those were political movements, not religious ones. Their drive was to enact their political and economic goals, religion did not drive the revolutions.
it certainly does have temporal and geographic limitations.... the military is the one who has jurisdiction in this legislation, thus it can not be in the US states or territories. It must also be a location that the military has been given authorization of force to operate against Hostile forces, so it can not be in some base in Germany or Japan, it must be during a military action.
your argument is based on someone's statement... I read the bill and it is pretty clear where this action can be taken and by whom it may be taken by.
What would be cool is if Slashdot create a forum like story where we could think tank these issues. Sort of like Slashdot interviews, but rather than the person we solicit be given our highest modded questions, we set it up so they bring us a problem and after think tanking on it for a while, we send them the top what ever solutions....I think it would need more time on the front page and some better tools for the revising work, but I think that is a task that we could perform admirably.... crowd source those solutions baby!
considering all adults in the world oppose SOPA because of the key issues that are in the WH statement, why wouldn't president Obama sign such a modified bill?
where is the WH statement vague? They support legislation to stop foreign piracy on the internet. They do not support all the moronic crap in SOPA that would allow entrenched business interests to shut down any site they want by nodding at an ISP via breaking the way the internet is built to work.
They could have ignored the issue entirely if they were planning to let it pass. It is not like this issue is something covered on Fox and MSNBC and CNN.
I do think they will support a heavily modified version that meets their published requirements because as they say in their statement, they support legislation to curtail piracy....just not stupid legislation that breaks the internet, hurts the ability of start-ups to innovate, ignores due process and limits free speech.
Google does not sell your data....They sell your demographic to advertisers...which means: "Mr Advertiser, I can show your ad to 18-25 year olds who enjoy and like to stay up past midnight." and the advertiser purchases that demo for its ads.
How is a coal miner voting for Obama a vote against his self interest? Unless you mean to say that he should have voted Green....a Libertarian vote would certainly not be in his interests (you think the Libertarian party supports mine safety regulations with string inspections?)
Democrats suck at falling in line... Why do you think there was so much softening of things like health care reform, and a failure of the card check bills? because DEMOCRATS pealed off.
If there were bills on the floor that a a filibuster proof majority in the senate and a majority in the house had to pass, and a republican president, you would have the majority leader, the speaker and the president deciding what the bills look like, and when they will be scheduled to be voted on.
If they are going to allow for the military to take jurisdiction of policing in the US from law enforcement, then there isn't anything left of our democracy to fight for.... we will be a police state by that time and not have any rights in the first place.
Actually, he can't, go read the law. They expanded the ability in 2006 (thanks Republican house and senate) and then in 2008 the expanded ability was revoked (thanks Democratic house and senate)
It is factually incorrect. The detention of suspected US citizens who are suspected terrorists or are actively fighting against the US military can only occur in a theater of war.
ONLY suspected terrorists captured by the military in a zone that the military has been granted Authorization of force (read section 1021 of the bill). Thus, the US states and territories are not included given the posse comitatus act.
Slashdot Mirror
Please, give some of these fine atheist examples.
those were political movements, not religious ones. Their drive was to enact their political and economic goals, religion did not drive the revolutions.
congratulations.....you have illustrated that they have different values than we do.
try again... it bought Deja and incorporated it into GoogleGroups.
Picasa is a little long in the tooth and needs some new features and a UI change to make it more user friendly.
it certainly does have temporal and geographic limitations.... the military is the one who has jurisdiction in this legislation, thus it can not be in the US states or territories. It must also be a location that the military has been given authorization of force to operate against Hostile forces, so it can not be in some base in Germany or Japan, it must be during a military action.
your argument is based on someone's statement... I read the bill and it is pretty clear where this action can be taken and by whom it may be taken by.
you are pretending that it is vague. It isn't.
And the president has no excuses because he has a three people (who signed the response) who know better about these issues.
What would be cool is if Slashdot create a forum like story where we could think tank these issues. Sort of like Slashdot interviews, but rather than the person we solicit be given our highest modded questions, we set it up so they bring us a problem and after think tanking on it for a while, we send them the top what ever solutions....I think it would need more time on the front page and some better tools for the revising work, but I think that is a task that we could perform admirably.... crowd source those solutions baby!
Do they have to allow due process for a US citizen captured in a battlefield fighting against the US Military? that is what NDAA allows.
50 thousand people voted on that poll.... so... how does that make it something that they could not ignore?
you are right, I did not communicate what I actually meant... "all adults int he world that oppose SOPA" is what I meant to say.
considering all adults in the world oppose SOPA because of the key issues that are in the WH statement, why wouldn't president Obama sign such a modified bill?
where is the WH statement vague? They support legislation to stop foreign piracy on the internet. They do not support all the moronic crap in SOPA that would allow entrenched business interests to shut down any site they want by nodding at an ISP via breaking the way the internet is built to work.
They could have ignored the issue entirely if they were planning to let it pass. It is not like this issue is something covered on Fox and MSNBC and CNN.
I do think they will support a heavily modified version that meets their published requirements because as they say in their statement, they support legislation to curtail piracy....just not stupid legislation that breaks the internet, hurts the ability of start-ups to innovate, ignores due process and limits free speech.
Google does not sell your data....They sell your demographic to advertisers...which means: "Mr Advertiser, I can show your ad to 18-25 year olds who enjoy and like to stay up past midnight." and the advertiser purchases that demo for its ads.
who said not using it for power generation? I said poor use would go away.
And?
Coal mining is not going away. Coal is an energy source.... what would go away is poor use of that energy source.
I hate war hammer.
How is a coal miner voting for Obama a vote against his self interest? Unless you mean to say that he should have voted Green....a Libertarian vote would certainly not be in his interests (you think the Libertarian party supports mine safety regulations with string inspections?)
Democrats suck at falling in line... Why do you think there was so much softening of things like health care reform, and a failure of the card check bills? because DEMOCRATS pealed off.
If there were bills on the floor that a a filibuster proof majority in the senate and a majority in the house had to pass, and a republican president, you would have the majority leader, the speaker and the president deciding what the bills look like, and when they will be scheduled to be voted on.
If they are going to allow for the military to take jurisdiction of policing in the US from law enforcement, then there isn't anything left of our democracy to fight for.... we will be a police state by that time and not have any rights in the first place.
Actually, he can't, go read the law. They expanded the ability in 2006 (thanks Republican house and senate) and then in 2008 the expanded ability was revoked (thanks Democratic house and senate)
Nice try. that is not going to happen.
It is factually incorrect. The detention of suspected US citizens who are suspected terrorists or are actively fighting against the US military can only occur in a theater of war.
ONLY suspected terrorists captured by the military in a zone that the military has been granted Authorization of force (read section 1021 of the bill). Thus, the US states and territories are not included given the posse comitatus act.