on both sides of the Pacific. The argument from Washington is not for floating the Yuan, but for discounting it.
do everything but open up the Chinese economy to foreign investment.
Huh? Are you saying that foreigners are unable to invest in China? Or that they are able to do everything they want in China except invest?
Maybe the US should create a blanket policy that only US made clothing will be allowed to be sold to the US government, I bet that would get China's attention.
Wouldn't that be in violation of NAFTA?
The thing is either they want to be a part of the world economy or they do not. Their policies seem to indicate that they want to have the best of both worlds, i.e. foreign economies open to them yet their economy closed to the rest of the world.
No, their policies are about controlling a potential bull in a China shop (excuse the pun). China already IS part of the world economy, whether they or the US want them to be or not. And the very fact that they are part of the world economy is putting enourmous stresses on every aspect of government. Infrastructure planning and development, legal frameworks, social upheaval, and the largest human migration in history (at an estimated 600 million people in 20 years). And quite frankly, it's a big enough task already without the 'expert' opinion of burger-boy-armchair-pundits sitting in their nice cozey condominium sucking down a Millers, telling China that they gotta start taking it up the ass from American businesses like everybody else in the third world.
It may be time for the WTO and the rest of the world to start telling China they can't have everything they want.
Yeah, right after they finish telling the USoA that. It'll happen.
linux is free. therefor it cannot be 'sold' to anyone, only the service contract can be sold if it is an enterprise verision bundled by some OSS company.
Incorrect. Anyone can sell Linux. In fact, you are free to do anything with Linux except RESTRICT ANOTHER PERSON'S ACCESS TO THE SOURCE CODE.
When tesla invented AC power, he was indeed an american citizen.
You are wrong. Nicola Tesla became a citizen after he developed two phase power generation.
Of course, when poor, struggling George Westinghouse asked Tesla to give up his royalties on the patent, so that he could press on with his battle against Edison, Tesla was a US citizen, and as a US citizen, he was soon to learn the 'American Way' as Westinghouse went on to become one of America's richest men and little Nicolai died penniless.
... at the moment of truth, Skywalker turned off the guidance systems on his spacecraft and used his feelings...
Yeah. And Reagan just turned off his brain while Col. N sold weapons to the Axis Of Evil(tm), to pay for death squads in South America (the Spokes Of Evil?).
Which would make America the Grease Of Evil(tm) right?
Slashdot Mirror
How the fuck can something be overated when it hasn't even been RATED????
Stupid mods.
I dont know anything!!!!!
25 posts and still no information on how to kill someone with a website.
Since when does free speech include the right to advocate the slaughter of innocents? Since when does free speech involve the right to tell people "convert to Islam, or be killed"?
I don't know. Perhaps always, hence the term 'free'. Free speech does not mean speech that we like, or even speech without consequences. It simply means the right to speak freely (whatever your idiotic opinion is).
If you want to start defining what is, and what is not free speech, then you may as well not have free speech at all.
A previous poster mentioned that free speech does not include being able to yell "Fire" in a crowded theatre, but in fact it does. It is not the word "Fire" that is prohibited, but in fact the behaviour of deliberately creating a panic in a dangerous location. This is a distinction that we should make when talking about "free speech".
Certainly, we don't want people to engage in the behaviour of advocating violence (although we seem happy for our own governments to engage in it), but generally to censure is more effective than to censor.
If all they were doing was 'voicing dissent' then most Western governments would allow that. It's when they go a step further, and start killing people, that it becomes a problem.
How do you kill someone with a web site? Or is that classified?
I'm going to Scotland in September - what must I not miss?
Your flight.
Why would Rupert Murdoch think of paying $3billion for a mostly free online service like Skype?
Reality Television.
Guantanamo Bay is where we are holding certain people who we captured during a war
Please provide any reference showing the declaration of war.
On the otherhand, there will always be those over here who are more worried about their rights then being alive.
Of course. It is better to live on your knees than to die on your feet.
Goodness.
Your parents get you an internet connection for your 15th birthday and now you have a vehicle to express all of your idiotic opinions.
Except of course, they are not your opinions at all, are they? You've just been watching too much Fox news.
The people of the United States of America have a moral compass that only points in one direction; away from themselves.
Using this compass, they are able to ignore (or be ignorant of), deny, justify or rationalise the equally despicable behaviour that certain members of their society carry out on their behalf.
