Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Note: You can take 10% off all Slashdot Deals with coupon code "slashdot10off." ×

Comment Re:Lying scum (Score 1) 303

Absolutely, but only one of these people is being investigated for it.

If it's against the law, but we only ever enforce the law targeting individuals based on political reasoning, then the law should be changed or the enforcement should be changed.

Either hold everyone to the same standard and initiate investigations into Powell, Rice, and the entire Bush administration, or change the law such that cabinet level officials have the power to disclose/store non-impactful classified information as they see fit to execute the duties of their office.

"law" may also be the incorrect term here. IIRC, classification rules are maintained by executive order, not by the congress. Could be wrong on that, but I don't have time to look it up at the moment.


Comment Re:Yes (Score 1) 687

Fascism doesn't necessitate the government takeover of corporations. In fact, if you look at the fascist nations in the past you see that Fascism and Corporatism go hand in hand. The only difference is if you are in a corporation that is aligned with the dictator, or not. With those in the 'not' category likely on a short list to a ride at the gallows.

In popular use, fascism is associated with the right-wing growth of government, where as communism is associated with left-wing growth of government. Public schools, welfare, socialized healthcare are all associated with communism. Patriotism, the military industrial complex, views of racial superiority are all associated with fascism.

Communism, in theory, is the exact opposite of Fascism. There is no central authority in communism. There is no dictator, there are no CEOs, there are no gentry, there is only the commune.

The problem with communism, much like libertarianism is in the act of implementing it. Any "true" communism or libertarian utopia implementation would immediately create a power void. That power void would be filled in very short order, and typically by the person or party you would absolutely least like to be in it.

In both cases, power consolidates. In communism with the state, in libertarianism with the corporations, to the point that eventually, both systems will either collapse or result in some form of absolute central control (quite likely fascism).

Both systems can work fine in very small communities, where a small number of close-knit people who all respect and trust each other can get by. But as soon as they are applied to a larger group, they fall apart.

It's understandable that you are unaware of the century of history and nuance that have occurred in the development of communism and fascism, but if you stop listening to Glen Beck and pick up a book, you may learn something :)


Comment Re:Lying scum (Score 4, Informative) 303

From Powell's interview:

Powel: I started using it [the private email server] in order to get everybody to use it, so we could be a 21st century institution and not a 19th century.

But I retained none of those e-mails and we are working with the State Department to see if thereâ(TM)s anything else they want to discuss with me about those e-mails.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So they wantâ¦

POWELL: (INAUDIBLE) have a stack of them.

STEPHANOPOULOS: â" theyâ(TM)ve asked you to turn them over, but you donâ(TM)t have them, is that it?

POWELL: I donâ(TM)t have any â" I donâ(TM)t have any to turn over. I did not keep a cache of them. I did not print them off. I do not have thousands of pages somewhere in my personal files.

And, in fact, a lot of the e-mails that came out of my personal account went into the State Department system. They were addressed to State Department employees and the State.gov domain. But I donâ(TM)t know if the servers the State Department captured those or not.

And most â" they were all unclassified and most of them, I think, are pretty benign, so Iâ(TM)m not terribly concerned even if they were able to recover them.

You may also have forgotten the Bush Administration's use of private email servers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Seriously, this is record of fact. Powell openly admitted to using a private email server, that he 'thinks' most or all of the emails were unclassified, and that he doesn't think that any that may have been classified were impactful.

Rice has not openly admitted it, but she was on the Bush admin's private web server and there were records that she "occasionally" used the official state department email system.

Politically speaking, Clinton's mistake was to keep a backup of the emails. Security speaking, this whole thing has been a wank fest for over a decade. At least Kerry started getting it cleaned up.


Comment Re:Lying scum (Score 4, Insightful) 303

There are procedures in place.

Yup, from Rice and Powell the procedures were to wipe the server and delete all records of the emails so that they wouldn't be included in any records retention or available for inspection.

If Clinton had followed the standing procedures, none of this would have happened. ;)


PS: Don't take this as defense of Hillary. It's offense at the cherry picked nature of this witch hunt.

Comment Re:Yes (Score 1) 687

Bunch of historically illiterate fascists.

I don't think that word means what you think it means.

If they were in favor of the 'evil corporations' taking over everything, paying for their bad decisions, wiping their noses/butts for them, they would be stupid fascist.

If they were in favor of the government doing the same, they would be stupid communists.

These two words, "fascist" and "communist" have very distinct meanings. I would recommend learning the difference between them as calling a commie a fascist makes you look like a dolt.


Comment Re:Yes (Score 1) 687

It's a non-existent risk for us in our current global status. But if the USD and EUR collapsed and China/Russia both looked at it as an opportunity to make massive land grabs, it could be an approach.

It's also an approach we have taken in part in our invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. It wasn't until after we had "won" that we realized that in order to establish order we needed a local government, not a parking lot with a bunch of refugees.

We've seen this approach used in multiple wars in Africa, and within the latest internal conflicts in Syria.

Most likely though, the country that would be most likely to take such an approach against us, is us. If a civil war were to break out, we would be the most likely to engage in absolute destruction of ourselves.


Comment Re:Yes (Score 1) 687

Fair point, the Swiss did in 1932 order their army to quell a strike/protest through the use of force resulting in 60 some injuries and a dozen+ deaths.

Since then, they were activated internally for WWII, and not again since. They've also time and time again had their funding, size, and mission scope cut.

So the long game won. Had the populous turned 1932 into a civil war, far more people would be dead and they would be in a radically different situation now. Had modern media been available in 1932, they would have been condemned by the world over (except for by the fascist and anti-union folks perhaps).

So yeah, I stand by my statement. A camera phone is vastly more powerful today than a gun. Groups like Anonymous have a far greater impact than the militias that showed up at the Bundy Ranch.


Comment Re:Yes (Score 1) 687

It isn't a matter of level of arms, it's a matter of intent.

For a invading force that does not care about the existing populace or infrastructure, an opposition force with small arms is going to be impotent. The entire populous can be wiped out, so there's no need for significant boots on the ground. Small arms fire erupts? drop a couple tons of explosives in the area and call it good.

For an invasion or occupying force that needs to maintain order and control of the local populous and infrastructure, small arms play a role, but I'd argue that good urban combat, sabotage, and a long game of disruption and politics is the only way to win the war. A few guys with guns can get mowed down with impunity, a few hundred peaceful protesters getting mowed down with impunity will have catastrophic results for the offending government.


Comment Re:4/5 in favor (Score 5, Interesting) 751

Companies could relocate out, but entrepreneurs would abound!

Think about how amazing it would be if you could tell "the man" to go to hell, and go out and start your own company with your own ideas and initiative. Knowing that in the years it's going to take to build a market segment large enough to become significantly profitable that you, your spouse, and your children will all have their education covered, their medical expenses covered, and enough money to cover your mortgage and food.

I would have gone independent long ago if I had such a solid safety net.


Comment Re:No such thing as a free education (Score 1) 274

It is NEVER free. Someone somewhere is paying for it.

Correct. In the case of tax payer funded education systems (much like our 4k-12 public school systems), the cost is being incurred by the tax payers and by future tax payers.

The trade off though is that a well educated populous allows for more advances in technology and innovation. Those advances in turn create new market segments, new career opportunities, and new revenue sources, all of which grow the economy.

The end result of which is that the minor cost of tax funded education programs is more than covered through the economic gains of the nation as a whole.

As the old saying goes, "A rising tide rises all boats".


Fear is the greatest salesman. -- Robert Klein