Unlimited bandwidth is not possible. You can make it illegal all you want. It doesn't trump physics.

Limited bandwidth does not justify throttling some customers more than others, depending on the nature of their "unlimited" contract.

Looks like Ozzy politicians are even more short-sighted and dumber than the sorry bunch of venal no-hopers currently running Westminster.

I wouldn't be too sure of that: Tory MP says astrology is good for the health "David Tredinnick, a member of Commons committees on health and science, says Britain should look to the stars to improve the nation's health"

Meanwhile, the really important issues, such as the NSA spying on everyone are being ignored.

This is just a sop, aimed at geeks to get them to forget about Snowdon and many other important issues for a while, perhaps to make people think that the politicians actually care about what people think.

Sometimes it simply breaks the incoming missile or rocket into segments or destroys its ability to follow its planned ballistic path. According to Lloyd and Postol, if the warhead isnâ(TM)t destroyed the interceptor failed.

That assumes that a certain degree of accuracy is needed by the incoming missile. If the target is "somewhere within a 10 mile radius" and the missile is knocked off course by a couple of miles, then the missile is likely successful.

I was in the same situation once. Laid off by Northern Telecom in the late '80s, I started work as a contractor at their head office three weeks later for double what I'd been paid as an employee. :)

I was once part of a site closure, which resulted in some employees (unfortunately, not me) getting both early retirement (pension payments) and re-hired as contractors at significantly higher rates than their salaries had been.

My wife and I decided, the next day that, short of an emergency situation, we were done flying commercial. If we couldn't drive to get there, we didn't need to go. It's not because we were afraid of terrorists, but we saw what a hassle and invasion of privacy it would became.

Some of us have families the other sides of oceans. It's not so easy to give up flying.

So it only takes 14+ years for ICANN to do something?

Perhaps DRA sent a letter to ICANN concerining renewal of icann.org?

The UK Parliament can pass a law that directly contradicts a treaty. A judge faced with a law that also gives clear direction that the intention was to override European law should have no choice but to interpret it so, rather than assume as now that the intention is to remain in accord with Europe given the prior acts Parliament have passed that speak to exactly that.

Once again, No

And yes you're right, how could anyone not love a massive command-based supranational state with poor democratic issues, endemic corruption, and a legal code largely directed at controlling behaviour rather than respecting individual rights. Worked out really fucking well last time.

The EU has its problems. But for the UK, pulling out would be worse. In order to trade with EU members, the UK would still have to follow many EU requirements, but without any influence over the setting of those requirements. Those car factories in the UK? Likely closed, like so many other businesses as exporting to EU countries becomes difficult.

Parliament is the supreme law-making body: its Acts are the highest source of English law.

Unlike in other countries such as the US, there is no such thing as an unconstitutional law, or an act of parliament being "illegal" if properly passed, because there is no constitution in the UK, and an act of the parliament duly passed is supreme.

No. It isn't. UK law must be in accordance with EU treaty requirements.

I am beginning to suspect that they whole anti-EU campaign is not really an astroturfing (and use of the useful idiots) by the 1%ers to get rid of those pesky EU laws that are preventing unrestrained wealth acquisition by the rich at the expense of the poor.