The use of my idea is denied to me if someone can wave a patent in my face and say “Stop using it!” When this happens, I would not even be able to solicit business as a consultant, although R and D may be possible in the cases where I could come up with a “workaround” for the patented idea.

Now, why should I be denied my idea,…….

has the idea been denied or dispersed?? could you not solicit business as a cnsultant or in r and d even when teh ideaq you come up with makes it way to others for them to integrate as they see fit??

When I spend my toil and labor to come up with a new idea, and even risk capital to put that idea into production, shouldn’t that idea be mine? Isn’t this the basis for private property, whether it be improving land (homesteading) or gathering acorns and deer (hunting and gathering)?

Now, why should I be denied my idea, even if without my knowledge, someone else came up with the idea hundreds of miles away, and three years ago obtained a patent for it?

It is not uncommon for people to develop the same idea independently, at around the same time. And, considering that there are literally millions of patents, many of which are quite silly and aren’t worth the paper they were printed on, why should I be expected to waste my time for a patent search?

The thing about ideas is that they exist, and are as real as you or me. They are there to be discovered by anyone who is willing to put the time and effort to discover them, and to find a use for them.

Finally, if I put the time and effort in understanding an idea, even if I have a copy of that idea before me, shouldn’t I be free to make use of that time and effort as I see fit?

It is you, Kerem Tibut, who is the IP Socialist, because you desire to take this property from others, to give to the State-declaced “Patent-Holder”, by use of State Force.

“Problem is that the airlines DO NOT want to be in charge of the security you are talking about. For instance, they are able to shift the costs of passenger security to the public as opposed to having to deal with this cost themselves.”

You’re right, but so what. Sure they would rather have the public cover the cost; and banks would rather not take responsibility for making bad loans, but that doesn’t mean government should cover the losses.

That assertion is beginning to stink like week old fish in July!

For every so-called “terrorist” plot foiled by the goofs and thugs of Homeland Security, the peace of mind, personal privacy and property of non-”terrorists”–the vast majority of passangers–is shamefully violated!

I am tired of being lied to, I am tired of having commercial air travel turned into a nightmare, and I am tired of being insulted by being told by the jackasses responsible that I am somehow being “protected”.

Don’t be so good to me! I would gladly abolish homeland security, return the airlines and airports to private security, withdraw our armed forces out of the mideast, and take my chances. People who are still afraid to fly would probably be afraid in any event, even if terrorism never existed, and should devote time to personal therapy to overcome their personal anxieties.

wishing everyone…
PEACE AND FREEDOM!!
David K. Meller

PEACE AND FREEDOM!!
David K.Meller

I find it regrettable, that instead of addressing the holes in your theory, you limit yourself to random jabs at anything that involves dissatisfied people.

I live in Turkey, and while I am an atheist I know what Islam is.

Islam is a Jewish sect just like Christianity but of course has some differences based on historic and cultural circumstances.

Islam is more militarist than Christianity because Islam at the very outset founded a new state (with Mohammed as the emperor while being a prophet at the same time and did what any state does. Conquer all that it can.

Christianity on the other hand was created by Constantin the Great out of many Jesus cults, for the purpose of extending the life of Byzantium thus its was shaped accordingly.

Actually theologically speaking, Islam doesn’t have many problems with the Judaism and the Christianity. Since Islam claims to be the last and newest version, it recognizes all the past prophets including Jesus and has respect for them.

On the other hand Jesus is a fraud according to Jews. Otherwise they would be Christians wouldn’t they. It amuses me to see some very fundamentalist Christian neo-cons having a love affair with Israel.

Also Christians didn’t very much like Jews as the history suggests, at least until Hitler.

The contemporary problem started with founding of Israel and the ascent of the US to the worlds strongest empire right after WW2.

Founding of Israel had problems in itself but the US acting as a juvinile empire contributed. Befor the US, British was the boss but they knew how to run an empire by manipulation, the US didnt.

The US both supported Israel unconditionally and they radicalized Islam against Soviet threat at the same time. Which was an explosive mixture.

So if the US withdrew from the middle east things wouldn’t end all of a sudden. To much damage has been done already. But it would be a good start. If the US can restrain Israel maybe even the Arabs can accept the existence of the Jewish state. But it wouldn’t be in a few years. Thats for sure.

