If someone is secretly manipulating or shaping information to push a preferred outcome it first needs to be secret to have any true effects. Without the secrecy you are free to evaluate the posted information with the knowledge that someone is trying to influence your opinion by excluding certain pieces of information or posts in this particular case. If you recognize this pattern you are free to go to another source for information. Unfortunately there are far to many news outlets or websites pushing their own agendas and partisan editorial lines instead of facts. A lot of folks can not recognize fact from opinion and tend to gravitate towards sources that publish information that validates their pre-determined opinion while ignoring any information that contradicts their stated opinion. You have the far right and far left and everything in between supposedly reporting on or describing the same thing but the information they publish turns out looking like the people providing the information all live in their own little universe. Web forums are notorious echo chambers where facts tend to get in the way. "Winning" the argument comes before facts. Most popular news sources and web sources are becoming adept at using "lies of omission" to shape their stories. This allows them to state that everything they published was factually correct which in a sense would be true but the information omitted could have put a whole different slant on the argument.
It's obvious you do not have a clue about what real "censorship" is. So a website rejects posts that do not meet their basic and usually very low standards you agree to when posting there, BFD. On the other hand under real censorship the site would not even exist in the first place and if you tried to start one in some countries you would have state security knocking on your door.
Obama's foreign policy decisions have basically been exactly what a majority of it's citizens want. It's not pretty by any means but he is fulfilling his promises in this one area of state.
When the Iranian jet was shot down the naval task group had declared a 100 mile restricted airspace zone over the naval group which was in international waters at the time. Even today that is SOP whenever a carrier or other naval assets are in international waters. They establish and enforce the no-fly zone in the air and on the surface. Prior to the Iranian plane being shot down Iranian military jets had attempted to violate the restricted airspace several times a day over the previous 7 days. When the commercial jet was shot down their flight plan was headed right into the restricted airspace. The Iranians knew about the air space restrictions and knowingly let the commercial jet fly into that area instead of routing the plane away from the danger. The plane in question would also not acknowledge any communication attempts by the navy to warn them off. And to top it off the plane had it's transponder turned off making it difficult to identify the plane. It almost feels like the Iranian actions were a setup to cause exactly what happened to secure a huge propaganda victory. The US acknowledged the shoot down immediately and did not try to hide or deny the incident. Instead the navy captain who ordered the plane to be shot down was exonerated and the US paid millions dollars to the Iranians in reparations. The circumstances of the Ukrainian shoot down are nothing like what happened in Iran.
Might as well give it a rest. Everyone knows that every country in the world except for the US and possibly Israel are a bunch of meek pacifists who would never engage in state violence of any type under any circumstances and even to suggest such a thing is now a despicable war crime. Although I have to say with all the peace, love, and understanding being spread around the world today I am pretty happy the US massively overspends on the military because were really going to need it in the not so distant future.
Yes he recognizes that the characteristics defining the US government behavior have been in a state of change since day 1. Governmental changes are changed based upon the cultural, economic, and the basic societal environment that exists in each era. It's hard to critique and judge government actions and behaviors in the past by using today's moral, economic, average public mindset, and ethical standards
Are you seriously arguing that because "citizen" is not mentioned in the Constitution that it applies internationally? And I really don't care about the rights of a foreigner and I am pretty sure they would reciprocate the same feelings in spades. There are only so many hours of the day so I need to limit the time I spend worrying about things that really don't effect me. And I believe the original poster acknowledged the fallibility while you have declared the entire judicial system as defunct. I would be interested in what you think should take its place? It is not enough to issue blanket denunciations and protest against something without a good idea of what realistic alternative you would support.
My original post was in response to someone claiming the Maldives should fear the Russian Oligarchs. The very few individuals targeted are considered Oligarchs and close to Putin and extremely wealthy. Your average Russian citizen is not being effected by the sanctions. Those sanctioned have to be wary of having their foreign assets and bank accounts fall victim to the sanctions.
