Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:That may be true, but the judge couldn't delay (Score 2, Interesting) 107

It's true that the vast majority of people that lived in ancient times lived and died in obscurity.

It's not true, however, that the Jesus of the fables was just another regular Joe that we would expect no one outside of his circle of followers to have taken notice of. Plenty of people that would have been less famous even then were nonetheless mentioned in some surviving document written by a contemporary. It seems awfully strange that a man who did signs and wonders, who astounded and confounded the wise and powerful, who fed multitudes in a miraculous fashion and so forth and so on, wouldnt show up as such in the historial record until roughly a century after his death.

By itself this is not conclusive either way, but it certainly doesnt strengthen the case for a historical Jesus. Not by itself.

Comment Re:The Constitution is clear on this (Score 2) 107

There is no provision in the US Constitution for Martial Law - a most inconvenient fact for those who wish to wield that power. As a result, they have traditionally taken to citing I:9, which does permit Congress to suspend Habeas Corpus in case of "rebellion or invasion." Since suspending Habeas Corpus and imposing Martial Law are kind of related it has been cited in this context.

The only case law on it I can recall is ex Parte Milligan, where the Supreme Court rationalised a power to declare martial law, yet still ruled that it was inherently unconstitutional to do so in any area where legitimate civilian courts were open and functioning, and therefore ruled against the government anyway. By that precedent I think Congress would have to declare it, and it would only be valid in areas where the civilian courts and authority had already been destroyed or rendered inoperable in one way or another, and only as long as there was a rebellion or invasion in progress as well.

Synopsis from memory, do your own research etc.

Comment Re:Where was Ron Paul? (Score 1) 362

I provided a link which you clearly did not actually watch. The pattern is clear. You have made up your mind without knowing any relevant facts, and you arent about to let any of those facts into your mind now. Posting facts, links, or arguments for you is a waste of time, you will simply reply with your preset slogans regardless.

Comment Re:Right of asylum cannot be assumed (Score 4, Informative) 650

Why is it worth reading? Did you check their assertions? The link they describe with "he's loudly trumpeting the moral superiority of the Putin government" only leads to him very briefly thanking the Russians, among others, who did not simply deny his asylum appeal without consideration. I dont see any 'trumpeting' at all, and I have no reason to expect the rest of this link-heavy screed actually supports its conclusions either.

Comment Re:What the hell Slashdot? (Score 2) 58

So that's what it is eh?

Causes me no problem on the front page. When I loaded the article I said 'oh, what's this, they are trying to load flash, wtf now? And I was spared seeing this awful bunch of crud that everyone is complaining about because this is not one of the handful of sites I trust to run javascript, let alone flash.

I'm not surprised though. They've been publishing broken links for years now, and they get away with that, why not the next level?

Comment Re:Where was Ron Paul? (Score 1) 362

Funny how you know so much about him you feel qualified to sit here and spout multiple paragraphs of bile about his supposed activities, yet you dont have the slightest clue what he actually did.

Here's a list of the representatives that Paul managed to bring together: Lynn Woolsey, Barbara Lee, Dennis Kucinich, Maxine Waters, Jim McGovern, John Conyers (DEMOCRAT) Walter Jones, John Duncan, Justin Amash (REPUBLICAN). You might notice a few names on there that were also important in todays vote from both sides of that list. You might also notice quite a few Democrats in both places as well.

You might try to actually do a little research on a person before you start calling them names in public. Or you might prefer to continue to be rude, petty, and ignorant. Your choice.

Comment Re:Still don't get it... (Score 3, Interesting) 362

It's interesting someone brought up COINTELPRO. The contrast between COINTELPRO and Watergate is instructive. Watergate took down one President who had gone too far - NOT in acting against, and lying to, the American people, but in acting against the other powerful faction in DC. That got reported and everyone has heard of it.

COINTELPRO was much, much worse, it was decades of continuous criminal action. But it was targeted at the people, rather than against a faction of the ruling class. Mainstream media has studiously ignored it more than not, many people have never even heard of it, and those who have mostly have no real idea what it involved.

The rot in this country isnt new, it's been rotting for quite awhile now, it's just that we are finally reaching the point where average folks can no longer avoid being aware of it.

Slashdot Top Deals

"You'll pay to know what you really think." -- J.R. "Bob" Dobbs

Working...