Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Deal of the Day - Pay What You Want for the Learn to Code Bundle, includes AngularJS, Python, HTML5, Ruby, and more. ×

Journal Journal: I HATE IT!!!!!! 6

The new slashdot home pages SUCK SUCK SUCK SUCK SUCK SUCK SUCK!!!! Who wrote that mess? WTF????

A fellow named ReedYoung added me to his "friends" list. Before slashdot ruined its interface I could click on his name and a radio box would come up to friend him back.

No longer. I don't have a fucking clue how now.


Submission + - The Deterioration of a Grand Old Institution (

grrlscientist writes: "This country is spending billions of dollars to bomb the innocents in Iraq, but we can't even spare a fraction of that cost to fix our premier museum and zoo, the Smithsonian Institution and the National Zoo??

From the story: Picture this: holding street corner bake sales to raise enough funds to protect this country's national treasures while we mortgage our future to bomb one country that is 6,000 miles away because we are afraid of the citizens in yet another, even more distant, country that we believe to be our friends."


Submission + - The Bush Admin. Uses Unlawful Combatants (

IConrad01 writes: "Functionalism In Action: Proof Positive — The Bush Administration Is Using Unlawful Combatants is a commentary based on recent news regarding the advancement of military tribunals for the unlawful enemy combatants in Gitmo which attempts to shed further light on the hypocrisy of the Bush Administration.

Blackwater is a mercenary force. Yes, we use the more "politically correct" term of 'security consultant', but as they say, "A rose, by any other name..." In light of recent news, however, this takes on a somewhat more... disturbing cast.

As this blog has reported in the past, more than 100,000 'security consultants' are in active service in a combat or combat-supportive role in Iraq. For now, please keep that in mind as I go in what will seem like a 90 angle from that point. The LA Times today reported on the fact that, apparently, the Bush Administration is set on invoking military tribunals on its military prisoners — you know, the 'unlawful enemy combatants' that we hear so much about? Consider:

The central issue in Khadr's case seemed to some to be ridiculously technical. In 2004, Khadr was ruled an "enemy combatant." The Military Commissions Act of 2006 set up the tribunals to try "alien unlawful enemy combatants."
In Monday's decision, Navy Capt. John W. Rolph, the deputy chief judge of the court, wrote that the trial judge was correct in determining that only unlawful combatants could come before the court. The appeals court also noted that the original Combatant Status Review Tribunal that ruled Khadr was an enemy combatant used a "less exacting standard" than was laid out in the Military Commissions Act.
So whether someone is an enemy combatant or an unlawful enemy combatant is a 'ridiculous technicality' is it?


"I've seen the forgeries I've sent out." -- John F. Haugh II (jfh@rpp386.Dallas.TX.US), about forging net news articles