"This is the same technology the armed forces use to help soldiers kill the enemy. All we're saying is, 'Don't sell it to kids,'" he told The San Jose Mercury News in 2008. So it turns out he knew what he was talking about after all!
At first I thought it was just because I look like Dave Grohl that everyone was coming up to me, but the questions were all about where to find 8TPI 3" lag bolts, gluten-free Portland cement, interior latex matte polka-dot paint, and not a single autograph request. Then I realised I'd worn an orange T-shirt when I went to Home Depot.
> He's claiming that Snowden is worse than Benedict Arnold -- who directly gave info to the British while we were at war with them. And Fuchs and the Rosenbergs, who provided nuclear secrets to the Russians at the dawn of the cold war.
> And he says that a guy who blew the whistle on our own government's pervasive and questionable surveillance regime on its own citizens is somehow worse?
It's a valid position if the US government is at war with its citizenry, which it certainly appears to be. Secret courts, death lists, "Constitution-free zones", gag orders...
Obama can say that he won't scramble any jets but the President's record on honesty is... specious, at best. If he paused with an "ummm" or "ehhh" before stating it, he was outright lying; if he said that and clarified quickly and clearly, he was "stretching the truth", meaning that he wouldn't scramble any fighters, but that doesn't exclude any actions from what the US has up in the sky already, aided by AWACS eyes and KC-135 tankers.
The US has an effective lock over the entire Atlantic airspace; no one crosses if the US decides not to allow it, and any aircraft can be forcefully diverted. So of course the EU is shit-scared; the EU gave up its military sovereignty through NATO back in the 1980s.
The safest way for Snowden to get across is inside a fitted-out 40' container buried down at the bottom of a centre stack on a Maersk or CSCL ship. And that would require too many people to remain silent for it to succeed.
As I watched this I realised that every time Obama is about to stretch the truth his speech pauses, and when he's outright lying the pause is extended and usually verbalised as an "uhhhh". Replay the video and note the difference in his head movements and speech patterns where he's confidently telling the truth (as he believes it) and when he's about to drop another whopper.
How about you give up all the crappy Google translations and ask the people here (among whom sufficient language skills exist to cover most foreign stories covered here) to translate properly? There's an opportunity for you to personally demonstrate CwF/RtB, perhaps even shelling out a few bucks (or Amazon list fulfillment) for the more prolific?
Bonus to you for asking for some legal summaries and why decisions make sense in the local, non-US context (Germany's privacy laws come to mind).
Oh noes! You called me a troll! So you probably don't realise that Mike's posted stories I've submitted.
You're totally cool with Mike sacrificing his integrity for page views. I don't really give a shit about his SEO and constant self-referential links. That's the game. But what does bother me is the bullshit sensationalism he resorts to and his utter unwillingness to accept that the EU has different laws, just like US states have different laws.
Feel free to be a boot-licking sycophant. It does me no harm. But know that if you dare make a claim about me I will respond. You toady.
The only thing this C&D shows is that the lawyer has read Techdirt or Groklaw. There is no legal case, not even a "trade dress" claim. Not only was no trademark infringed upon, the basic design is a part of popular culture, something the letter admits.
But the sheep here, just like at reddit and /. and everywhere else, are lining up to say how great the company sending out baseless C&Ds is, not understanding the law nor even that "Jack Daniel Distillery, Lem Motlow Prop, Inc." is the company name because Lem was playing games when he registered the company but that it's actually owned by one of the largest US booze consortiums. They also don't realise that JD today is nothing like JD of decades past, the recipe having been changed drastically twice, once to knock the alcohol down to the standard 43% and a second time in the '90s to "tune" the flavour to give it more mass appeal.
The "superpriemium" Single Barrel version tasted almost the same as the stuff in the 1950-something bottle of JD I once had.