Well, you did manage to get your point across quite vehemently in 104 characters, and so did I just now!

Not even voting is not a valid criticism, though. Voting lends legitimacy to the elaborate hoax of pretenting we have a choice, and that this choice matters, in a false bipartisan paradigm.

But most of them don't even know/think that, so they can't use it as justification.

Yet they don't even vote.

Well, a good defense always starts with a good offense.
You americans understand, what with this being codified in your constitution, the blood of patriots and tyrants, etc.
So, if you cannot afford a big honkin' gun, or are in a nation where that basic necessity is overlooked, you should definitely look into potato guns, and molotov cocktails.

Trust me, you'll need that firepower.

Actually, sounds like a serious case of education to me. Sounds like there's some sociology, economics, and political science in there. There's even a preexisting condition of history; some nasty shit.
Got bit by that bug a while ago, never got back on my feet. Seems like the aches are even worse lately.
Can't you tell in your bones when a storm is coming?

Well, I think the more interesting question you should be asking yourself is, what are the courts' qualifications that makes their insights about the issue better than a random dude on /.?

I mean, I'm a pretty open-minded guy, and as such, I tend to abhor arbitrary authority (where an entity presents itself as being right, and thus deserving of trust - institutions such as religions and governments often base their authority on this). I prefer rational authority, where the confidence factor into a source's opinions is based on their qualifications and the soundness of their discourse.

And I find Random Dude's opinion convincing, while I haven't seen any rationale for the courts' decisions. And so I'd prefer not to lend them any trust until I have something to base it on.

I mean, if you haven't observed the courts' utter failure to comprehend technical issues time and time again, then you must be new here*.

(4-digit UID notwithstanding)

Well I'd think that a propagandist fits within the definition of media terrorist. Which fits what Ravell is doing here.
An interesting thought to hold in mind is that information always has two main meanings; the information itself and the information of what your interlocutor wants you to believe.

And you stop grumbling at about -40. At that point you just do whatever needs to be done and get the hell back to shelter ;)

Seems quite broad, no? So many ways to define sets of people, and then say you only need 2. So basically any time you have any kind of relationship with another individual you are suspect.

A subset of which is

So basically any citizen in any relationship with another citizen cannot be safe from worry should he mention what he honestly thinks of the established order and what should be done with it. And whatever he legitimately thinks should be done, if the establishment doesn't like it he's fucked because

is a criterion that could probably jail the U.S. population ten times over - and it looks like it'll keep getting worse.

Fixed that for you.

Except, no, it is not a phone, aside from a very limited subset of its functions. It is a phone-enabled internet tablet, a nearly full-fledged turing machine that you can do nearly anything you want with it, especially if you are wishing to root it. It has as much power as a 2000's 1000-1200$ desktop computer, with a capacitive touchscreen, blistering solid-state memory, many different integrated wireless communication protocols (wifi, bluetooth, cell), and who knows what else, all at your fingertips in a pocket form factor for 600 bucks.

But sure, think of it as a phone if you can't conceive better.

Good attitude, but you should take it just a bit farther. Don't want something public? Don't do it! Someone'll know eventually, and time is running out before humanity tends towards total information awareness.
As a side bonus, you can feel good about yourself, because you're not worrying about someone learning something you did - you just have to cope with everything you do.
Why are westerners so dissociated in what they do and what they wish to be?

Actually, Iran does not hold anti-Israeli rhetoric. Rather, just as how you don't call atheists "anti-theists", Iran simply does not recognize the existence of a State of Israel. The basics of their logic being, Israel's creation being totally illegitimate (look up the Balfour declaration, and the subsequent uprooting of Palestinians from their lands and then wrongful appropriation of these lands by Israelis), there is no reason at all to recognize that state.

This. I've encountered the same problem on Last.fm. I only pay 3$ a month for unlimited music, so I figured I might contribute something like an extra 20-30$ a month to the artists I stream most during that period.

But while most of them give their music for free on collective sites like 8bitpeoples.com, I've found no way to give targeted donations to certain artists which I enjoy most, save from following the last.fm link to "buy on itunes/amazon"... but how much will iTunes/amazon collect, and then their publishers, and then who knows what else... so so far I've avoided donating while I work out the problem. Why do artists not provide us with a way to give them straight, targeted, pure-profit donations?