Depends.

Many wealthy people in the USA made lots of money from WW1 and many were all set to make lots of money from WW2, until those pesky Japanese spoiled the party.

The current "war" is (I think) the longest continuous period of war in the USA's history.

Corps make lots of money from wars, as long as they are not fought at home.

Call me crazy, but I'd much rather trust corporations than government. Corporations have to answer to shareholders, and to a lesser extent, their customers

If there were real competition in residential Internet service, those corporations would have to answer to their customers. With the local duopolies, they only have to answer to their shareholders.

So, yes, you are crazy.

I recently transferred one domain (I plan to transfer the rest), but came across an interesting issue in the process. The domain used a proxy registration to hide my information (as recommened in TFA), but, in order to allow the transfer, I had to disable the proxy registration and make it public. Thus, for some time, my privacy protection was not effective. Now this wasn't a big deal for me, but it could be for others.

Also, note that GoDaddy's domains by proxy makes the total cost of a private domain registration far higher than many other registrars.

Although the proposed power would let Customs request passwords from any traveller or do random checks on electronic devices, Tremain told a parliamentary select committee that was not its intention.

Instead, the department would only use the power if it was acting on "some intelligence or observation of abnormal behaviour", she said.

Protip: whenever some government official says that they won't use their power for some purpose, you know that it will be used in exactly that way or for that purpose. Case in point, RIPA in the UK, which has been used (abused) in cases related to petty crime in exactly the way it was originally claimed it would not be used.

Indeed. Watch the movie "This film is not yet rated" for a very clear explanation.

Right. So why do you keep voting for the Two Parties? They hardly have a reason to change when, for all your "citing", they can count on your support no matter how they treat you.

You know that the US has these things called "Primaries", right? That's your opportunity to vote for a candidate who reflects your opinions better.

Through the money of the Koch brothers, the Tea Party has pulled US politics to the right. It can be pulled back, but not if people give up on voting. In my opinion, those who don't vote have no right to express an opinion on any political matter.

It's not a coincidence, it's a natural consequence of the economic power behind the English language. If the world were dominated by China, the world's most famous bard would be called Li Bai.

British economic dominance came during and after the Industrial Revolution, not before.

I have often wondered if the reason that England led the industrial revolution was the use of the English language. There were also cultural issues (a culture of meetings that enabled exchange of ideas), but perhaps there is something about the English language that allows people to think about, discuss and solve problems in a manner that is more effective than some continental languages.

I've never had a problem getting the rate I was quoted. It's common that they are out of the particular car class I ordered, but that's to be expected,

I am not going to use Hertz again.

In the past, one paid extra for the convenience of an on-airport car-rental location and perhaps a nicer bus. Now, all the car rental locations are in the same building (unless you are using a small, local company) and at some (many) airports, the busses are also pooled. So the primary advantage of Hertz is gone for me.

On my last rental, I declined the navigation system. Yet on returning it, I was charged for the navigation system. Was this an accident? I am suspicious that it was not.

On this same rental, I asked for additional drivers. At no point was I told that there was an extra cost for this. Yet, I was charged extra. This may be legal, but it was deceptive.

Hertz, you lost my business.

See the Wikipedia article on the Speech and Debate Clause or read it for yourself in the Constitution. So he can talk all about the program during a speech on the floor of the Senate, and nothing can legally be done to him.

FTFY.

If a bunch of Republican senators could get together and write a letter outlining the details of these abuses, I'm sure there wouldn't be any consequences (to themselves

Wouldn't there? Ask Joe Nacchio if he agrees with you. My expectation is that certain details of the private lives of some of those politicans would somehow become public.

At this point, I believe that it is possible (likely?) that the CIA and the NSA would use (have already used?) blackmail to preserve their position.

Well, obviously if the prosecutors hid evidence, then they go on death row and the accused is set free as he did not get a fair trial.

I'll put you in the naive category. I think that is better than stupid.

There was video of a policeman hitting a handcuffed supect during questioning. Was he convicted? No. You really think that prosecutors are going to suffer for misconduct? If so, I have a bridge to sell you.

You get 1 appeal, and if denyed, you go directly to the punishment instead of back to your cell. If you REALLY didnt do it, take the chance, otherwise sit there and rot until your day

Either you are naive or ignorant. What happens when it comes out that prosecutors hid evidence? Does that justify another appeal? Why do prosecutors fight tooth and nail to prevent examination of previously unexamined DNA evidence?

The plain fact is that innocent people have been executed in the USA. And you want to speed up the pathway to execution?

Do you want to be responsible for executing innocent people? I don't, which is one of the reasons that I oppose the death penalty.

some of it is semantics. I dont see a problem with changing "choke hold" to "arm bar" is that is what the police call the move that was done.

Terminology that replaces generally used terms with those used by a relatively small group has no place in Wikipedia. This isn't about semantics, it's it's about obfuscation.

Long time ago I had a co-worker who made a mistake where he lost a lot of un-recoverable data. He went in to our boss to offer his resignation. My boss said "Hell no! I just paid $100,000 for you to learn that lesson, so now I need you to make sure that kind of thing can't happen again."

Some years ago, I got a consulting gig where the previous consultant had tried to add a RAID array to the company's main file server, but re-formatted the existing array instead of the new one!