Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
So you think it should be legal to take secret information about perfectly legal but secret acts of the US government and publicize them, to the detriment of US foreign relations? Or that it should be legal if he's also whistle-blowing? That release of documents that we really, really needed to know about absolves him of all other crimes in the act?
He definitely broke the law, I don't think that's in question. I do think the main reason he broke the law is that the current whistleblowing system doesn't work. Reporting this through proper channels would have either A) Produced no results or B) Resulted in him being disappeared or ruined. My personal opinion is that his releases, while embarrassing for the current government, weren't actually particularly damaging to the US Strategic position as a whole. Because he worked with a reputable journalist and filtered the releases (unlike Bradley Manning's straight dump, which was intolerable) I think the good he did outweighed the problems he caused, which is why I think he deserves a pardon.
Regardless, a movie about Starship Troopers that doesn't include power armor isn't a proper re-telling of the story.
That assumes he knew about Romney and Koch, while considering Koch and Romney conservatives(not all do).
It what bizarro world are those two not conservatives?
That same may be said of killing [insert bad guy]. It doesn't make the murder legal, it may only lessen the sentence.
Except in Texas where it's still a valid defense to say "He needed killing" and get off scott free if the jury agrees. Not a bad law in my opinion.
Treason: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.
He didn't levy war on us, he didn't adhere to our enemies, nor did he give them comfort. There is a flimsy argument that perhaps his actions gave aid to our enemies but if you roll with that reasoning then all of the people he exposed are also traitors so I'm not sure that's an argument the government would want to make.
He may be a criminal under the current laws, but he's not a traitor. Furthermore, if what he did was illegal then it's the law that is wrong and should be changed. The correct action would be for him to receive a presidential pardon followed by congress strengthening the whistleblower laws and a big shakeup at the NSA to root out their culture of taking activities beyond what they are authorized for. I'm afraid we don't live in that rosy alternate universe however.
So how is a surgeon supposed to wire up a body to a brain that hasn't grown into that body?
Seems like what you need is a way to replicate that original process and let the brain re-learn its interface.
But those are not human hands.
Well, not Human 1.0 anyways.