Let me ask you a silly question:
If somebody stops a theft, but then shoots his way out murdering 100 ppl which were not connected to the theft, is he a hero in your POV?

True, but apparently, we have not honored our part either. We told Gorby that we would NOT be going after old warsaw pact nations, but we have.

LOL; Right now, Large businesses and foreign gov. are buying America's gov. That is true. BUT, TRUE fascism is where the gov. controls businesses. By far, the best example of that is NOT the west, but China, Russia, Iran, Venezuela, and somewhat socialist nations in Europe.

BUT, America got businesses to go along with this by offering up contracts (Verizon, ATT and Qwest very much got contracts for allowing a lot more ).

But declaring America as a whole to be fascists is a joke. I will say that the republican party fits the very definition, but they do not control everything.

First, Femi was part of the fascist party. He left Italy to escape the anti-jew laws that was used against his assistants, and was looking at his wife and kids.
Secondly, everything that he had done up to that time, had been in the open. Germany had not even started work on nukes until late in 39, and they used Femi's work just as much as the American's did.

There is ZERO similarities here. After all, did America pass laws that prosecuted either Snowden or his family? Nope.

Hmmm.
Einstein was doing nothing with Germany's military projects before he came to the US, nor did he seek to steal any state secrets to bring here. Yes, Einstein was declared a traitor by Germany, but only later on, and not for spying and stealing.

Snowden has openly stated to others that he stole these documents. He has said exactly how he did it. And multiple other witnesses who were part of this are backing up his story ("I gave my credentials to snowden", etc).

Sorry, but in any nation in the world, Snowden would be a traitor, while Einstein would only be a traitor by those that say that all ex-pats with value are traitors (like china still does, and USSR used to do).

While it is irrelevant, Germany did want to.

Actually, his running to China and Russia is not an issue. We have provided safe haven for others from other nations without them telling us all their secrets.
The problem is that Snowden is a hero by speaking about the spying on Americans, but then he is a traitor for speaking of what we LEGITIMATELY do with spying on other nations.
Now, he has destroyed a lot of our capabilities to know what terrrorists, Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, etc are doing. In fact, I would not be the least bit surprised if all of this outing of our capabilities is what is leading to Putin to go after Ukraine ( that and the fact that there is enough oil to provide Ukraine and the rest of Europe independence from Russia).

At this time if were to come back to the west, I say pin a medal on his chest and then allow 20 ppl to shoot him in the head.

Look, that area is contentious and has LOADS of satellites flying overhead. IOW, loads of pix were taken. It should be easy enough to subtract the KNOWN flights from those sats. and see what remains.
BUT, nobody is coming forth with that.

Seems to me that they should be finding plenty of mamoth in greenland and north america. Perhaps we are not looking as much as we should.

Sometime ago, an accountant ran around screaming that oil is created by the earth. Now, here the possibility of heat and pressure with Carbon and water. Makes you wonder.

I'm sure that they don't. But we understand that roadways isolate areas and cut up habitats. We never really thought power lines would do that. But now maybe we do.

Nature doesn't "consider" anything. Your argument is basically that nature will adapt around us. Yes, it will..... but it might "adapt" in ways that eliminate important species, destroy biodiversity, and generally ravage the environment around us. Nature may "adapt" in ways that suck total ass for both us and millions of other species.

Because we have power lines everywhere and as far as I know we haven't really spent a lot of time considering the possibility that a simple power line is a de facto boundary to an animal's habitat. It's kind of a big deal when there are serious, important aspects of land use planning and environmental conservation that absolutely rely on accurately predicting and knowing an animal's range and habitat.

How about instead of cost shifting and purchase pooling we actually work on what medical care costs in the first place? In the US you can got to Cook County or the US Federal court in the Eastern District of Texas and drive up a drug company's everyday costs by suing them in a class action for side effects they already disclosed before you bought their drug. There should be some sort of grand jury or board of people with a clue who decide the merit of these things before millions are spent on lawyers.

The for-profit speculative commission-only trial lawyers are a big part of service and product costs for drug companies, hospitals, clinics, doctors, nurses, and even medical assistants and medical techs. If you want to make healthcare more affordable through insurance cost changes, change the cost of malpractice insurance so that only people who actually screw up need to pay exorbitant premiums. When I lived in Illinois it was really difficult to get a doctor's appointment within six months without crossing state lines because the malpractice rates caused several of the doctors in the area to retire early or move to more sensible states.

Also, why do we have federal and state funds going into basic research at universities that gets patented and sold to corporations to turn into products? If research comes from a largely government-funded school then the NIH or someone should be licensed to then sublicense any of those patents to all comers for a reasonable fee.

Also, why do the drug companies pay the FDA to fast-track drugs? The PDUFA means that in order to get faster drug trials, the deeper pockets get faster times to market. If we're spending billions of dollars to improve healthcare, why don't we fund the FDA sufficiently to get the best drugs approved fastest rather than the most heavily promoted ones? Why don't we partner with other developed countries to do joint trials that meet the standards of the FDA and its counterparts in, say, the UK, Germany, France, Japan, South Korea, Canada, Finland, Sweden, and Brazil with all the agencies reviewing all the data and making decisions for their own constituencies rather than repeating the trials over and over?

They LOVE to slam CA and anybody over there. Now, Silicon valley remains far more innovative than NYC, so, they continue to gripe about it.