Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Fenrir]

I should, in future, be extra certain that I am really wrong before employing sarcastic, self-depricating humor.

Weird, one would not normally think fish police to be a very high risk job.

Carp. Your argument is invalid.

[Urist Imiknorris]

Nope; according to their wiki page, one of their primary duties is retrieval of protected species.

From the mouths of their predators.

[Kilroy the Grand]

Something like 90%+ of the money you pay for most 1st world food items goes towards packaging & marketing; the price of the raw food could double, and most of us not living in abject slum-shack poverty would hardly see a change in food prices. Which is why changes in the raw food item prices overwhelmingly affect those in extreme poverty condition.

The most major thing it will contribute to is more government-toppling in 3rd world countries. The Arab Spring, if you recall, was originally about high prices for staple foods in Tunisia.

What if something along the line of farmers losing 50%+ of their crop, and the main artery to the middle of the country got so low that you could no longer use it ship food?

[lordcooper]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-19259623

Looks like the UK is gearing up to fuck over Julian Assange.  Threatening to raid the embassy of a sovereign nation...classy.

[Solifuge]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-19259623

Looks like the UK is gearing up to fuck over Julian Assange.  Threatening to raid the embassy of a sovereign nation...classy.

That's just vile. First of all, you just don't go violating political asylum, let alone overstepping the sovereignty of another nation with threats and brute force. Second of all, ignoring that Assange upholds that the so-called "sexual assault" was actually done in mutual consent, and the charge is politically motivated... would a nation really risk an international incident just to arrest a potential sexual offender?

It's just a transparent way to mask that they want to dismantle Wikileaks, and can't find a legal way to do it. More power to you, Ecuador.

EDIT: Oh wow... I didn't realize that corporations had already been putting a financial stranglehold on Wikileaks. This is worse than I thought.

[alway]

Keep in mind though that Assange still has the upper hand. You may recall he released his 'insurance package,' with the decryption key set to be released if anything particularly nasty happens to him. The 'insurance package,' if you recall, was a big document dump without any redaction of names or highly damaging information. The sort of stuff that would get field agents and moles killed if it were leaked.

[Solifuge]

I didn't know that... puts my mind a bit at ease, though I really hope it doesn't come to that.

I just finished viewing a livestream via Bambuser, provided by a number of dedicated 24-hour livestreamers outside the Embassy. They just got pizza donated to them from somewhere in Canada, and are eating while others hurry to the site, hoping to beat the morning police blockades and such.

There are times I've been finding myself pacing around the room like a caged animal, fretting over how to combat this kind of wrongness. I'm frustrated by feelings of powerlessness to make a concrete difference in problems like this. Still... independent journalism like this gives me hope for the future. You aren't likely to get coverage like this from any major media outlet.

[Euld]

What... WHAT.  Wow looks like the company that owns the school I go to has been committing fraud on a massive scale for nearly 10 years now.

[scriver]

That's just vile. First of all, you just don't go violating political asylum, let alone overstepping the sovereignty of another nation with threats and brute force. Second of all, ignoring that Assange upholds that the so-called "sexual assault" was actually done in mutual consent, and the charge is politically motivated... would a nation really risk an international incident just to arrest a potential sexual offender?

It's just a transparent way to mask that they want to dismantle Wikileaks, and can't find a legal way to do it. More power to you, Ecuador.

EDIT: Oh wow... I didn't realize that corporations had already been putting a financial stranglehold on Wikileaks. This is worse than I thought.

I'm sorry? It's morning and I'm really tired, so I'm going to ask you before I go on a rant - did you just say that because Assange says it was consensual, it couldn't have been rape? In Vector's heritage thread?

[darkrider2]

What... WHAT.  Wow looks like the company that owns the school I go to has been committing fraud on a massive scale for nearly 10 years now.

For-profit college are three words that make me shiver. Apart from the fact that all colleges make profits from their business, when the sole purpose becomes profit then I have a problem.

[Solifuge]

That's just vile. First of all, you just don't go violating political asylum, let alone overstepping the sovereignty of another nation with threats and brute force. Second of all, ignoring that Assange upholds that the so-called "sexual assault" was actually done in mutual consent, and the charge is politically motivated... would a nation really risk an international incident just to arrest a potential sexual offender?

It's just a transparent way to mask that they want to dismantle Wikileaks, and can't find a legal way to do it. More power to you, Ecuador.

EDIT: Oh wow... I didn't realize that corporations had already been putting a financial stranglehold on Wikileaks. This is worse than I thought.

I'm sorry? It's morning and I'm really tired, so I'm going to ask you before I go on a rant - did you just say that because Assange says it was consensual, it couldn't have been rape? In Vector's heritage thread?

No I'm not, Scriver, and I appreciate your forbearance on that rant.

