...intimidating a teacher impedes, if not destroys, the ability to teach
The judge in this case, Dolores Umbridge, simply got it wrong. Intimidating a student with unwarranted suspension impedes, if not destroys, the ability to teach because it causes the student body to exterminate all rational thought and to regard their teachers with well-deserved contempt. The student owes no debt of respect to the administration; he should be free, in his off-campus activities, to criticize the miscreant coaches at his school with impunity. The school has no corresponding right to not feel intimidated.
It doesn't matter how you look at the comment, Sagehorn lied and cast dispersions on the character of the teacher that the post and comment were referring to.
Agreeing sarcastically to a sophomoric question is in no way an attack on someone's character. Just FYI: The word you are looking for is "aspersions." Troll better next time.
Secret trade agreements presage all manners of problems to come. Why do you think their terms were secret? The smart investor would be buying shares in companies that make pitchforks and torches.
The Vizio terms of service are unconscionable. This alleged “agreement” is made under duress, given that their product is unmerchantable by design; according to a response (to my complaint) from Vizio’s own tech support representative, you must consent to their TOS or you can’t even use the intended functionality of the device; no reasonable consumer would buy a TV that could only be used by consenting to onerous and unfairly one-sided terms. Further, the written agreement expressly allows Vizio to modify the terms unilaterally without notification to the other party and does not provide for the ablity to rescind.
These surveillance mongers would be laughable if their their liberty-destroying agenda wasn’t so dangerous. How long will they whisper this poison before the same twats that authored the Patriot and USA Freedom Acts eventually pass legislation that disallows Apple et al. from offering encryption?
Our taxes actually pay someone to post this crap?! Social media doesn't further the goal of transportation safety. Are we subsidizing propaganda or just pissing away funds that eventually require more government thugs to continue stealing every greater sums of money from citizens?
Re: Re: What about 2 years worth of lost interest/profits?
He could easily be awarded treble damages for the willful collusion that took place, and that's what he should be seeking. I don't understand why there even needs to be a legal challenge in cases like these. Simply carrying money is not a crime. If the authorities can't demonstrate that the chain of custody for funds relates to criminal activity, they should not be allowed to seize them. The assumption here is guilty until proven innocent.
As long as this “court” is gauging Congress’ intent based on a question of obviousness, why not also gauge what the authors of the Constitution intended for the people? Surely it wasn’t mass surveillance. FISA’s evil genie allegory is apropos; its track record shows that the NSA is its recognized master, and it will use every iota of wiggle room to interpret their wishes as its command.
The law makes sense for corporations and business records, but it's absurd to apply it to citizens. Prior to a legal action, a computer only contains data —not "evidence." Unless you have precognitive skills, anticipating what may or may not be relevant among the minutiae of that data is impossible.
I agree that the guy shouldn't have lied, although it seems that he went to the cops and answered their questions of his own accord, so perhaps they were unintentional misstatements. The article indicates that he was prosecuted for clearing his cache not because he had any part in terrorism, but because of alleged "sympathies" for jihad, which sounds a lot like the government is either going after thought crimes or that it has some ESP of its own, considering that, by their own admission, there was no evidence of that.
I think it’s bizarre to not hate on USA FREEDOM, but I guess some people are silver lining types and others aren’t. I haven't found much of substance in the changes, which further entrench bad practices and allow for six more months of total, illegal seizure, for "transition." Congress, having committed to a course of action, probably considers itself done with surveillance issues for a while, possibly until 2019. The sloppy writings of the legislature are less concerning than are secret courts with their ongoing mockery of representation. The appointment of advocates—made from within the star chamber—only apply to "novel" or "significant" changes, whatever that may be and whomever controls those definitions.
The Act was passed to give the appearance of taking substantive action. Legislators can now claim they struck a fair compromise that balances liberty and security, which may placate some of their constituents.
NSA defenders are still trying to sell the angle that they are merely 'perceived' as intruding on civil rights, even after being reprimanded for the seizures by a court. There is no evidence that a burden-shifting of these actions to a third party will "presumably take care of that." Regardless of whether or not Snowden appropriated some documents, he fulfilled his oath by putting the interests of the people before his own freedom.
I don’t know, Mike. I’ve lost faith in their intention to respect the law. The NSA has a lot of power, operates in a veil of secrecy, and acts in extra-judicial ways with some regularity; surely they never reasonably believed that some piddling executive order and a clearly unconstitutional rubber stamp court gave them actual legal authority. They’ve also “pushed” so hard and so far that boundaries became practically nonexistent; e.g. Clapper brazenly lied under oath, and, by surveilling the legislative branch, the NSA threw our system of checks and balances right out of the window. We should all take anything our government says about surveillance activities with a well-deserved grain of salt.
