But they didn't pay her for those hours. If she was performing company duties, she's owed back pay for every hour she did.

I am not sure it's illegal, but I do not understand how she was "off the clock" if she was required to perform company functions. They didn't monitor refute the fact that she was monitored when she asked. So they can't really be said to have hidden it from her. She is certainly owe back pay for every hour of the day and the company should certain pay the penalty for not paying an employee's salary in a timely manner. But those are civil matters... I am not sure anything illegal was actually happening here... Now if they denied spying on her while they in fact did spy on her, then I can see how criminal laws would apply. Oh, and I am not a lawyer.

When they should be worried about 3d-printed propellers. That's that's the only component of a drone that can actually be improved. The rest can be built with cheap consumer parts. Single drones will get out of the communication range of most hobbyists though before reaching any place where they can do any harm to any passenger plane.

Any job that requires a license cannot be performed by someone off shore. Immigrants *can* do them, but only permanent ones. You can't make a claim that a guest worker is needed because he (as a foreign national) is licensed. But even that doesn't really hold up. The only people who still have the job they had 40 years ago are the ones who have stake in the company. So chose employment which offers partnership.

Why not? The airplane pilots' doors are now locked. Now most people can no longer commandeer a missile and fly it into a large building at their whim. That is the most dramatic improvement in security that has happened in response to 9/11. The rest is show business designed make it easier to find statistically improbable patterns of behavior in order to identify flanking threats (rather than the face-frontal attack threats that they purport to thwart).

This:

is an attempt to take advantage of this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...

and the reason it will succeed is that those who are smart enough to know better than to make logic errors in public don't make them in error. They make them because they are selling something. And if they are selling it in the open, their sales pitch is just the tip of the iceberg.

Then why are the lawyers winning?

Hoover? Dam!

Only under common law system. Without it, you'd always run the gambit of a jury not buying your argument that an esoteric point of law is enough to send someone away for 20 years. With it, the jury only gets asked cryptic questions about what they heard. These questioned are designed to conform to the standards which are carved out by the specialists in the law who know the nuances of the web of implications of all previous judicial opinions. If you think jury nullification is possible under such regiment, you watch too much TV.

Esquire? Well, I am sold. They do know who looks smart.

It's not usually customary to invite those under investigation to the investigation... or did I miss something? They are not on trial. What's being looked into is whether the overall process is broken. That's a behavioral question. Maybe they could have invited some psychologists, economists or ethisists to the inquiry. But why invite the scientists who are under the investigation?

Is that there is still dial-up AOL.

2 years is a long run? Hard drives used to have 5 year warranty. Many still have 2 year warranty. Cutting off a people who use the device to store their personal info after 2 years is a "long run"? Aha.

Yes, there is. Hundreds of thousands of people without any kind of security clearance knew about the building in SLC and what it does. It's not even below ground. It's huge.... humangous even. The news of what it does would have been common place by now with or without Snowden.

We would know exactly everything that we already know, but we wouldn't think of some guy, whose name sounds like a title of a fiction novel, when we thought about it. The building in SLC is HUGE. You can see it from space. There is no way the government had any intention of hiding it. If it did, it wouldn't be above ground. Snowden's job is to be a distraction from the topic.