The richest and most powerful Russian oligarchs are currently having some difficulties managing and funding their foreign enterprises due to targeted sanctions. I think the Maldives will get along just fine in the future. All they did was honor and fulfill their responsibilities and treaty obligations with Interpol. The guy arrested is the son of a top level and powerful Russian nationalist and a long standing party member. If this guy really wants his son back they could always exchange him for someone the US wants back. It would not be the first time this type of exchange was made.
They were disabling the domains not selling them to another company to use. And it seems like this incident was settled by using the protections built into the judicial system. In the end the company was compensated and MS got the offending domains disabled. The bigger question is why does MS even make the effort to root out malware and shut it down? Identifying and taking down malware networks benefits everyone using the internet not just MS.
Why would you take a person with a college degree and no experience over a person with 5-6 years of experience if all other factors were equal? A college degree can show a persons general aptitude, work ethic, and show a solid grounding in the basics but they have never worked in a professional programming environment. Like I mentioned before you can easily gauge a persons programming and related technical skills just by asking the right questions and questions about their college degree are at the bottom of the list to be asked if you have not exceeded the interview time limit. I have a 1989 CS degree and a 2008 IT MS degree and when I got my first job that CS degree really didn't help all that much. However, the job experience I accrued rapidly diminished the importance of the college degree to where it just became resume fluff.
He should have limited his releases to domestic data but he did not stop there and released information about foreign intelligence. Programs that did not harm any US citizens or break any US laws. And to top things off the domestic related programs were not secret. He could have used the foreign intelligence data as a bargaining chip to cut a deal with the government to drop or greatly reduce the criminal charges related to the domestic data so he could return to the US.
Google and the internet in general is fantastic resource and denigrating those who take advantage of those resources is silly. And college may be heavy on the theory behind computer science concepts it does not put much effort into teaching the intricacies and pros and cons of the various frameworks floating around today. It is also pretty easy to tailor interview questions to get a good understanding of the applicants skillset and knowledge. Judging someone's programming skills is a lot easier than gauging someone's accounting skills or general business administration skills. The tricky part falls on the interviewer to make the questions and topics relevant and fair for both beginners and experts depending on the position. I have found that introducing a general concept and letting the applicant explain their understanding of the concept is better than asking direct questions about things such as language syntax or esoteric discussions on compiler directives. I could probably come up with 5 legitimate questions about C++ or any other related technical area that even a hardcore veteran would be hard pressed to answer correctly. I have conducted technical interviews on and off for almost 20 years and I can't remember a single time where a candidates college degree ever factored prominently in evaluating an applicant. And get real. I will take someone with 10 years of experience over a college graduate with 3 or 4 years every day of the week. Don't get me wrong a college degree is a definite plus but it is not a very good indicator of how well the person will perform on the job.
The statement "If you want peace prepare for war" says it all. Damn near every dispute or argument of any importance over the past 5000 years has been solved by military force. Russia did not bale out the US over Syria it was the lack of domestic US political and military support that nixed any bombing plans. US inaction in this case has emboldened others who no longer need fear US involvement. Without a direct attack on US interests the US public will never support a military action no matter how much suffering takes place. I am not advocating US involvement I am just commenting on the effects of doing nothing. Personally I am glad the US is disengaging from these areas of non-ending conflict. The middle east is already on it's way to a catastrophic and generational war without end, Russia is free to assume control of it's former client states, and China can continue to take over the south pacific oceans and islands. The warlords in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Iran, and various African countries have a free hand to commit atrocities of the worst type because they have nothing to fear from their own governments and outside assistance is disappearing.
Without the war mongering Air Force and Navy or the military in general most of the technology you enjoy using today would be non-existent or significantly less advanced. Technology advances in general have been accelerated ever since the Chinese, Persians, Greeks, and Romans began trying to conquer the world. Civilian companies working on space technologies today are all taking advantage of work pioneered by the warmongers to advance science and make profits. They have all benefited from the trillions of dollars spent by governments who put no price tag on one upping their potential adversaries to build the better mousetrap. And while NASA might have budget problems the military sure doesn't which is where new material sciences, advanced computer technologies, and new propulsion systems are being created.