When I read Cameron's statement, I cringed, and I don't even live in the UK. It sounds ominously dystopian. He might as well have said: "For too long, your government has tolerated you and your different ideals. Those times are over. You'd better get with the program and conform."
These works are derivative, rather than transformative, and it's a slap in the face to legitimate fair uses cases for someone to directly profit from another's photo without permission. What is fair about this use? Does it inform education? Is it parodic? No. It isn't. I would not be so care fee, were this done with my own photo. "Appropriation artist" = con artist.
This is a tu quoque logical fallacy, where you attack a perceived inconsistency in a position, rather than the merits of the actual argument. The "debate" over unlawful surveillance has gone on ad nauseam, and there is little to discuss further—healthily or otherwise; the underlying issue is already unambiguously decided by the Constitution, and a court recently expressed incredulity at the justifications.
This case is the modern day equivalent of The Anarchist Cookbook—an infamous guide for making all manner of weapons has been in print since the 70's; that genie wasn't regulated back into the bottle, and neither will this be.
I agree. It really isn’t sufficient for a court to say that a plaintiff’s rights haven’t been trampled just because he can’’t cite precedent. Some things are, literally, unprecedented. It’s still the judge’s job to make a fair decision based on the facts and the spirit of the law.
On the post: Court Reverses Previous Decision; Upholds Suspension For Student Who Rapped About School Employee Misconduct
...intimidating a teacher impedes, if not destroys, the ability to teach
On the post: School, Police Chief Must Face Lawsuit Brought By Student Suspended For 10 Days For Tweeting 'Actually, Yes'
Re:
Agreeing sarcastically to a sophomoric question is in no way an attack on someone's character. Just FYI: The word you are looking for is "aspersions." Troll better next time.
On the post: Spanish Cops Use New Law To Fine Facebook Commenter For Calling Them 'Slackers'
Re: reason behind this?
On the post: Vizio Latest Manufacturer To Offer More Ways For TVs To Watch Purchasers
Class action?
On the post: NSA Apologist Offers Solutions To 'Encryption' Problem, All Of Which Are Basically 'Have The Govt Make Them Do It'
Learn how to communicate in code, now
On the post: TSA Asks America To LOL At Traveler Who Had $75,000 Taken From Him By Federal Agents
Is internet commentary their job now?
On the post: Judge Orders Lying, Cheating Government To Return $167,000 To The Man They Stole It From
Re: Re: What about 2 years worth of lost interest/profits?
On the post: Fast Track Moves Forward And Now The Fight Is On TPP Directly
Re: Constitutionality
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1983
On the post: FISA Court Tackles Section 215 Mess, Public Advocates In New Opinion
Mischievous genie
On the post: According To The Government, Clearing Your Browser History Is A Felony
Anticipatory relevance and psychic powers
I agree that the guy shouldn't have lied, although it seems that he went to the cops and answered their questions of his own accord, so perhaps they were unintentional misstatements. The article indicates that he was prosecuted for clearing his cache not because he had any part in terrorism, but because of alleged "sympathies" for jihad, which sounds a lot like the government is either going after thought crimes or that it has some ESP of its own, considering that, by their own admission, there was no evidence of that.
On the post: Did Letting Section 215 Expire Completely Change USA Freedom Without Anyone Noticing?
Pragmatism vs. optimism
On the post: USA Freedom Act Passes As All Of Mitch McConnell's Bad Amendments Fail
Re:
On the post: Elected Officials Grudgingly Admit Snowden Forced This Debate On Surveillance... As White House Insists He Belongs In Jail
"There's a perception..."
On the post: Three PATRIOT Act Provisions Likely To Sunset, Briefly, But USA Freedom Will Pass Shortly
Re: Re:
On the post: UK Government Goes Full Orwell: Snooper's Charter, Encryption Backdoors, Free Speech Suppression
Re:
On the post: Richard Prince Continues To Push The Boundaries Of Copyright Law In Selling Other People's Instagram Selfies
On the post: Richard Prince Continues To Push The Boundaries Of Copyright Law In Selling Other People's Instagram Selfies
Unfair use of fair use
On the post: WSJ Editorial Board So Clueless It Thinks That We're Now 'Rushing' Through A Surveillance Debate That's Been Going On For Two Years
Re:
On the post: The First Amendment, The Second Amendment And The 3D-Printed Gun
Re: Is Convenience That Big A Deal?
On the post: Judge Throws Out Lawsuit From Redditor Who Found An FBI Tracking Device On His Car
Re: Judicial cowardice
Next >>