Before an answer, I will say that a large part of that trust came from being ignorant to the way the world actually works. I was young, delusional, and believed that authorities would never lie. Outside of Nixon and Kissinger of course. Hindsight is 20/20 as they say, and looking back I don't believe they were as accountable as I wanted to believe.. but there are several differences between today and then in attitude and training of law enforcement.

Back then, police were not held in a higher regard than the public. Respected, sure.. but a cop's actions were measured by their risk to the public. For example, the commando style raids we see today are a very new phenomenon. 30-40 years ago this would not have happened unless someone's life was in eminent danger. Today we have commandos chucking grenades into houses to serve warrants. We have commando style raids for non-violent crimes like drug dealing. Cops shooting family pets because they claim "I was afraid of the dog". Those things simply did not happen back then. Police were expected to respect the public as much as the public respected them.

There are many other differences in training and actions found to be acceptable then and now. A cop shooting someone today can simply use the excuse "I thought I was in danger", even when it's a kid playing army with his buddies. That would have had an officer suspended without pay 40 years ago, and back then there were many more kids out playing army/cops & robbers, etc.... Toy guns were much more common, hell we brought them to school to play at recess.

Lastly hiring practices are much different then and now. Then, there was more worry about public perception of officers. Cops were expected to outsmart the bad guys, not kick their asses. Today agencies want the ass kickers, bad asses, and bullies. "Gangs" are not something new, so that excuse does not work as the justification.

Accountability is a good thing, and something severely lacking today. We have enough independent footage to know that events that happen should not, but since the footage is from "independent" sources they are all labelled questionable. A source that can be held with fewer questions, such as the body cameras by cops, would add much to a case like Michael Brown. Even if the camera was not facing Michael Brown at the onset of the encounter, audio could have been used to determine who's story was most accurate.

Thirty/Forty years ago I would have always taken the cops word over an encounter. Today, not so much. What you point out is exactly correct. People behave different when they are being watched, which includes "people" in Law enforcement.

Because it's not possible to have both, unless you are just going to be a baby factory and let the State raise the kids. Is that another thing you want? And trust me, I'm a huge advocate for Plato's "The Republic" but that is one area where I completely disagree with Socrates. (if you are confused read the book)

Being a parent is a full time job all on its own. Not everyone can be like the Yahoo CEO and build a nursery next to her office to spend some time with the kid while at work. Most women in fact are not in such a position, and many don't want the stress of having a baby at work anyway. Instead of admonishing or belittling a person for wanting to be a parent, prop them up for being a parent.

Oh I know, I'm a misogynist for claiming that the woman should do these things. If of course you ignore the fact that men don't have the breasts to breast feed, and lack the uterus to carry a baby from conception to birth. After birth, I'm fine either way. I work with a lady who pumps all day and her husband takes care of the baby (and their other 2 children) all day. Nothing wrong with this arrangement in my opinion, and in today's society it's often the fiscally responsible choice.

Stop painting any woman without a career in some_company as a bad thing, and relationships as a bad thing. Parents (yes, that is plural) should both be involved in a kids life, and this happens when we promote the benefits of relationships and promote accountability for actions (such as pregnancy). This trend of 2 people being required to work full time at a company is a very new one, it really started in the 1970s and 80s.

But then again, I have not hear the arguments about the patriarchy and misogyny for a while so at least it's different agenda based reporting.

Society does not have enough turmoil, so we have to invent and spew more...

Except as I stated to someone else, the system won't change with the same players in the system. No candidates in the last election, or the one before that, or the one before that, ad nauseam, have changing our system on their agendas. Zero, zip, nada, primarily because their livelihood depends on the current broken system. If it's fixed, they lose their jobs (or have a strong chance of doing so). We could use the same exact arguments to discuss term limits, which have also been discussed by the populace but never voted on favorably by the politicians who rely on this broken system for their paychecks.

I surely agree that the current system is horribly broken. Maintaining the system won't "fix" it, so enough people have to vote to change the system in order to invoke changes./p.

If only our Politicians thought this simply, but I do like the idea.

So the US Media and Politicians never switched the blame from the GOP who claimed responsibility for the hack to the DPRK never happened? The shift in blame is all black helicopters and "hookey"? Really now, I think you need a reality check, because this is not a casual link but _WHAT HAPPENED_.

Perhaps you are considering that the CIA did make changes to Sony PR information is also just a casual link, even though the emails prove this. More black helicopters and casual strands right?

