sciamiko’s Techdirt Profile

sciamiko

About sciamiko




sciamiko’s Comments comment rss

  • Feb 16th, 2015 @ 2:05am

    Re: Re: regarding torture

    It shows the difference between the legal and military mind, as exemplified by these two quotes:

    "... the law holds it better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent party suffer..." - William Blackstone, Commentaries of the Laws of England (1765)

    "I'm more concerned with bad guys who got out and released than I am with a few that, in fact, were innocent." - Dick Cheney,
    http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/12/dick-cheney-defends-the-torture-innocents /383741/
    (2014)

  • Dec 8th, 2014 @ 9:04am

    TSA approved locks

    I thought these days that baggage had to be locked with TSA approved locks when flying to the USA. This means the TSA have the master keys to get in, or else they will cut the bag open if they want to see what's inside.

    I do not suppose that it was difficult for baggage handlers to get their hands on those master keys.

  • Jul 3rd, 2014 @ 4:48am

    ISDS?

    Could this be a case where ISDS could actually be useful? Surely the investors have a case against the states of the UK and USA because they are interfering with their business without due reason.

  • Jun 27th, 2014 @ 6:22am

    Asymmetry

    I've filled in the questionnaire (as an EU citizen), and thanks to all the good work in clarifying the issues on the various sites. It occurred to me that ISDS creates an asymmetry, which judicial systems normally shun. If I had a dispute with a corporation (sorry, sir, investor), then even if I won, the investor could take the case to the arbitration panel claiming that the local laws were antithetical to the investor's business model. But even if I could afford it, could I get to put my case?

  • Mar 22nd, 2014 @ 1:37am

    Re: Voting

    Quoting Sarah Harrison:

    "The act gives a definition of terrorism as an act or threat "designed to influence the government", that "is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause" and that would pose a "serious risk" to the health or safety of a section of the public."


    Voting for the opposition at a general election seems to fall into the definition of "terrorism" according to this statement.

    1. Designed to influence the government? Yes - in fact attempting to overthrow the government.

    2. Made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause? Yes - promoting the political aims of the opposing party.

    3. Pose a "serious risk" to the health or safety of a section of the public? Yes - listen to any raucous parliamentary debate in the House of Commons and it is clear that the party in power believes that the other side will serious damage the health of the nation or part of the population. Look like good character witnesses for any trial.

    This legislation is a disgrace and needs repealing.

    P.S. all my attempts to put in html tags just got stripped out when previewed. How do you make an indented blockquote?

  • Feb 11th, 2014 @ 9:31am

    Don't Spy On Us

    If you're in UK, there is this action today against spying by GCHQ:
    https://www.dontspyonus.org.uk/org

  • Dec 6th, 2013 @ 8:23am

    Re: Can't tell


    2) The Intelligence community is simply saying, fuck you we can do whatever we want because no one will stop us.

    I think you've got it right there. They believe they have the capability and are going to use it whatever anyone says. Spies are in the business of manipulating others and have no regard to what anyone thinks of them doing so.
    It's the sort of psychopathic behaviour that will brazen everything out right up until someone takes their toys away.