And yet earlier this week his own lawyers said he wasn't involved in any of this and joined at the end of it all. Those who know Hammond know he's a liar. This is one of them. If he had anything to back these claims up, he'd not have plead guilty, especially when he 'wasn't even there'.
Nate Anderson (deputy editor, Ars Technica) is writing a book covering this and other things. I've been speaking to him about my dealings with Hammond, including logs from the time. I've no problems providing evidence (I also provided some of the logs to Al Jezeera before the panel discussion with his lawyer I was on Tuesday) Hammond's the one claiming he had nothing to do with the credit card stuff, and the FBI was giving him a hit-list, and yet pled guilty without contesting any claims. I don't know about you, but it sure sounds like he has nothing to back his claims.
Hammond hardly has the best reputation in the world for telling the truth. I've had extensive dealings with him back to 06 (before he went to prison for Protest Warrior) and every time he did something, he'd start off by boasting about it. And then a few weeks later, when called on his boasts, he'd change the story.
When he did the mob action in Daley square, he told people at the time he wanted to mess things up for the politicians and cause as much trouble as possible. When it came time in court, it was 'youthful exuberance'.
I had things I was working on targetted by him, and a variety of lies given as to why, and then threatened that I'd better not talk to his parole officer, because 'snitches get stitches'. (The irony of what he claims to do never seemed to hit him)
It's also funny that he claims others stole the CC numbers and made charges, especially as he said it was his aim with the protest warrior hack. And if they were stolen before he was even involved (as one of his lawyers told me point blank tuesday), that should have been easy for him to prove. So for him to plead guilty to it shows knew they had evidence.
He's not an activist, he's an anarchist that wants to cause trouble, trying to cover things as activism, as a 'get out of jail' card. Because as a thug and vandal and thief, he has no support; as a poor maligned political activist being targeted by the Gov, he has a story people can get behind, despite it being a lie.
I'd much rather have a nuc plant here. As it is, within 25 miles of me, I have the biggest coal-fired plant in the US, and a hydro-plant. BTW, guess where the only cases of uranium poisoning of residents in the last 10 years in the state of Georgia happened? 2 years ago, within 5 miles of the coal plant.
Of course, yes, this is a tea-party district (I don't live here by choice) being covered by both Austin Scott, and Paul Broun.
The real problem most people have with nuclear power though is one of ignorance, and I partly blame superheros. Hulk, invisible man, fantastic 4, Spiderman, Sam Beckett, Alex Mac, Dr Manhattan etc... They all give the idea that 'radiation does things and changes you', and so people get afraid, because they don't know the reality. And unfortunately, in this area, people cherish their ignorance (my landlord is PROUD of the fact he's 84, and has got through life with only a 4th grade education)
That's actually the wider problem now. People in the US think that education means elitism, and that it's somehow 'wrong'. At least, that's the impression in the south.
Let's reiterate a few things that you've glossed over.
The damaged cooling pond was damaged because of a major earthquake and tsunami, and as yet has not killed anyone. The earthquake and tsunami killed tens of thousands, and the nuclear plant was not the only power plant to have issues. Almost a dozen were killed as a result of a hydro-dam breaking at the same time, and yet no-one's hitting on hydro-power, despite it being much more deadly (not just now, but in general).
I haven't done the maths you suggest, but I have worked in that field, developing some things at a different location that may be in use there now for this (I don't know how specific I'm allowed to go) and that's WHY people like me worked on the things we did.
Also, if your folks worked on the first two cores (and, I'd assume, the Demon Core?) you'd know just how NOT actually lethal it is until it reaches its criticality point.
The video autoplays, even if you're on the front page and haven't expanded the story. It's silent for the first 10 seconds or so, then suddenly "Wiggle it, just a little bit!" blares out. Worse, it then goes straight onto another story (overhyped on cyberbullying) and presumably another.
Erm, I don't know how they'd "make more money". Thanks to Hollywood accounting, only a moron would accept any sort of pay deal based on viewership/profitability.
Besides, every TV show I've worked on (be it for Comedy Central, G4, BBC or Channel4) I've always been paid WAY before it airs, most of the time before I'd even left the filming location (nothing quite like being handed a cheque for thousands as you're checking out of the hotel...)
I almost tripped over them at least once (they were hard to see, plus *people*. And most of the weekend, I was in pain, having ruptured my knee during one of the panels I hosted Friday night (TPB-AFK showing, with Q+A, ISPs and 6 strikes, and Pseudonym rights)
Quick note though, The Marriot-Marquis is not 'the host hotel', it's 'one of the host hotels'. It's such a big event, that it takes up five (The Marriott, the hyatt, the Hilton, the Sheraton and the Westin) and the Americas Mart was added as a 6th host building this year.
That said, since I was made aware of this last week, I've been doing some digging, and it may be that the company doesn't own the pattern at all. More info when I get it.
I feel I should add perhaps a slight justification for why my Dragon Con badge is there.
I volunteer for the convention, working on the Electronic Frontier Forums track (which means I emcee a bunch of panels on law, technology, privacy and so on). One of our attending professionals is Mr Chintella (amongst other lawyers). In fact I was on panels with Mr Chintella on the 30th (discussing ISPs and 6-strikes, along with another lawyer, TJ Mihill who has also represented copyright owners), and again on the 2nd (on P2P litigation and Prenda law, Again with Mr Mihill, but also with a local public defender as well)
I also ran a screening of TPB-AFK, and a panel on pseudonym rights,, and 3 more on British sci-fi/fantasy; while Blair was on two panels about the NSA and wiretapping with the ACLU's Chris Soghoian, using his experience in the army to give a differing viewpoint.
So that's why Blair retweeted it, it's a hell of an event that has to be seen to be believed.
Maybe techdirt will send a reporter down next year (there's also space, science and skeptic tracks, for things like the daily dirt0
And to go with the 'AF Holdings should be prepared to explain why Paul Hansmeier was designated as its 30(b)(6) deponent instead of Mark Lutz.' Mark Lutz was due to be deposed at 9am this morning at the state bar of Georgia (http://ia801600.us.archive.org/7/items/gov.uscourts.gand.188990/gov.uscourts.gand.188990.44.2.pdf)
He didn't show. Judge O'Kelley's not going to look favorably on it. Of course, maybe the reason he didn't show was because the deposition order was worded to specifically name Lutz, and state that 30(b)(6) substitutions are not acceptable as he is the material witness, not 'the company'.
As a point of fact, the issue of taped calls came up in the July2nd hearing.
Mr Nazaire complained, and made out it violated Georgia wiretap law, New York wiretap laws (since he often travels to NY state), and Federal wiretap laws. I knew that was all crap, and I'd guess the former FISA judge did too.
However, Mr Chintella did talk about not recording calls unless approved by both sides, but that he'd only done it because Mr Nazaire has promised some sort of agreement on the phone, and then reneged.
So the whole 'calls may be recorded' thing is based on faulty law, and has been discussed in front of the judge who (it appeared to me, from what I saw of his body language) to not be buying it at all.
Of course, since Mr Nazaire filed my blogpost as evidence (60.15) he's also filed the specific references to the laws as evidence (page 3), so he can't get away with claiming that at all now, without looking even worse.