You make a good point. “Security Socialism”.

I will point out the contradictions as I see them.

And the point is, IP socialism and freedom of association are not compatible.

If it is ok for me to look at you with some gadget that makes me see you naked, record your naked image and keep it, it is ok for the government officials to do it.

Unless you think I don’t have a right to see you naked, as the title suggests. Then of course you would have hard time justifying your IP socialism.

Russ,

As anyone who frequents this site should know, the desires of the government rarely, if ever, align with those of the people it rules. And as Fallon points out, the US and British governments created just about every state that exists in the middle east after the “great” war and placed in charge of them people who would be obedient to western demands.

To say “why would some Saudi’s resent US troops in their nation when the Saudi government asked us to be there?” Is about like asking “Why would American’s resent a large Chinese or Russian military presence in their nation if the US president (appointed and supported by the Chinese or Russians) asked them to be there?”

It should be obvious. Blame America? You bet, where the US gov. is culpable the US gov. should be blamed. And there’s little doubt they are HIGHLY culpable for their nearly century of interventionism in the middle east, for pretending to stand for freedom and liberty while installing and backing murderous and totalitarian regimes world-wide, and for deceiving people like you into cheering for the home team no matter what color banner they fly.

Problem is that the airlines DO NOT want to be in charge of the security you are talking about. For instance, they are able to shift the costs of passenger security to the public as opposed to having to deal with this cost themselves.

Which religion does not have crazy and violent stuff in its detail? Christianity is notorious for its multiplicity.

Are you into neoconservatism to the point where you don’t believe that backlash can exist?

Do you find no relation in today’s events to the WWI victors’ selfish carving-up the Mideast
in the name of “democracy” and “self-determination”? Wasn’t that democratic-imperialism?

I just can’t buy into the Blame America First shit any more. One of al Quaida’s biggest beefs against the US is that there is a military presense in the Arabian peninsula *AT THE REQUEST OF THE SAUDI GOVERNMENT*! This is not about US imperialism. This is about a crazy interpretation of a religion, basically Islamic imperialism, telling them that they must fight until everyone in the entire world submits to Allah. If you don’t believe that, I think you’ve got your head in the sand just like the Lefties.

“Three months passed between Nayirah’s testimony and the start of the war. During those months, the story of babies torn from their incubators was repeated over and over again. President Bush told the story. It was recited as fact in Congressional testimony,”

“At the Human Rights Caucus, however, Hill & Knowlton and Congressman Lantos had failed to reveal that Nayirah was a member of the Kuwaiti Royal Family. Her father, in fact, was Saud Nasir al-Sabah, Kuwait’s Ambassador to the US, who sat listening in the hearing room during her testimony. The Caucus also failed to reveal that H&K vice-president Lauri Fitz-Pegado had coached Nayirah in what even the Kuwaitis’ own investigators later confirmed was false testimony.”
http://www.prwatch.org/books/tsigfy10.html

but with politicians like these….terrorists seem freindly.

maybe high speed trains will catch on. at least they cant be piloted to areas to cause greater harm if tracks can be suddenly de-electrified.

By the way Russ, just what did all them Muslims do to you? Are they like the po’lice?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZSEf_4F3jk

“You really think that this (removing troops) will end the threat? I think that’s naive.”

Will it end terrorism? Maybe not. But when you’re digging a hole for yourself, the first step to take is to stop digging. Our belligerent foreign policy, especially the active wars the Middle East, is creating terrorism rather than diminishing it. To state otherwise is to deny reality.

Russ goes on:

“even free trade with them would be considered anathema to them if it introduces their children to that terrible Western culture.”

That’s the wonderful thing about free trade: both sides have to voluntarily agree to the exchange. If Muslims feel as you think they do, they can choose not to trade. The thought that the average Muslim on the street is going to wage a bloody jihad against the West over Britney Spears videos and denim jeans is just plain silly.

What they object to is what any person would rail against: aggressive wars, occupation, the killing of innocent family members and friends, torture, indefinite detention without trial. Stop these policies and the reason for terrorism practically vanishes overnight.