I wanna say it gets really tough, because "naturally born US citizen" is not further defined, as such, is inherently up to interpretation.
So we don't know, unless they try.
I wanna say it gets really tough, because "naturally born US citizen" is not further defined, as such, is inherently up to interpretation.
So we don't know, unless they try.
I think, it's because this case is so big, that the amount of people talking about can't really increase, but also there's so much more to the case than this aspect. Which makes it difficult to focus conversation on this.
I also wanna say that it makes sense for him to get charged, even though a lot of people don't like it. Killing another human is an issue no matter what it is. And just because we think this crime stands for something bigger, that doesn't justify the killing in the first place. It's just shades of immorality.
That said, healthcare is a huge issue and I hope this changes things finally. I also don't agree with the charging of terrorism, as it says "terrorism" in it, and even though there's a small chance it fulfills the requirements, I have no angle to personally view this as terrorism.
Does it instill terror? Everyone gets scared when someone is killed, but this does not exceed it to the point that there is now a present danger. There's no furtherance to the terror, only vigilance in the crime.
Some lawyers even argue this is a pile-on to the charges, which might be the case, although I'm not an expert.
But I do think it's gonna be hard to prove the terrorism as opposed to everything else. Truly, the only threat to the prosecution of the other counts is jury nullification, which poses completely different risks.
But that's a story for another day.
Either music or software.
I feel like there should be more people better at whatever they are seeking.
As a German, fair enough.
Breaking a cable with style!
God that's bad. This is what I'd expected Russian trolls to do on Lemmy before getting down voted into oblivion, but I wouldn't expect a CEO to do this. This is fucked up.
lawful interception
Idk bout that. Usually you get a warrant for wiretapping and then you pay someone to install it. If they are trying to break encryption or identifying users, that means they inherently are doing something the law does not favor.
Let's also acknowledge that if encryption is bad because it cannot be broken, that means encryption is pretty good at what it should do.
Breaking encryption is never something you do for the right reasons.
Free education? Hell yeah brother!
How the f do you even start killing people for this? I mean the PR crisis that follows an assassination makes everything way worse doesn't it?
The history around Gaza and Israel is long and super complicated. The "they hit me first" gets really fucking dumb after like 10 rounds. That's why most people in the west don't support the war, they support leaving people alone. Either the gazans or the Israelites.
War is the ultimate singularity. It's a black hole that sucks up everyone and everything and there's literally no positive to it. So if you have a say in it, the only way to cause less tragedy is to stop it.
On that note, fuck the Hamas for attacking Israel at the festival, and fuck Israel for escalating this into another war.
Looking at the European fascism trend, I'd vote an actual trashcan over those funko-pop Nazis.
I mean considering law is the practical application of a moral construct, and this moral construct is mostly agreed upon, I would not wanna question the laws that make killings a crime for example, although there is obviously nuance.
I understand that some people think "there can be a justification for a killing" but I would always say, if we justify some killings, there is always a chance people will abuse this "loophole" for crime we created. So saying all killings are illegal is kind of the best application of our morals we have. Unfortunately, it's impossible to include every little nuance and detail in the moral system we base our laws upon, but that's why our laws are not absolutely rigid, and our moral systems are bound to change inherently.
I get it, it feels wrong, I really do. But there can be both. I can both say that even a CEO shouldn't be killed, and at the same time acknowledge that there is good reasons and something like that was inevitable given the status quo.