I see why, but I think they would believe it is in their best interest to keep him alive. They might technically get more power if he's killed, but the whole situation would be vastly more complicated. Keeping him alive and compliant is a better move, I think.
This really doesn't make a ton of sense...anyone in DPRK capable enough to have him killed while he's in China wouldn't stand to gain much from the chaos that would develop after his death. I think everyone agrees that he's a military puppet at the moment, and that they are content to use him as a figurehead. Don't see how they'd profit from his death, really.
That is LITerally the most fortified sniper's nest I have ever seen, in my life.
They aren't so clever with the naming these days. It would just be "This Ain't Downton Abbey XXX"
SPOILER ALERT, ASSHOLE!
Some of his advisors discussed the never-before-used constitutional option of having him declared unfit for office, whereupon the Vice President would take office, I think as early as 1986. I saw one of his speeches very late in his second term...he seemed COMPLETELY out of it. Just very dazed, in a sad old man kind of way.
This is why non-profits and organizations that are historically beloved/unquestioned (think Penn State) do such horrible jobs with crisis management--because they've never had a crisis before! People hear their name and think "awwwwwwwww..." So when it comes time to defend a bad decision, they look completely inept.
Women talk about abortion like THIS, but men talk about abortion like THIS.
I should add, for those unaware, that their keyboardist is a breast cancer survivor.
I doubt Murray would agree, but I need a National Service Program. We need a program that would force members of the upper tribe and the lower tribe to live together, if only for a few years.
Translation: "I have just watched a SHIT TON of Downton Abbey!"
Yeah, I was going to say they are just as horrifying alive as they are dead.
If they had asked for permission, I'm sure the article would have said that. It didn't, therefore I'm reasonable certain they did not.
Gawker's EIC is the guy who made his name by printing photos of Brett Favre's dick. So...good luck with that. (I agree with you, fwiw, just saying AJ is literally the last guy on earth who's going to have a problem with this article.)
But then the obvious followup question is "was there information on the phone of a less personal nature that would have also revealed that this bug existed?" And the answer to that is without question "yes."
Well, I'm sure Wiz is thrilled that he was able to play such a crucial role in exposing this problem.
Oh, I know they didn't contact the guy. I'm just trying to get Sam to admit it in print here to save "Wiz's" lawyers a question in the deposition.
Yeah, and, Christ, they even write "we had to cross the line" in their Twitter messages. Way to show the court you knew in advance what you were doing was wrong! Gah, the Gawker legal department must be losing their shit right about now.
Sam, you STILL haven't addressed whether or not you contacted this guy first to alert him to this.
[en.wikipedia.org]
Public disclosure of private facts arises where one person reveals information which is not of public concern, and the release of which would offend a reasonable person.[13] "Unlike libel or slander, truth is not a defense for invasion of privacy."[14] Disclosure of private facts includes publishing or widespread dissemination of little-known, private facts that are non-newsworthy, not part of public records, public proceedings, not of public interest, and would be offensive to a reasonable person if made public
Ruh-roh! How ironic that Denton's cherished page views will most likely be used in the court proceedings as evidence of this!
Gizmodo may have given him legal ammunition against Apple by running this post. If Apple knew that a technique they were training their employees to do (use their own SIM card while repairing a customer's phone) could expose those people to the exposure of personal information and did not warn the employees about this, they could perhaps be sued. And this post is a perfect illustration of the damage that could be done by that information getting out into the wild.
