What am I missing here? I thought Assange isn't a US citizen. He also wasn't on US soil when he received, nor when he published the material. How is the US juridical system involved, then?
There is no exemption to the law for non-citizens. Non-citizens are routinely extradited to other countries for breaking their laws, even if they weren't physically present. Kim Dotcom is one example, as was that British hacker who broke into U.S. military computers (I forget his name.) I believe there was also someone from British Columbia extradited to the U.S. for selling marijuana to U.S. citizens while they were visiting Canada. (Again, I forget his name.)
At no time has Assange had a US security clearance. He has no legal obligation to not publish info others have provided.
Laws against releasing classified information apply to everyone, not just those with a security clearance. Some exceptions can be made in the case of journalists publishing information for which there is a strong public interest (read up on the Pentagon Papers case, for instance) but in general, knowingly leaking classified documents is a crime, no matter who you are. Secondly, as the article states, they now believe they have evidence to show that Assange assisted and possibly even enticed Snowden and others to break the law by stealing documents or violating their security clearances. Assisting in the commission of a crime is most definitely a crime. So it sounds like they may have a pretty good case.
>> Gorsuch will "face cases that demand a solid command of the complex issues digital technology raises..." If you think a 49-year old justice will be bad at tech, you should look up the ages of the rest. There's even one on there named "Ginsburg" who was 35 when Gorsuch was born - probably time for her to finally head out to pasture, right?
Whatever you may think of Ruth Bader Ginsburg's politics or decisions, she is an intellectual giant, much smarter and sharper than the vast majority of people half her age. There's a good reason she and Scalia were such good friends. Despite almost polar opposite politics, there were few others in the world that were their intellectual equal. And they were both wise enough to understand that associating yourself only with those whose political beliefs are aligned with yours is really self-limiting, and ultimately rather boring.
31% of Americans are white men. The rest are definitely affected by "social justice."
Actually, it is precisely those 31% that are MOST AFFECTED by "social justice". Just not in a positive way.
They can stop printing cash, that is fine, but that does not mean you have to be part of this experiment in oppression a and slavery, defy this crap, exchange in something tangible, use precious metals or just barter, tell the government to fuck off, or don't tell it but act that way.
That all sounds good, until you try to go to the supermarket and pay for your groceries with gold bars. Ditto for just about anything else you buy.
13 per cent CPU. For a blinking cursor. That's... impressive.
But not in a good way
Yeah, my old Commodore 64 had a blinking cursor, and it somehow managed that remarkable feat with an 8-bit 6510 CPU running at 1MHz!!!
Ok, I am not a tax specialist, but isn't corporate tax applied to profit?
But those profits still enrich the company. Which means the value of the shares go up and shareholders pay capital gains taxes. No matter how you look at it, corporate income tax is double taxation.
remember the court battle in which the E.U. argued that Apple owed more taxes to the Irish government, despite the fact that the Irish government didn't even want those revenues? This is the kind of absurdity that results from corporate taxes.
Not absurd at all. Ireland tried to do something E.U. membership explicitly forbids. Whether they "wanted" these taxes from Apple is completely irrelevant.
Wow. If you don't see the absurdity in a company being forced to pay taxes to a government that doesn't want them, then it will probably be very hard to convince you. At the very least, it turns the idea of taxes entirely on its head. Taxes are supposed to be a means of collecting revenue so a government can function. According to EU logic, taxes are about some kind of competition between countries with minimum rates set so no country is too competitive. This is such a distortion of what taxes are supposed to be that it's no surprise the EU is breaking up. I say good riddance to them!
This is a basic problem with corporate income tax: everyone in the world feels they are entitled to their "fair share". Corporate tax itself is a kind of double taxation: a corporation is made up of people who pay income tax. In addition, there is sales tax paid on all goods sold in a given country. I imagine a great deal of sales tax has been paid on Apple products in New Zealand, money the government wouldn't have if Apple didn't sell products there.
The problem with corporate income tax is that it is always possible for a mutlinational corporation to shift its profits to whichever country offers the lowest tax rate, unfairly enriching that one country. The best solution is probably to get rid of corporate income tax altogether, and make up the difference with sales taxes. (After all, the cost of corporate taxes are passed along to the consumers anyway.) This way, there's no arguing about who is entitled to the tax money: it's paid by the consumer wherever the sale takes place. This isn't the first time corporate taxes have caused problems: remember the court battle in which the E.U. argued that Apple owed more taxes to the Irish government, despite the fact that the Irish government didn't even want those revenues? This is the kind of absurdity that results from corporate taxes.
Physics is a superset of chemistry.
I guess that depends if you're talking to a physicist or a chemist.
Who is he talking about? Who's "us"?
Well, since it's the NSA and DOE saying this, I'd guess us=U.S.
Not that I know of. I suspect Google's been disappearing unpleasant facts on their News product for a while now.
"The holocaust never happened" is not an unpleasant fact - it's an out-and-out lie.
"The earth is flat" is also an out-and-out lie, but search engines won't delist my pages if I make that assertion, nor will I be subject to prosecution in any nation for saying so.
Look at what would happen if you shot an American on American soil from Canada or Mexico.
The key word in the above sentence is "you". The basis on which the judge dismissed this claim is the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, which immunizes foreign governments from suits by Americans in U.S. courts except in cases where the complete tort occurred on U.S. soil. The key word there is governments. Private citizens can still be sued, so I don't recommend you personally shoot someone across the border unless you are doing so as a government agent. As other posters have pointed out, this kind of immunity is necessary to protect, for example, drone operators who take out terrorism suspects on foreign soil.
The summary also says (emphasis added):
Customers' email addresses and usage data were transmitted to the company's Canadian servers, the lawsuit alleges.
I'm aware of that, but the post I was responding to was talking about a Canadian law. Last time I checked, you can't bring suit in a U.S. federal court over a Canadian law.
Waste not, get your budget cut next year.