Oh no worries, my scorn and disgust isn't aimed at you, rather it's all focused on the morons in this story, who have demonstrated a complete and utter lack of critical thinking ability, and instead rely on 'guidelines' and 'rules' that are completely incapable of being applied proportionally, instead treating the lightest offense as heavy as the worst.
... to prioritize profits over lives, and not give a damn if people die because they cannot afford the medicine they need.
The pharma industry of course is filled to the brim with these kinds of 'people', but it's a serious shame that the Indian government, who had been willing to actually fight the greed of the scum to make sure their people were able to afford medicine, instead appear to be caving in to pressures from outside their country.
I can't be the only one thinking this, but it seems the 'prestigious publishers', in cahoots with the (likely kickback receiving) ones pushing for students to have works published brought this on themselves, by on one hand insisting that students and academics get published, while at the same time being completely indifferent to just what was published.
So really, they only have themselves to blame for the egg they now find covering their faces, and if they want to fix the mess they caused, they might have to (gasp!) do their jobs, rather than just handing it off to a computer to 'read' and judge.
'looks real enough to be used in a threatening manner'
A pointed finger is supposed to look enough like an actual gun to be considered 'threatening'... the school official is either a coward of the highest order, or desperately trying to justify a completely insane and idiotic action.
Unfortunately, that's where the insidious part comes in, they usually try and keep the 'you must be a criminal' tax low enough that buying from areas that don't have the tax is still the more expensive option due to shipping and whatnot, so unless people know about it, and are willing to pay extra just so they don't have to pay the extra tax, odds are most will just pay the increased price.
And of course it goes without saying that the 'collection' agency isn't likely to make a big fuss about how their win just jacked up the price on everyone's electronics, as that would mean the blame would (rightly) fall on them for the price increase, so most people will likely just end up blaming the 'greedy tech companies for raising the prices', without having any idea as to the real reason behind the raise.
I believe you severely overestimate their rationality and sanity, and especially their ability to admit to being wrong, more likely they'd call in the national guard and/or the FBI to deal with the 'massive outbreak of terrorism threatening the school'.
Mind you, would make for a very public protest against the idiocy that is 'zero tolerance', so that alone would probably be worth it.
By the way, it's my opinion it's quite possible this is happening to voting machines as well. Or even likely, given what we've learned of NSA's depravity.
Eh, seems to be more effort than they'd bother with or need. With how much data they scoop up on everyone, if they want to influence an election, just 'let slip' a few embarrassing facts, or put that character assassination part of the agency to work whipping up outrage against the enemy of the one they want elected.
You can practically taste the fear and panic, and you can certainly see the results, that of lashing out wildly, with already debunked accusations, as though the people he's trying to convince are as gullible and easily fooled as the morons he deals with on a regular basis.
Yeah, not sure if you've noticed, but the idea of 'It's legal so therefor it's okay' has been taking a beating recently, and in fact has never been a good way to measure the good or bad of an action.
Recently, most of what the NSA has been doing is 'legal'(technically... sorta... mostly because they've been fighting like mad to keep any outside, impartial judges from reviewing their actions, and sadly the courts have gone along with them), but other than people unfamiliar with just how extensive their spying is, or authoritorians who feel that those in power can do no wrong, you'd likely be hard pressed to find someone who would argue that what the NSA is doing is right.
Historically, you've got a whole bunch of things that used to be legal, yet which the vast majority of people today wouldn't agree with in the slightest. Little things like racial segregation, prohibiting women from voting, the ban on drinking, freakin' slavery...
Point is, just because something's 'legal', doesn't make it right.
Not illegal no, but it does showcase the massive blinders the people working for the NSA seem to be operating with.
Objecting to bosses that they feel are spying on their every action, because of what it does to them, yet having no problems doing the exact same crap to the nation as a whole(if anything the employees get off lighter), apparently not realizing that the troubles they deal with from pervasive surveillance are the same ones they're inflicting on everyone else.
Not illegal to be sure, but hypocrisy of that magnitude is certainly a good thing to have pointed out like this.
Whereas you seem to fail to understand that 'trial, then punishment if the accused is found guilty' is generally considered, worldwide, to be how justice is best upheld.
Something like this completely throws out the idea of 'innocent until proven guilty', and replaces it with 'Guilty because I said so', which is anything but just.
Skipping the whole trial step and going straight to ordering the accused to be punished is both a serious abuse of power(by completely sidestepping the courts like his, he's essentially saying he's more powerful than them), and a pretty strong indication that the evidence, and therefor the case, wouldn't hold up in court, and the person ordering the shutdowns knows it.
Ah, never gets old, seeing people like this who get angry at Snowden for 'harming 'murica' show such open contempt for such core principles of the US like 'everyone gets their day in court before punishment' and 'innocent until proven guilty'.
Nope, far as they're concerned, they know he's guilty, so straight to the execution, none of that 'court to prove guilt' crap.