Specifically this part: "The Commonwealth's motion to compel decryption does not violate the defendant's rights under the Fifth Amendment because the defendant is only telling the government what it already knows."
What...the...fuck!?!? They're actually codifying an exemption of a constitutional right on the basis of a presumption of guilt by the PROSECUTOR? So we're now not only violating the constitution, but universal human rights as well?
This entire contortion of a ruling makes zero sense. Evidence is compelled of the accused that the prosecution believes will incriminate that same accused, as evidenced by the prosecution "already knowing" what it will say/be/read, and that same presumption of guilt is what obviates the law of the land?
This is a ruling that cannot be allowed to stand....
Mine did as well and I then discovered how awesomely convoluted my district is drawn. This tool is handy for both contacting your reps and making you hate the gerrymandering all at once.
Hell, WOMEN were new at the time, and they came from men's ribs, obvs, so those of us with penises are actually the root of all.....WAIT, WE CAME FROM GOD. Holy shit, it's HIS FAULT!!!!
The Cheney family, while clearly evil, also doesn't have that Clinton all-encompassing gravitas. Plus, I'm pretty sure Dick Cheney never sexually assaulted someone....
Nor mine. There surely must be a more hideous political family besides the Clintons, but I can't for the life of me think of who that family might be. Nobody lies like a Clinton....
I've always been both a console gamer and a PC gamer, but I had a realization the other day when I realized how much I hated Watch Dogs: if there were sports titles on the PC that match the quality of the console games, I'd probably sell my PS4 immediately and never buy a console again....
Re: I think people are being a little too quick to dismiss Ubi's defense...
Jonathan Cooper, quoted above, is also a former Ubisoft animator so I'd trust him to know what's involved in adding a female character. Reading other comments from people in the industry, you might be surprised how many female characters are built to include most of the male/default animations, just with different targeting relative to the characters size/shape/etc.
The general consensus is that it really isn't what Ubisoft is claiming it is....
Not only this, but I find it abhorrent for people to look at someone staying IN the situation and trying to change and telling them to just leave the union and not fix the problem. This guy staying in and still fighting is way braver than simply bailing....
While this isn't Mike writing this article, I'll thank you for this comment. I actually have a TON of problems with this article, but the section on Abu Sayyaf is downright insane.
Case in point, characterizing their goal as wanting an Islamic govt. on their little plot of land instead of their actual STATED goal, creating a new caliphate-led theocracy as a FIRST STEP, is disingenuous in the extreme.
For all my war-weary fellow Americans who want it all to not be true and for their to be no danger, man up and get ready, because there sure is an ideological war to be fought, and it will come to our shores once more, so you might as well be prepared for it....
The point is that they're changing the game. AMD could do something like this as well, but they don't, and the end result of Nvidia doing it is a worse off gaming consumer.
The post, and the study it's based upon, relies on a couple of logical assumptions that I don't think are actually true. For instance:
1. "For one thing, the American public has yet to be let in on the government's legal rationale for acting as judge, jury and executioner of US citizens suspected of terrorist activity." - The percentage of drone strikes that have hit American citizens is so small as to be negligible. That isn't to say the question isn't important and that Obama must answer for his killing Americans, it's just that it has no place in a conversation about the overall drone strike policy. It statistically might as well NOT be happening.
2. "The basic premise of the Obama Administration's drone program is that decapitation, the killing of a terrorist organization's top leadership, works. Killing al-Qaeda's leadership should, in theory, limit the organization's ability to plot attacks on the US and its allies." - That MUST be a joke. The whole point of the cell terrorism operation is that it can operate without leadership directive of terror actions. Is this study REALLY suggesting the American defense department is somehow unaware of this? No, the answer to this absurd fallacy is addressed below....