But let's hand-wave that behaviour away by comparing it with Stalin's or Mao's purges, or Hitler's ethnic cleansing. Of course, the huge magnitude of these acts overshadow America's long history of pogroms and massacres.
But, lest it seem that I think Americans are particularly evil, I do not. I think they are as evil as the rest of the human race. But if only you could stand in someone else's shoes and see how hilarious your piety is.
You really are an offensive cunt, aren't you?
i'm much more interested in who manufactured (not to mention fired) that little guided missile that went through the window 18" off the ground at the Pentagon. Pretty good logistics for a guy living in a cave on the Afghani-Pakistan border, no?
They outsourced the guidance system to India.
Could you try to post this in English next time?
I would if I thought your reading comprehension level was above a 3rd grade.
Perhaps I should have been a bit more specific:
...
Or smarter
-Supply an initial velocity to a steel javelin so that it is accelerated towards the surface of the planet in a targeted manner.
How can you have an intitial velocity and acceleration?
As the javelin conintues on it's course, it gains speed due to the increasing force of Earth's pull
The Earth's pull (also known as Gravity), is a constant, based on it's mass. The force increases because the distance decreases, but not by much. Gravity decreases by the square of the distance. The radius of the Earth is ~6000km, so 6000km into space, the force of gravity would be the square root of the force at the surface (9.8) which is 3.3 m/s/s
It's spike-like shape(look up the word javelin in the dictionary) would greatly ease resistance due to atmospheric re-entry.
Friction is also a constant. I think you mean that it's javelin-like shape would decrease air resistance due to it's small surface area?
As it enters the earth, it starts accelerating at =roughly= 9.8 m/s squared.
Once it enters the earth, it pretty much comes to a complete halt. But if you mean, once it enters the earth's atmosphere, it does indeed accelerate at 9.8m/s/s until it reaches terminal velocity. Terminal velocity is also a constant, and as such there are no minimal terminal velocitys. If your amazing javelin were to enter a trans-dimensional flux field and accelerated past terminal velocity, then it still wouldn't accelerate past the sound barrier (unless it was one of those special whisper-quiet, no sound javelins). At which point, it would be travelling about as fast as a bullet, but not as fast as a missile.
Stick out your hand, you'll see what I mean.
|
oo|o
You're right!
Of course, this type of explanation is probably too much for someone just now learning the word "microgravity".
What is this "microgravity" of which you speak that can defy the laws of physics?
Thank you for explicitly outlining why the human race is doomed.
I'm heading off to snort some cocaine off a hooker's tit's, and if someone tries to stop me, I'll kill them!
Because we all know that terrorists hate our freedom to snort cocaine off a hooker's tits and that's why they attacked the WTC because that building was full of both whores and cocaine, and if those terrorists think that we will forget about it, then we'll just bomb civillians in their general area until they start importing cocaine and make prostitution legal (and beer for our troops so that they can relax with a few cold ones after a hard days liberating).
And the next time some whiney brown person claims that their family was tortured and murdered by some 'death squad', trained and armed by the CIA, well we'll just explain that we have to torture and murder their family because we knew 9/11 was going to happen sooner or later, and so we simply inverted the space-time causal continium, and killed them before they even thought of hurting our great nation.
3. Fire a pulse light right over someones head and assasinate them.
4. End war on terror.
I'm just trying to imagine how having some buzzcutt American at the controls of a weapon in space that can fry you at any time will somehow reduce the level of terror in the world.
Question: How do you tell one rag-head camel jocky from all the rest when viewing them from above?
Presumably, the American way would be just to simple kill all of them. They're all terrorists underneath the rags anyway, right? Besides which, they are all going to your christian hell, so this way you get twice punishment for the same price. Why don't you write the Pentagon with your excellent idea?
Yes, and many real wars have been preceeded by trade wars. Think, then step carefully.
I hate to say it, but the real authority here may be the history majors...
The First Opium War began in 1839 as a result of a trade embargo on Opium that was enforced by Lin Zexu, an official of the Qing government. The British exchequer was being drained of silver as it was the only tradeable item that the Qing would accept as trade for tea. To redress this imbalance, it was vital that British traders were able to sell Opium in southern China. So you could say that this was the first 'War On Drugs'.
