Or how about we all just drop Java since it's terrible and the cause of too many security problems?
Java on the browser very much corresponds to the cliche of the horribly misshapen monster moaning "please... kill me". Java - or at least the JVM - outside the browser seems to be doing fine. Scala, Clojure and Groovy are thriving, and starting to get mature, Kotlin is hot. Java frameworks are doing really well in webframework performance. The JVM might be in better shape than ever at the moment.
The article had been deleted as demanded, but in a revenge move, it was restored by a different volunteer administrator, improved, and subsequently translated into English for the whole wide world to read.
The story has since hit the German news, and received an official statement from the Wikimedia Foundation."
Oh, it must be true then.
Well, they provided a citation for it. Bush said it during a televised address to a Joint Session of Congress on September 20th, 2001:
Our response involves far more than instant retaliation and isolated strikes. Americans should not expect one battle, but a lengthy campaign, unlike any other we have ever seen. It may include dramatic strikes, visible on TV, and covert operations, secret even in success. We will starve terrorists of funding, turn them one against another, drive them from place to place, until there is no refuge or no rest. And we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. (Applause.) From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime.
Of course, if you'd looked at the reference provided you'd already know this.
Of course, if you'd referenced the citation directly instead of referencing Wikipedia which references the citation, it would have been clear from the outset where the information came from
They say that yelling "fire" is a crowded threater doesn't qualify as free speech. People can get hurt if you do that. It's not funny and accomplishes nothing useful. So why is yelling "bomb" in an airport any better?
It isn't, and that kind of behavior should be punishable, I don't think many people disagree with that. Saying something like "Did you think there was a bomb in there or something" to the TSA is not actually the equivalent of yelling "bomb" though.
I have a very similar sense of humor, and could see saying something like this. But not at airport. And not at the TSA. I don't know if people just lack the common sense or the social skills to realize this is not the right place or time. And it sounds like in most cases they get checked 'just in case' but nothing too over the top. If someone was charged for making a bad joke, then I'd be complaining that the TSA was over the top as well.
Don't you recognise that it is a problem you can't make these kind of jokes at an airport or at the TSA? Yes, it's probably a bad idea to do this. But it is ridiculous that it is a bad idea.
"I'm no Bush fan, but I don't think he ever said that."
There's a wikipedia page about that sentence from him.
Oh, it must be true then.
6oz of liquid? That's even worse than having a bomb!
5oz of liquid is ok. But only in a terrorist-proof plastic bag. 2 gallons of liquid is also OK. But only if you drink it. I don't know much about toxicity and explosives, but I'm pretty sure there must be at least some liquid explosives that will not kill you until airborne.
Just like my double-ROT13 encryption on this message!
Typing in all caps is considered shouting, please refrain from it. Also, ROT13 is traditionally capitalised.