3. "According to Jordan, believing that targeted killing can actually weaken al-Qaeda means assuming al-Qaeda depends on a group of charismatic leaders. But that's wrong." - What fresh bullshit is THIS? al-Qaeda, and most other terrorist groups, do not rely on charismatic leaders for operational planning and orders, but they sure as SHIT rely on them for the most important part of their operations: money-gathering. On top of that, each of these leaders takes on something of a rallying point, where bin Laden was supposed to be the final Imam, for instance, and every instance where we put those fantasies to a deathly rest is a strike at the enemy's morale.
4. "Without a doubt, simply pursuing this program has done little to engender goodwill in countries deemed terroristic enough to warrant extrajudicial killings." - And? Who cares? The idea that we have to win the hearts and minds of groups of people who are either actively plotting against Americans or harbor those people is silly. You'll NEVER appease the terrorists without giving up our ideals and those harboring them aren't allies. Why are we concerned with their opinion of us? I'd be more interested in beginning to see jihadi groups and those harboring worrying about what WE think of THEM....
5. "That the government remains largely silent on the collateral damage hasn't helped." - Nor, mind you, has the terrorist groups' lack of explanation on why they so often hide among those that would end up being collateral damage. This shit is messy and we make mistakes. The amount of those mistakes are amplified by the actions of the enemy. Why are we looking to blame ourselves first for this?
Put another way, if terrorists were hiding a WMD cache inside a nunnery that had befriended them, are we advocating that we spare the terrorists and forsake the lives of Americans to avoid hurting any nuns that aren't directly involved in terrorism? Please....
6. "But Jordan's report goes deeper, suggesting the "cut the head off" approach doesn't work against a largely decentralized opponent. Rather than throw underlings into disarray, the death of a top-level terrorist simply results in swift reshuffling of the organizational chart." - Yes, the enemy doesn't immediately concede defeat. So what? Please tell me this study isn't really suggesting the death of bin-Laden didn't have a destabilizing and monetary effect on al-Qaida, because that would be FOOLISH. Actual al-Qaida is a shadow of its former self because the targeted strikes worked beautifully.
7. "As Jordan's stats note, there's no correlation between confirmed "decapitations" and worldwide al-Qaeda attacks." - You're looking at the wrong correlation. If I whack a hornets nest out of a tree, sure the hornets may attack even more than they had before. But the nest is gone and the long-term ability for attack is reduced. The effectiveness of programs like this is measured in decades, not years. What you want to know is that each decade enjoys a safer environment from these groups than the last. I'll note that nothing similar to 9/11 has occurred since that terrible day and few attacks on American interests overseas have even come close to 9/11 in size and scope. The Benghazi attack is a wonderful example. For all of the silly conservative hand-wringing over it, it was ultimately of no consequence.
8. "especially one that contributes to radicalization" - We MUST stop it with this stuff. You cannot appease the radicalized. It won't work, unless you're willing to give up free speech over cartoons in Europe, admit fault for being invited to have an airbase on "holy" land, and hand over a democratic pacific island nation to terrorists just because. Stop trying to play nice with these people; it won't work.
It's far beyond time that Americans get a little stuffy about their rights, their freedoms, and their government. There's quite a lot to work on, and there may be aspects of the drone program that need to be altered, but that doesn't mean scrapping the program entirely, nor does it mean targeted killings of radicalized jihadists doesn't work or isn't necessary.
And for the love of all that is holy, stop blaming yourself for the fact that a bunch of radical jihadi maniacs with no interest in your freedom or your life don't like you. That doesn't matter in the least.
On the post: Massachusetts SWAT Teams Claim They're Private Corporations To Get Out Of Transparency Requests
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Massachusetts Ignores 5th Amendment; Says Defendant Can Be Forced To Decrypt His Computer
This ruling is INSANE
What...the...fuck!?!? They're actually codifying an exemption of a constitutional right on the basis of a presumption of guilt by the PROSECUTOR? So we're now not only violating the constitution, but universal human rights as well?