The 'War in the Pacific' began when the US imposed an Oil embargo on the Japanese in the Pacific. This was presumably to protect American interests in the Phillipines and China.
The pretext for the war in Vietnam was that that, at the time, Vietnam was the world's largest rubber producer. To lose the rubber trade from Vietnam was considered an economic risk to the US (and to the incorrigably corrupt government of South Vietnam, who had been screwing the population for years). The fact that Malaysia quickly replaced Vietnam's rubber production, and the later discovery that rubbers and plastics could be synthesized from crude oil, completely negated the economic argument for the war in Vietnam. But hey, only 55,000 Americans and 2 million Vietnamese had to die to prove that economists are idiots.
When the Federal reserve noticed that the cash receipts in Florida were consistently short by millions of dollars, the US government began the War On Drugs. Not because they gave a shit about people taking drugs, but because brown people south of the border were obtaining millions of their money. Unfortunately, turning the United States into a police state, with the highest incarceration rate in the developed world, only served to increase both the volume and price of drugs imported into North America, thus enriching the brown people even further, and destabilising their governments.
And in the present. A certain dictator of one of the largest Oil producing countries in the world, under the thumb of UN for 11 years, decides to sell Oil in Euros, rather than US dollars. The effect of which would be to severely discount nearly a trillion dollars of US debt. And so to prevent this from happening, a 'War of Liberation' is declared, and the US dollar is (almost) saved from it's inevitable fate.
The Chinese government was allowed into the WTO several years ago on the condition that they would open their economy up to other nations of the world.
...
Well, if you had ANY idea of the terms of that agreement, perhaps you wouldn't be prattling on like an imbecile.
However, this new policy
This new policy is retalitory for the US govt threatening textile quotas.
as well as others (such as pegging the yuan to the US$)
There are actually very important fiscal reasons for continuing that practice on both sides of the Pacific. The argument from Washington is not for floating the Yuan, but for discounting it.
do everything but open up the Chinese economy to foreign investment.
Huh? Are you saying that foreigners are unable to invest in China? Or that they are able to do everything they want in China except invest?
Maybe the US should create a blanket policy that only US made clothing will be allowed to be sold to the US government, I bet that would get China's attention.
Wouldn't that be in violation of NAFTA?
The thing is either they want to be a part of the world economy or they do not. Their policies seem to indicate that they want to have the best of both worlds, i.e. foreign economies open to them yet their economy closed to the rest of the world.
No, their policies are about controlling a potential bull in a China shop (excuse the pun). China already IS part of the world economy, whether they or the US want them to be or not. And the very fact that they are part of the world economy is putting enourmous stresses on every aspect of government. Infrastructure planning and development, legal frameworks, social upheaval, and the largest human migration in history (at an estimated 600 million people in 20 years).
And quite frankly, it's a big enough task already without the 'expert' opinion of burger-boy-armchair-pundits sitting in their nice cozey condominium sucking down a Millers, telling China that they gotta start taking it up the ass from American businesses like everybody else in the third world.
It may be time for the WTO and the rest of the world to start telling China they can't have everything they want.
Yeah, right after they finish telling the USoA that. It'll happen.
linux is free. therefor it cannot be 'sold' to anyone, only the service contract can be sold if it is an enterprise verision bundled by some OSS company.
Incorrect. Anyone can sell Linux. In fact, you are free to do anything with Linux except RESTRICT ANOTHER PERSON'S ACCESS TO THE SOURCE CODE.
Capish?
When tesla invented AC power, he was indeed an american citizen.
You are wrong. Nicola Tesla became a citizen after he developed two phase power generation.
Of course, when poor, struggling George Westinghouse asked Tesla to give up his royalties on the patent, so that he could press on with his battle against Edison, Tesla was a US citizen, and as a US citizen, he was soon to learn the 'American Way' as Westinghouse went on to become one of America's richest men and little Nicolai died penniless.
Oh. I agree.
Try 1974. Everyone wanted to be the next Woodward and Bernstein.
If I understand you correctly, you are equating electoral fraud with a blow job. Is that correct?
... at the moment of truth, Skywalker turned off the guidance systems on his spacecraft and used his feelings ...
Yeah. And Reagan just turned off his brain while Col. N sold weapons to the Axis Of Evil(tm), to pay for death squads in South America (the Spokes Of Evil?).
Which would make America the Grease Of Evil(tm) right?