It is amazing what people will due to avoid discussing--or even having to think about--an uncomfortable subject. The message of the image was impossible to miss, yet it is attacked on the wrong grounds entirely.
What do you suppose those same people would have done if his newspapers had been formed into big, boxy letters spelling "HATE"?
That would drive these same people bananas...because such a construct wouldn't carry the built-in excuse that was implicit in the KKK symbol.
Keep up that pressure: They're starting to fold. This is the FBI confessing to a lesser crime, so as to keep the greater crime concealed.
Which, of course, would be that Stingray allows them to record all cell conversations in the vicinity. Do I have proof? Nothing but their hypersensitive reaction to any inquiry related to Stingray; which springs from a guilty conscience.
Believe me, they aren't concealing that Stingray "disrupts phone calls;" we already knew that. No, their guilty conscience comes from something much more ugly, something they're still hiding.
See, the thing is that the officers only see the white areas on the Waze "map". Those are the areas where there are no officers, which Waze is obviously promoting as lawless, free speed zones; where the officers could get a lot of revenue but there are no officers there.
They can't see anything else: If the Waze map were a forest, they'd walk right through and never see a tree.
Maybe I missed something, but I didn't think any U. S. law respecting torture was changed in any significant way since the 2006 Military Commissions act.
So what's the deal? Did his sentence require him to spout propaganda? Because he said, "I’m proud I had a role in seeing that torture is now banned in the United States." But if the law didn't change then how did he have a role in changing nothing?
Before proceeding with a no-knock warrant, officers must flip a fair quarter having heads and tails. If the result of the flip is tails, the officers shall carefully record that no-knock was not used, to permit statistical reporting by no-knock go and no-go.
If the result is tails, the procedure may be repeated for the same warrant, but each occurrence of tails shall be recorded as above.
Seems like a straightforward rule to determine who to punish. Let's see...
1. Everyone uses Microsoft Windows. (Well, not everyone, but close.) 2. That means Microsoft Windows is used by murderers, druggies, robbers, politicians, rapists, and investment banks. 3. So Microsoft is responsible for all that crime!
No wonder we have so much crime! We need to lock up Microsoft!
Or, on the other hand, we could recognize the idea that software companies are responsible for how the users employ their software as: The. Dumbest. Idea. Ever.
Of course it is, "equal parts ridiculous, pathetic and dangerous," that the government would impose a gag order to avoid backlash and/or embarrassment.
It is also my estimation that avoiding backlash and/or embarrassment accounts for around 85% of the times that the government imposes a gag, asserts "national security", or says it "can't invade someone's privacy".
The FOIA was supposed to have prevented the government from hiding malfeasance and incompetence, the primary causes of embarrassment and backlash. But it's been effectively gutted because they just wave "National Security" and FOIA is gone.
To me, personal privacy excuses are especially annoying because the government doesn't care at tinker's curse about it. They violate it often enough when it's to their advantage, but when they will be embarrassed, "Oh, gee, poor _____'s privacy, it's soooo sacrosanct!" Hypocrites.