This entire contortion of a ruling makes zero sense. Evidence is compelled of the accused that the prosecution believes will incriminate that same accused, as evidenced by the prosecution "already knowing" what it will say/be/read, and that same presumption of guilt is what obviates the law of the land?
This is a ruling that cannot be allowed to stand....
On the post: Australian Police Confiscate Pastafarian Man's Guns Because He Posed For His ID Card Wearing A Colander
Re:
On the post: House Overwhelmingly Votes To Slam The Backdoor Shut On The NSA!
Re: My Rep voted NO
http://www.house.gov/htbin/findrep?ZIP=60559&Submit=FIND+YOUR+REP+BY+ZIP
On the post: That Time When People Thought Playing Chess Would Make You Violent
Re: Re: Now We Know
On the post: Hillary Clinton: All For Vague, Undefined Surveillance Reform, But Screw That Snowden Guy
Re: Re: Re: Re: Anyone against Snowden
On the post: Hillary Clinton: All For Vague, Undefined Surveillance Reform, But Screw That Snowden Guy
Re: Anyone against Snowden
On the post: Back To Normal: Nintendo's YouTube Plan Sounds Like A Big Bucket Of Terrible
Re:
On the post: Fans Mad At Ubisoft For Nixing Female Characters In 2 Games; Ubisoft Mumbles Something About Cost
Re: I think people are being a little too quick to dismiss Ubi's defense...
The general consensus is that it really isn't what Ubisoft is claiming it is....
On the post: Video Game Music Composer May Get $50K Fine By His Own Union For Working
Re: Re:
On the post: The Real Blame For The 'Slender Man' Killings Is The Media Blaming Slender Man For The Killings
Re:
On the post: Why Has Tom Cruise's Reputation Faltered? Pshh, Because Of The Internet, Of Course!
Re:
On the post: Techdirt Is Now 100% SSL
You son of a bitch....
This is how you know your boss hates you: he refuses for free the thing you value most in this world....
On the post: Creepypasta Feels Compelled To State That Its Stories Are Fiction & It's Not A Satanic Cult; Thanks Everyone...
Re: Re:
His soul belongs to ME KNOW. Muahahahahahhahahahaah!
(Please contact to contribute your 10% of salary tithings)
On the post: How Chinese Censorship Tries To Disappear References To Tiananmen Square
Re:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contras
All clear, now? A Chinese man in Beijing wouldn't have been able to do that in the 30 seconds it took me....
On the post: Everyone Go Crazy: Prepare To Blame The Internet For Murder-Inducing Ghost Stories
Re:
On the post: Everyone Go Crazy: Prepare To Blame The Internet For Murder-Inducing Ghost Stories
Re: Re: Maybe...
You mean other than AWESOME!?!?!?
On the post: How Many Terrorists Are There: Not As Many As You Might Think
Re: Article is disingenuous
Case in point, characterizing their goal as wanting an Islamic govt. on their little plot of land instead of their actual STATED goal, creating a new caliphate-led theocracy as a FIRST STEP, is disingenuous in the extreme.
For all my war-weary fellow Americans who want it all to not be true and for their to be no danger, man up and get ready, because there sure is an ideological war to be fought, and it will come to our shores once more, so you might as well be prepared for it....
On the post: Is Nvidia Playing Fair With Their New Development Tools?
Re:
On the post: Study Shows US Government's Drone Killing Strategy Is Having Zero Impact On Al-Qaeda Attack Numbers
Writing for the minority
1. "For one thing, the American public has yet to be let in on the government's legal rationale for acting as judge, jury and executioner of US citizens suspected of terrorist activity." - The percentage of drone strikes that have hit American citizens is so small as to be negligible. That isn't to say the question isn't important and that Obama must answer for his killing Americans, it's just that it has no place in a conversation about the overall drone strike policy. It statistically might as well NOT be happening.
