Bradley Manning tried to get in touch with a number of traditional media outlets, the NYT included, before giving up on traditional outlets and just dumping the files to Wikileaks. He discussed this, and many other things, in a statement he read at his pre-trial hearing. The Times tries to blame their failure on Bradley, but the ball was in their court and they chose not to follow up on it.
It's all in a statement he read out at his last pre-trial hearing: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/01/bradley-manning-wikileaks-statement-full-text
Come on, has everybody already forgotten that we invaded Iraq because of "bulletproof evidence" that Saddam had an advanced WMD program? And then that justification for invading sort of just... fell off to the wayside when we occupied the country and picked apart the guts of his regime, and it turned out there weren't any WMD's, and the intelligence turned out to be fake?
The United States wants regime change, they're just putting pressure on Iran. The Islamic Republic came into power on a wave of anti-Western (well, more like anti-Western-imperialism) sentiment and has distinguished itself to its people by not bowing to Western pressure, even under sanction. It is entirely plausible that they're committed to pursuing nuclear energy in the face of American pressure simply because they don't want to be seen to buckle to American demands.
They're called "natural experiments" but apparently economics is a special "science."
We are a good sample if you want to study Americans though.
If you'll Read The Fine Article, you'll notice that this particular botnet is using Tor hidden services to obscure the location of the command server; they're not routing botnet traffic through Tor to a command server on the clearnet; that would be silly, as you just pointed out.
I'm glad you latched on to the most important part of the meme (the GP was just parroting a meme which has been making the rounds lately), which was the problematic formulation, and not the message it was trying to convey.
Yeah, because the same "stoner brigade" you just derided for being lazy fucks are also a well-heeled special interest lobby like the coal industry.
while I never was a full-time stoner myself, I did smoke enough to know that I sure as shit wouldn't have felt comfortable driving on it (or doing anything else that required concentration).
Of course, no stoner I've ever talked to claims that everyone can drive at any level of high-ness, but rather derides the idea that you can set a uniform standard like you can for BAC. Pot doesn't work the way alcohol does; it influences brain activity in much more subtle ways, and it effects everyone a little bit differently. Most importantly, it doesn't impair your ability to judge if you're capable of driving.