A Snowden trial could... however as I recall, under evidence rules in the US his ability to showcase potentially illegal acts that only came to light due to his own classified leaks is not permitted.
On the other side, no group that I am aware of has sued and won over the various Snowden revelations so as to establish a precedent which a Snowden defense could be based.
So... Snowden 'allegedly' violated the law because he's not yet been convicted... but the "illegal acts that were being covered up" are in fact... illegal acts? Have said acts also been adjudicated as illegal?
I could be mistaken... but at last check more courts have non-overturned rulings finding that the administration was engaged in an illegal amnesty program than have found that the information revealed by Snowden to be of illegal actions.
You really should look into the history of why that facility was established where it was, I'd start with an understanding of the Eisentrager case first: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J...
I think the fact that the USAG won't guarantee his constitutional right to a fair trial
How exactly is the AG doing that?
How exactly are you (the AC) going to determine if it is a fair trial or not?
They are a private company that has a published set of terms and conditions.
Can a baker, florist or photographer put forth a set of terms and conditions with regards to what kind of events they will provide services for?
The courts have been saying no for a while now in the case of some events they may disagree with: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/....
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
It is an interesting world where some people/companies are compelled to provide services equally (if they want to remain in business), while others are given a pass.
I'm still waiting for a case like this to happen in the US as it would be rather entertaining viewing: http://www.nationalreview.com/...
Is that you Gecko45?
and give them grounds to point the finger at the west and say "See, they are a bunch of infidels that deserve what they get!".
Eating pork, drinking alcohol, not praying to Allah five times a day and allowing my wife to drive and not cover her face head while I draw a cartoon about Jesus, Moses and Mohammed walking into a bar is plenty enough reason for them already.
When you are dealing with hyper-sensitive people you have two choices:
1) Change your entire lifestyle so as to walk around on egg shells and hope and pray they don't get offended, or
2) Live your life normally and require them to develop a thicker skin.
There was a time in this country where #2 was actually the norm, alas people like you however keep trying to push us harder and harder towards #1.
But then, it's easy for me to say that... I am an adult, I simply do not get offended regardless of what someone says about me or something that I care about. It's part of being an adult.
Know what we call people who freak out at every little thing?
Children... and Democrats... but mostly children.
Also missing are Yemen, Somalia, and Pakistan: http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/23/...
Clearly his Peace Prize protects him from condemnation.
Wouldn't it be useful to see if and how the murder rate in the US is distributed... and see if perhaps in a country of more than 300 million there might be pockets which are the source of a disproportionate murder rate to?
Or do you want to ignore the fact of the low murder rate in easy to legally get a gun Plano, Texas (.4 per 100,000) and the high murder rate in the hard to legally get a gun city of Detroit (54.6 per 100,000)? The numbers are striking: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...
In fact, oddly enough those places with the highest per-capita murder rates in the US tend to have rather strict gun laws full.
Maybe, it's more than just laws about how easy or hard it is to get a firearm?
Why are you limiting it to just terrorist attacks?
At last check, with the exception of the Gabrielle Giffords's shooting... every single mass shooting in this country since the 1950's where there have been more than 3 deaths have taken place at a location where people were not able to carry a firearm.
This applies not only to every single school K-12 shooting you can think of, but the Aurora theater prohibited firearms on their premises, Ft Hood only allowed MPs to consistently be armed, Virginia Tech prohibited students (even with CPLs) from carrying... the list goes on and on.
Let me turn that Q around for you... when in the history of a world has a person hell-bent on doing evil, walked up to a door that said "Gun Free Zone" and said "Damn, I guess I'll have to find another place to create carnage?"
Yes, deflection.
A point is raised and you poo poo it by attempting to divert attention rather than argue something substantive.
An additive point is raised and you poo poo it again by again attempting to divert attention rather than argue something substantive.
A valid premise which you still reject is expanded upon... and all you can do is poo poo it without citing A SINGLE THING while still trying to divert attention to something else.
You had 3 chances, you struck out.
Your continued attempts at deflection continue to amaze. First you attack the source I cited (I could have picked one of many, NRO seemed the least controversial. Clearly though you didn't click on it as it has a YouTube video from CNN where the quote I was mocking was uttered), now you speak about 'surveys' and call comments like the above just 'speculation or thumbnail estimates'... why don't you try doing what ScentCone did above... offer some specifics?
Allow me, lets consider the terrorists who hijacked the two aircraft that ran into the World Trade Center with some quotes from their Wikipedia pages about their education or work history:
American Airlines Flight 11 – One World Trade Center
United Airlines Flight 175 – Two World Trade Center
As we see, most of these men had some level of education beyond grade/high school. Many pursued college, some graduated and worked, some dropped out, either to go fight, or more often because they struggled academically.
I'd bring up the other two planes... but I think you get my point.
I shall now wait for your next attempt to move the goal posts.
... or is that 'too nuanced’ of an explanation?
Maybe we just can't clean our way out of these attacks?
so most corporations took them only to realize they werent very applicable.
Not applicable in what way? I've got an MSDN subscription and the $150 of free credits I get each month are quite straight forward and applicable... and I use them.
Microsoft recently started revoking, quietly, these credits.
Citation?
now, like a drunken pimp, microsoft is peddling azure to...startups.
Only now? I had an old co-worker who used their BizSpark program to get a good deal of free Azure credits to launch a startup with some friends a few years back.
Alas I've got better things than to do to continue to respond to your screed which does not seem based in much reality.
Those who can, do; those who can't, write. Those who can't write work for the Bell Labs Record.
