The next question would be what action Jerrold G. Neeff, Esq, might face from the Florida Bar for bringing a lawsuit that he knew to be frivolous and in bad faith (as the judge stated)? I'm no lawyer, but that seems like it has to be sanctionable.
Theresa @ #23, et al: While an order to attack or invade Iran would be unwise and imprudent (not to mention impudent), it would not be clearly illegal. The UN Charter has been interpreted (by the World Court) to allow preemptive self-defense, so that's no basis to refuse such an order. And there is nothing in the UCMJ or US Code that makes it illegal either. So on what basis are they to refuse?
The right to refuse an illegal order is intended to allow soldiers to legitimately refuse orders to execute prisoners, deliberately target civilians, etc. It is not intended as a way for military personnel to refuse unwise orders, operations to which they personally object, or even wars that are unpopular with the civilian population.
Opening military discretion to that extent would undermine the entire concept of civil control of the military. Allowing the military to opt out of a conflict it doesn't want leads to a disconcerting slipppery slope in which the military leadership gets to pick and choose the wars it supports and thus control the nation's foeign policy to an unprecedented degree. I think we can all agree that we don't want that, right?
The Teller origin of the possibility, and the calculations by Hans Bethe and others that disproved it, are reported in Richard Rhode's Making of the Atomic Bomb, which quotes from the immediate post-war technical history (Manhattan District Project, Project Y, The Los Alamos Project, by David Hawkins, 1947.)
Guthrie @ #1: Apparently it was Edward Teller who first suggested that possibility -- the idea was that the temperature in the fireball was high enough, in theory, to fuse atmospheric nitrogen, which could in turn set off hydrogen-hydrogen fusion in the oceans. They quickly worked out that the reaction was not actually energetic to cause this reaction to run-away.
PJ Evans @ 3:
Of course not. Clearly, it's divine retribution for California allowing gay marriage.
(Seriously, I've seen this argument already.)
What I find baffling about this is the assertion that we should not talk to the Iranian government because it poses as big a threat as the USSR did. Even if the comparison were true, it would be an arguement in favor of engagement, not against it.
After all, we did hold regular diplomatic discussions with the Soviet Union, and these were pretty much essential to avoiding hostilities on several occasions. Imagine what might have happened if Robert Kennedy hadn't been talking to Ambassador Dobrynin during the Cuban Missile Crisis. It's not a pretty picture.
Earl Cooley III @ #10: apparently they are -- I woke up a month or two ago to the sound of someone battering down the front door to an apartment down the hall from mine. Turned out to be a police officer forcing the door to let in EMTs to assist one of my elderly neighbors who suffered some sort of medical emergency. (Sadly, the outcome seems to have been poor -- the apartment is empty now.)
This probably has something to do with the fact that the Washington Post(at least online) listed Virginia in a front-page text box with the Super Tuesday states a few days ago. I think it had the correct date attached, but the proximity with the list of Super Tuesday states probably confused some folks. I know I was puzzled for a little while.
Before we all leap to wildly to conclusions, how about we read CBP's side of the story.
Basically, boils down to that it was believed to be commercial material being brought across the border at the wrong point of entry and without the necessary documentation. Stupid rule? Perhaps, but not something a CBP agent at the border has the authority to overrule. Improperly applied? Arguably, but I can certainly see intelligent people arguing either way on that.
Plus, a hard drive not attached to a computer is the sort of thing that does tend to raise red flags for, among other things, child pornography (Why? Because it looks like a way of making it harder for an agent to inspect the contents.)
Also not mentioned in the original story is the fact that Customs tried to contact the owner repeatedly to return the drive. He claims not to have received those messages, but what would you bet that "DHS stole my music" makes a better story than "My drive got held up in customs"?
To be fair (and balanced), Romney's at least consistent on this. As Governor, he vetoed a bill funding hate crime enforcement and actually embargoed money previously appropriated for a state anti-bullying program.
