31–40 of 85 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd send hundreds of them, every one full of old socks or something. Make it very expensive/annoying for them.
There's got to be Assange lookalikes that can muck with their surveillance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's got to be Assange lookalikes that can muck with their surveillance.
There is a lot of pen-testing fun to be had here. At the least you'll annoy them and amuse you, and at the best you cause them to expose the holes in their security capabilities.
"The estimated cost of the police presence is more than £12m." So who should get fired for such a waste of police resources?
So whats the limit on how much society should spend to seek justice if someone raped you?
On mobile this redirects me to a bunch of spam somehow... Careful if you click through.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, that's why I wrote "seek justice".
You also used the clause, "if someone raped you", stated as if it were a fact and not an allegation. Or, at least, that's how it reads to me. If you posed the question, "How much would you want society to spend if someone raped you?" it would have carried a different connotation. But by asking "whats the limit on how much society should spend..." implies society knows for a fact that you were raped by someone. Sorry…
I believe such argument have a place and time, but at least dissociate them from the original point ...
"The estimated cost of the police presence is more than £12m." So who should get fired for such a waste of police resources?
According to Google the average salary of a police man in England is £30,000 and they work about 40 hours per week. So it should cost £126,000 station one person for 24/7. Now I understand that real costs will be higher for various reasons, but 100x?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You also used the clause, "if someone raped you", stated as if it were a fact and not an allegation. Or, at least, that's how it reads to me. If you posed the question, "How much would you want society to spend if someone raped you?" it would have carried a different connotation. But by asking "whats the limit on how much society should spend..." implies society knows for a fact that you were raped by someone. Sorry…
Oh please, you absolutely understood what he really meant and are arguing over the wrong usage of words rather than the point he was making. I believe such argument have a place and time, but at least dissociate them from the original point ...
First, I'm not entirely sure this person is a he. In the absence of an indicator of which gender a person is, I typically don't assume.
"Oh please, you absolutely understood" is not a justifiable statement here. What knowledge do you possess of what I do or do not understand?
And I'm not being pedantic here: I actually though that 'polack was trying to weasel in the suggestion that Assange is guilty without proving beyond a shadow of a doubt (which no Internet commentor really should be able to, barring a huge evidence mis-handling by the Swedish investigators).