Recall that anyone is innocent until proven guilty in a fair trial. Even people accused of sexual assault. Also realize that this is not an issue where Assange will be given any chance in a court of law... they intend to send him to the States rather than try him locally, likely for indefinite detainment thanks to Homeland Security.

Consider, for a moment, that GB is willing to violate asylum, diplomatic immunity, and Ecuador's sovereignty just to arrest him. This is not how suspected sexual offenders are treated... this is how the state treats those it wants to silence.

Anyway, GB just sent the police into the embassy. I do not know what is happening. The Bambuser stream was shut down by a DDOS attack, and the stream moved to http://www.livestream.com/occupylsx.

[Scelly9]

Anyway, GB just sent the police into the embassy. I do not know what is happening. The Bambuser stream was shut down by a DDOS attack, and the stream moved to http://www.livestream.com/occupylsx.

Christ... I was really hoping that they where bluffing.

[Leafsnail]

Recall that anyone is innocent until proven guilty in a fair trial.

And if he isn't extradited to Sweden he'll never get a trial.

Even people accused of sexual assault. Also realize that this is not an issue where Assange will be given any chance in a court of law... they intend to send him to the States rather than try him locally, likely for indefinite detainment thanks to Homeland Security.

Do "they"?  Any evidence for this?  Who is "they", anyway?

Consider, for a moment, that GB is willing to violate asylum, diplomatic immunity, and Ecuador's sovereignty just to arrest him. This is not how suspected sexual offenders are treated... this is how the state treats those it wants to silence.

It's actually more like how states treat suspected rapists with outstanding European arrest warrants who make a fool of them by skipping bail and fleeing to another country.  The threat to a foreign country is out of line (as far as I can tell it's still a threat) but Assange's flight to another country makes him definitely worth pursuing.

[Reelya]

Alex Jones says Martial Law in the US. WTF?

Alex Jones is retarded.

Okay, I paraphrased a bit.

Anyway, I found the source of the information, at the least: FedBizOpps.gov

The National Weather Service did indeed request 70,000 hollow-point rounds earlier this month, amending the amount several times, and finally rescinding the request and claiming it to be a clerical error, the rounds instead intended for the Marine Fisheries Service. The Department of Homeland Security has a similar order on file, which has been increased from the original amount since it was originally posted in April, to include other materials and types of rounds, as well as a provision for the continued purchase of rounds every month.

So, that much is not fabricated. I personally find it strange that they are ordering hollow point rounds, rather than practice rounds, for what they claim is target practice. I understand hollow-points behave more like regular rounds, while not being as destructive, but it is still unusual. As is the Fisheries service stockpiling anti-personnel rounds.

It says leaded training ammo for the DHS, nothing about hollow points. And minimum 1000 bullets per year, not 750 million. But i guess saying fisheries inspectors or whatever are getting armed wasn't exciting enough.

Note though the details i linked in a previous post of the US Armies deal perfectly matched the main details of the supposed DHS purchases - same month they ordered 450 million, with options for more, same company, hollow points, also from a reuters story, etc.

I think all three separate stories were conflated for the Homeland Security 750 million "story."

EDIT: sorry i hadn't seen the amendments, not used to that webpage.

[Reelya]

That's just vile. First of all, you just don't go violating political asylum, let alone overstepping the sovereignty of another nation with threats and brute force. Second of all, ignoring that Assange upholds that the so-called "sexual assault" was actually done in mutual consent, and the charge is politically motivated... would a nation really risk an international incident just to arrest a potential sexual offender?

It's just a transparent way to mask that they want to dismantle Wikileaks, and can't find a legal way to do it. More power to you, Ecuador.

EDIT: Oh wow... I didn't realize that corporations had already been putting a financial stranglehold on Wikileaks. This is worse than I thought.

I'm sorry? It's morning and I'm really tired, so I'm going to ask you before I go on a rant - did you just say that because Assange says it was consensual, it couldn't have been rape? In Vector's heritage thread?

Sciver, you obviously haven't read about the details, even many feminists say the charges are rubbish. i'll just link some stuff about it

http://www.theweeklyobserver.com.au/wordpress/?p=696
^ This references 4 corners, which is the most highly regarded investigative journalism show in Australia. Luckily, it's on the ABC which transcripts almost ever show, forever:
http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2012/07/19/3549280.htm
^ THIS, is an excellent documentary, 45 minutes by a well-respected investigative journalism show, gives the FULL story.

---

Also this one is older but talks about all the bizarre twists of how the charges changed day by day almost as they tried to make something 'stick' to Assange. They even tried to retroactively make a law that any man can be called a rapist by the government for having more money than the woman, even if she consented. "male power" abuse by wowing the ladies with your bling would be rape if that passed.
http://sunnysinghonline.blogspot.com.au/2010/12/swedens-rape-law-infantilise-women.html