Xopher @ #6:
Carl Sagan mentioned this idea in A Demon Haunted World. Was he borrowing from Arthen?
Sylvia Li, at 35. The problem with this plan is that at any point when the Senate is in session, any member may come to the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. If a roll call reveals that less than half of the Senators are present, the majority of those who are present can vote to compel the other Senators to appear. If the absent members decline, the Senate Sergeant at Arms can be sent to bring them, by force if necessary. That gets potentially quite messy, like that incident in Texas a few years back wehen legislators went into hiding to avoid a quorum call for a vote on redistricting.
Scott at #25. That's not really how a fusion device works. Fusion devices of the standard Teller-Ulam design use a single fission device as a trigger, with lithium deuteride and uranium for the fusion secondary. For diagrams, see:
http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Library/Brown/index.html
Jon at 23:
The usual marginal note to turn text that is already set in italic back into notmal text would be "Rom" (meaning Roman text). You would also underline the text to be set in Roman text.
Maybe I'm confused, but I've just read the bill and it does not seem to mandate keeping records of user communications. It requires keeping records of who was using any given IP address, dial-up connection, or user ID. But I don't see how that's the same as keeping copies of the actual messages sent by to to each individual user.
Pedantic @ #3: It's often said that one salutes the rank, not the man, but that means only that you salute a superior officer even if that officer is personally distasteful to you.
You are expected to salute senior officers not wearing the uniform, assuming that you recognize them. Your own commanding officer will draw a salute, even if you run into him while he's jogging, but a random officer you don't know can't expect a salute.
Regulations also require a hand salute to any person who would be entitled to a gun salute or other ceremonical honors, even if they are not uniformed. This includes the president and other senior government oficials (DoD Secretaries and undersecretaries, certain House and Senate officers, ambassadors and consuls, etc). So it's definitely a requirement to salute the president, regardless of whether he is ex-military or not.
The question of whether to salute (or return a salute) when you are yourself not in uniform is less clear. The Navy and Marines never do so. The Army and Air Force may, though it is not obligatory. In the Navy, we were warned that Army and Air Force people will also salute when uncovered (not wearing a hat), such as indoors, while the sea services never do. Civilians should not salute, and generally do not, though courtesy demands an acknowledgement of the salute , usually a nod and a "thank you" or similar words. The presidential salute is very much an affectation of Reagan and Bush and Clinton ought not have continued it (I don't recall whether Bush senior did so -- I think not).
The part that's really funny is that true illegals are actually a net positive for Social Security. They often end up paying into the system through the usual withholding mechanisms using a false Social Security Number. Of course, without legal status they can never get that money back out. It works out to something like $5 billion per year being dumped into the Social Security "earnings suspense fund" from illegals, if this FreeRepublic article on the subject is to be trusted.
Linkmeister @ #5:
Tuckerization on Wikipedia:
Tuckerization is the act of using a person's name in an original story as an in-joke (e.g. Mount Kirby in Kurt Busiek's Astro City comics). The term is derived from Wilson Tucker, a science fiction writer of the 1940s-1980s, who made a practice of using his friends' names for minor characters in his stories. A tuckerization can also be the use of a person's character or personal attributes with a new name as an in-joke (e.g. Ian Arnstein in S.M. Stirling's Island in the Sea of Time trilogy, clearly modeled on his good friend Harry Turtledove, albeit an alternate history Turtledove).
Many science fiction authors auction off tuckerizations at science fiction conventions with the proceeds going to charity.
Fun list. But the main link isn't permanent (it goes to the letters section now). Try this one instead:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/magazinemonitor/2006/12/100_things_we_didnt_know_last_2.shtml
| Year | Number of comments posted |
|---|---|
| 2009 | 2 |
| 2008 | 7 |
| 2007 | 10 |
| 2006 | 27 |
| 2005 | 5 |
Total: 51 comments. View all these comments on a single page.
The most recent 20 comments posted to Making Light by Tom S.:
Show all comments by Tom S..