I was thinking similarly, but not quite the same. How many terrorist are engineers seems to be a backward question. Would a farmer be a terrorist, or have any value to a movement? Professional welder? Carpenter? So there are certain people that fit and certain people that don't from the perspective of the terrorist organization.
Further still, who is more likely to be dissatisfied with the current state of their Government/World? The farmer? The employed mason? Or the unemployed specialty engineer? Who is more likely to notice corruption, the higher educated engineer or the lower educated restaurant cook?
In other words, I kind of agree with the premise that more engineers would be terrorists. I don't think that it's really surprising just by glancing at the world. I don't intend this as insulting, but the more intelligent people I know tend to be the most dissatisfied with our Government and the direction it's going. They tend to not hope on the band wagons, follow trendy music and fads, etc... The founders of the US were similarly well educated people who were fed up with their current government and figured out a way to revolt.
Look at the size of that boy's heed.
I'm not kidding, it's like an orange on a toothpick!
Well, that's a huge noggin. That's a virtual planetoid.
Has it's own weather system!
I'm not sure if you are in the US, but you may not understand how bad our so called justice system is. An interesting article today shows that in the last couple years, Just the Federal "Civil Forfeiture" has taken over 5 times as much money and property as crime. This is where there is no trial, no charge, not even an allegation. Police just take your stuff by simply claiming that it was connected to a crime or.. get this.. a Potential crime.
If you already knew this you know how bad things are. Since the burden of proof, allegations, and fair trials are gone what would make you believe that a Copyright claim would be different?
But you hint at something, which is a tactic not often considered "fair" but since that's gone anyway... Turn the claim on the plaintiff and start having people flood their ISPs with bogus claims of copyright infringement, trademark abuse, or hell even patent infringement. While you are probably right that it would only work against individuals as a real action, it would still start to cost money. And how about everyone going and filing small claims charges against them for damages related to an increase in their ISP billing due to frivolous lawsuits?
I'm really not sure how to oust an appointed judge either. Impeach them and the guys that appointed them?
Obama's too busy "rebuilding" the US economy along "progressive" lines to notice the lack of jobs.
If you think Obama is a Progressive, you really need to turn off the AM radio.
Yeah, I know - what do you expect about a President who learns about major world events by reading about them in the newspaper? Do you REALLY expect someone like that to do his fucking job when he just about BRAGS about NOT doing it?
Again, if you think the President, any President, learns about major world events by reading the newspaper, you need to turn off the TV.
%40 I don't think so...
I guess I've read too many political articles and everything now smells like an ad, a conspiracy or outright propaganda.
LOL, that's because most of it is!
Don't forget the early cancellation clause! I have a boiler plate one that includes paying out the remainder of the contract plus a 50% penalty. If they cancel the contract before the 6 or 12 months is up. I've used it twice. In both cases new management came in and decided to outsource to India. First step was to get rid of all the contractors. I smiled all the way to the bank!
If your going to contract, at lease be smart about it and use every advantage you can get!
What happens when they balk at paying and you have to sue to get your money?
I have to explain that to people all the time.
To an employee, you are a paycheck / insurance / vacation-time / etc. If they fuck up they have to go through the interview process to replace those items. And it is in their best interest to do the job correctly so they don't have to deal with the problems or the hassle of interviewing.
To a contractor, you are billable hours. If they fuck up they have to find replacement billable hours. That's it. They don't care whether it works right because they can charge to fix it. Again. And again. If they find a customer who pays better, you'll be on your own. Unless you want to cough up more money.
Ah, so corporations are gong to see what it's like to work for a corporation.
Let's start World War III over a piece of land in the middle east we all gave fuck-all about five years ago.
Didn't we elect someone to get us the hell out of some sandy region where everyone hates everyone else, and the only people they hate more is anyone who shows up to help? Are we really going to do this all over again with the advisers and the airstrikes and then another Iraq/Libya/Egypt clusterfuck?
Yeah, that was never going to happen. We are not there to help. We are there to advance our interests as our leaders see them. It looks like Russia and the West are now fighting a proxy war in the region, with both sides trying to advance their interests. I think the people there are pissed that world powers have been doing that in their countries since the forties if not before.
By the way, I own stock, but it doesn't mean I am for every type of corporate abuse that makes the company a few extra bucks.
So as a shareholder what are you doing about it? Are you attending shareholder meetings? Are you putting forth proposals? Are you voting on the board of directors? Are you doing these things even if they are unlikely to make much difference?
Just so we're clear I agree with you, but if you are a shareholder and you say nothing then the blood is on your hands too. If you own stock then you are an owner of the company and you are tacitly condoning any actions you don't speak out against.
Not all shares are voting shares. What you suggest just isn't realistic for shares owned through mutual funds and the like.
Being arrested requires that charges be filed. Ahmed was not arrested and not charged with any crimes, he was detained. Your twenty minutes is plucked out of the air and meaningless. Twenty minutes for a vehicle stop? Okay. Twenty minutes for charges relating to weapons or drugs? No way is that twenty minutes. The legal limit varies, but 24 hours is generally the limit that you can be detained without having charges filed (at which point you are arrested).
Ahmed was hauled off and _DETAINED_ for a reason. YOU may not agree with the reasoning, but that does not mean there was no basis. How people keep modding this lie up when law dictionaries are pretty easy to find is astounding (https://www.law.cornell.edu/). Well, not really.. it suits a narrative.
It is your destiny. - Darth Vader