Fav quotes

Started by Lord T Hawkeye, September 19, 2009, 01:02:11 AM

Previous topic - Next topic
Quote from: MrBogosity on April 09, 2015, 09:04:09 AM
The issue is, the NSA has conflicting purposes. One is to secure the nation's information infrastructure, and the other is to gather foreign intelligence information. Apparently, Congress is too computer illiterate to realize how these are at odds with each other. We covered an example on the podcast a few weeks ago: a holdover from the days when encryption wasn't allowed to be exported, 20 years later was still causing security issues.


I'm not sure. I mean the very definition of Double think is to  hold two mutually contredictory beliefs, knowing they are contredictory, but believing and convincing yourself that they are not

While we're not vocal supporters of public schools (or California for that matter), California does something good for once.

Seriously if you're going to mandate that children get their education from these institutions you should require that EACH AND EVERYONE of them get their fucking vaccines already.
Working every day to expose the terrible price we pay for government.

Quote from: Dallas Wildman on April 09, 2015, 03:08:23 PM
While we're not vocal supporters of public schools (or California for that matter), California does something good for once.

Seriously if you're going to mandate that children get their education from these institutions you should require that EACH AND EVERYONE of them get their fucking vaccines already.

My opinion on this is, private schools and daycares should require vaccines (and most of them do), and the same rules should apply to the government as to the rest of us. Yes, we don't want government run schools, but as long as we have them VACCINATE!

Quote from: MrBogosity on April 09, 2015, 04:55:28 PM
My opinion on this is, private schools and daycares should require vaccines (and most of them do), and the same rules should apply to the government as to the rest of us. Yes, we don't want government run schools, but as long as we have them VACCINATE!

I was under the impression that government schools DO require vaccinations, unless there's some reason the pupil can't get them. 

Quote from: dallen68 on April 09, 2015, 06:11:46 PM
I was under the impression that government schools DO require vaccinations, unless there's some reason the pupil can't get them.

By default they do, but in many states people can cite "closely held religious beliefs" to exempt themselves by law.  This includes Texas.
Working every day to expose the terrible price we pay for government.

Quote from: Dallas Wildman on April 09, 2015, 06:43:30 PM
By default they do, but in many states people can cite "closely held religious beliefs" to exempt themselves by law.  This includes Texas.

Okay, so we require those people to show documentation from their church (or whatever) that says that, then we put those students away from the others. This also prevents people just "claiming" blah, blah. Much the same way someone claiming consciencious objector status does when there's a draft.

Quote from: dallen68 on April 09, 2015, 06:47:39 PM
Okay, so we require those people to show documentation from their church (or whatever) that says that, then we put those students away from the others. This also prevents people just "claiming" blah, blah. Much the same way someone claiming consciencious objector status does when there's a draft.

That reminds me, does anyone know what happened to those phony 'conscientious objectors' who fled to Canada back during the Bush administration and claimed refugee status?  (They were phony because anyone who's ready the actual terms of conscientious objector status knows that it's an exemption from military service entirely, and they were wrongly claiming that they could conscientiously object to and be exempted from specific operations or theaters.  A valid claim under this section would result in a discharge.)

Quote from: dallen68 on April 09, 2015, 06:47:39 PM
Okay, so we require those people to show documentation from their church (or whatever) that says that, then we put those students away from the others. This also prevents people just "claiming" blah, blah. Much the same way someone claiming consciencious objector status does when there's a draft.

I'd imagine anyone with the proper resources could just draw up such documentation to satisfy anyone who looks at it.
Working every day to expose the terrible price we pay for government.

Quote from: evensgrey on April 09, 2015, 07:24:20 PM
That reminds me, does anyone know what happened to those phony 'conscientious objectors' who fled to Canada back during the Bush administration and claimed refugee status?  (They were phony because anyone who's ready the actual terms of conscientious objector status knows that it's an exemption from military service entirely, and they were wrongly claiming that they could conscientiously object to and be exempted from specific operations or theaters.  A valid claim under this section would result in a discharge.)

You can object to a mission, if you can show that it is amoral/illegal under US MILITARY law. The catch is, it's the morals of the US Military, as a whole, not you, & there's a court-type procedure to go through to establish this. This is of course, a separate thing from being a conscientious objector, which is meaningless when there isn't conscription happening because... If you conscientiously object, why did you join?

Quote from: Dallas Wildman on April 09, 2015, 08:16:43 PM
I'd imagine anyone with the proper resources could just draw up such documentation to satisfy anyone who looks at it.

Yes. It would also take a certain amount of skill on something like Power-Point. And I believe it would be beyond the skills of most woo-ers (well, the "I'm making shit up because I want to be spethal" variety, anyway).  Others would (hopefully) reconsider when they realized what the trade offs were. Those of genuine faith would just accept those trade-offs as a cost of faith.

Quote from: dallen68 on April 10, 2015, 12:05:25 AM
You can object to a mission, if you can show that it is amoral/illegal under US MILITARY law. The catch is, it's the morals of the US Military, as a whole, not you, & there's a court-type procedure to go through to establish this. This is of course, a separate thing from being a conscientious objector, which is meaningless when there isn't conscription happening because... If you conscientiously object, why did you join?

They were claiming that the mission was illegal, but were talking about being conscientious objectors instead of following the correct procedure.  (If I understand correctly, since it is a crime to follow an illegal order, and any orders to partake in an illegal operation would be illegal by definition, the court-martial that would follow from refusing the deployment orders would have to deal with the claim that the operation is illegal as a defense.  That's a tough row to hoe, as penalties are severe and US military courts are, at best, extremely questionable.)

As to the last question, it CAN come up, IF you come to accept the NIF while serving.  A while back, Stefan had an interview with a guy who had done precisely that:  He joined up, and during his period of service had come to accept the NIF and was in the process of going through the arduous process of establishing himself to NOW be a conscientious objector and getting himself a discharge.  Unlike the people I was asking about above, he didn't run away after an obviously frivolous claim was denied.

"When the mob and the press and the whole world tell you to move, your job is to plant yourself like a tree beside the river of truth, and tell the whole world—'No. You move.'"
-Captain America, Amazing Spider-Man 537

[yt]XARMbTEGVDk[/yt]

Quote from: AnCap Dave on April 13, 2015, 09:36:23 PM
[yt]XARMbTEGVDk[/yt]
Man, I wish this wasn't so accurate.
"The more laws and order are made prominent, the more thieves and robbers there will be."
Lao Tzu