2. "The basic premise of the Obama Administration's drone program is that decapitation, the killing of a terrorist organization's top leadership, works. Killing al-Qaeda's leadership should, in theory, limit the organization's ability to plot attacks on the US and its allies." - That MUST be a joke. The whole point of the cell terrorism operation is that it can operate without leadership directive of terror actions. Is this study REALLY suggesting the American defense department is somehow unaware of this? No, the answer to this absurd fallacy is addressed below....
3. "According to Jordan, believing that targeted killing can actually weaken al-Qaeda means assuming al-Qaeda depends on a group of charismatic leaders. But that's wrong." - What fresh bullshit is THIS? al-Qaeda, and most other terrorist groups, do not rely on charismatic leaders for operational planning and orders, but they sure as SHIT rely on them for the most important part of their operations: money-gathering. On top of that, each of these leaders takes on something of a rallying point, where bin Laden was supposed to be the final Imam, for instance, and every instance where we put those fantasies to a deathly rest is a strike at the enemy's morale.
4. "Without a doubt, simply pursuing this program has done little to engender goodwill in countries deemed terroristic enough to warrant extrajudicial killings." - And? Who cares? The idea that we have to win the hearts and minds of groups of people who are either actively plotting against Americans or harbor those people is silly. You'll NEVER appease the terrorists without giving up our ideals and those harboring them aren't allies. Why are we concerned with their opinion of us? I'd be more interested in beginning to see jihadi groups and those harboring worrying about what WE think of THEM....
5. "That the government remains largely silent on the collateral damage hasn't helped." - Nor, mind you, has the terrorist groups' lack of explanation on why they so often hide among those that would end up being collateral damage. This shit is messy and we make mistakes. The amount of those mistakes are amplified by the actions of the enemy. Why are we looking to blame ourselves first for this?
Put another way, if terrorists were hiding a WMD cache inside a nunnery that had befriended them, are we advocating that we spare the terrorists and forsake the lives of Americans to avoid hurting any nuns that aren't directly involved in terrorism? Please....
6. "But Jordan's report goes deeper, suggesting the "cut the head off" approach doesn't work against a largely decentralized opponent. Rather than throw underlings into disarray, the death of a top-level terrorist simply results in swift reshuffling of the organizational chart." - Yes, the enemy doesn't immediately concede defeat. So what? Please tell me this study isn't really suggesting the death of bin-Laden didn't have a destabilizing and monetary effect on al-Qaida, because that would be FOOLISH. Actual al-Qaida is a shadow of its former self because the targeted strikes worked beautifully.
7. "As Jordan's stats note, there's no correlation between confirmed "decapitations" and worldwide al-Qaeda attacks." - You're looking at the wrong correlation. If I whack a hornets nest out of a tree, sure the hornets may attack even more than they had before. But the nest is gone and the long-term ability for attack is reduced. The effectiveness of programs like this is measured in decades, not years. What you want to know is that each decade enjoys a safer environment from these groups than the last. I'll note that nothing similar to 9/11 has occurred since that terrible day and few attacks on American interests overseas have even come close to 9/11 in size and scope. The Benghazi attack is a wonderful example. For all of the silly conservative hand-wringing over it, it was ultimately of no consequence.
8. "especially one that contributes to radicalization" - We MUST stop it with this stuff. You cannot appease the radicalized. It won't work, unless you're willing to give up free speech over cartoons in Europe, admit fault for being invited to have an airbase on "holy" land, and hand over a democratic pacific island nation to terrorists just because. Stop trying to play nice with these people; it won't work.
It's far beyond time that Americans get a little stuffy about their rights, their freedoms, and their government. There's quite a lot to work on, and there may be aspects of the drone program that need to be altered, but that doesn't mean scrapping the program entirely, nor does it mean targeted killings of radicalized jihadists doesn't work or isn't necessary.
And for the love of all that is holy, stop blaming yourself for the fact that a bunch of radical jihadi maniacs with no interest in your freedom or your life don't like you. That doesn't matter in the least.
Next >>