Believe everything you are told by our Media, they have never lied before. Same goes for the politicians, and remember Saddam really had mountains of yellow cake and dirty bombs.. GW told you so, and it has to be true.

This is after the fact we are talking about, not what ever fantasy land you pretend to live in. Sony did not have to out their execs, hackers did that for them. The original group that took credit never mentioned either the movie or the DPRK. That was a side show to divert attention away from the content of the emails and put CISPA SOPA back on the political agenda. You are choosing to ignore investigative journalists who do this for a living from The Intercept and Wired. Oh, I know.. according to you Glen Greenwald must just be a 9/11 truther because you say so and correlate anyone that questions Government actions to an easy to play lie card. Pathetic, simply pathetic, reasoning skills you have going on there.

Here is a tidbit, but we can go further. For example Opium production in Afghanistan was prohibited under the Taliban and right before the war Opium production was at record lows. Right after the invasion opium production goes to all time highs and has remained at all time highs ever since. There were plenty of lies regarding nearly every war, it's a question of whether or not there was also enough justification for "bad" to start the war. I don't believe any of our recent wars have such justification, but of course that is my educated opinion.

As to the comment from Halivar, stating that "Sony works for the CIA": That is a goddamn idiotic statement for anyone to make. It does not discount what is obvious and provable collusion between huge corporations and Governments, which we have plenty of _proof_ for in the US. We try to pretty some of it up by labeling it "just lobbying", but in reality it's outright bribery, blackmail, cronyism, and nepotism. The levels of collusion are not just courtesy, it's input to operations in both directions. Whistle blowers from nearly every major "news" outlet have claimed this, and many from Hollywood have made similar claims regarding Hollywood's itinerary and direction for movies. "Oh, they only did that in WW I and WWII" really does not make sense, but this is what people will attempt to claim.

Nowhere do I even imply that this is about money for Sony. This is about demonizing the DPRK, not money. It's about bringing back CISPA/SOPA legislation, and demonizing hackers in general. It's politics, not money driven.

Before you attempt to make a false claim the answer is "N", I'm not a fan of the DPRK Government and don't intend any implication that they are the good guys. Quite the contrary, if everything we are told is true they are a despicable dictatorship. At the same time, lying to topple dictators for a political agenda has not turned out well anywhere else. Iraq, Libya, and Afghanistan are easy examples of lies to topple Governments that have been horrific for the populations living in that country. We don't conquer to establish a better Government for them, we topple to destabilize and exploit resources.

Further, we can't topple the DPRK without pissing off China and suffering severe consequences.

fixed link https://firstlook.org/theinter...

It simply demonstrates the sham that we were told a week ago today. There is no threat from the DPRK, just fear mongering typical political spin for an agenda the people are not privy to see. The Intercept has an article hinting at what I'm sure others guessed here.

Wired had the article last week demonstrating how week the link is to the Sony hack and the DPRK.

I normally enjoy Seth Rogan's movies, but in this case I'll wait for the TV edition. I don't need to pay for the propaganda machine willfully.

And we will change our broken system of FPTP gerrymandered electoral college how exactly? Last election there were exactly 0 candidates willing to change the system. Primarily because their livelihood depends on the current broken system. We don't see any traction on things like term limits for the same reason.

Sure, I agree that there is a huge hurdle. We have to jump it to move forward.

Telling people to either not vote, or to only vote D or R will never change the status quo. There is no possible way to get away from the currently broken system claiming "the US is a two party system" (which it is not and has never been) by doing nothing.. or doing the same thing over and over.

Results _require_ action! If you want to change the system you need everyone voting and voting against the status quo. Promoting Einstein's definition of insanity will never make things better. It can't, and this expectation is exactly insane. "Oh, if we only voted for this Democrat or That Republican things would be different". Yet this is what gets repeated over and over.

If you don't like the path the US is on, vote for anything except the status quo! The argument of "those guys are bought and paid for too" may or may not be true, but if they are they surely don't receive the amount of money and pandering that the D and R candidates do.

Intentionally running a MITM attack against your customers aside, there is a huge problem with the legislation to begin with. There is a valid answer, and has been for quite a while, for people that want to keep their kids away from porn without the heavy handed Government regulation.

Cybersitter and NetNanny are not for me, but if I had young kids I may use that type of service if I was worried about their access. These companies get paid to manage content for you, and are _completely_voluntary so don't impose restrictions on everyone. And if those services are not available in the UK, or not good enough in the UK, why not create the company and let the free market do the work? As bad as the US has become, I'm glad I'm not from the UK.