(no subject)

The wonders of "security by default", the Microsoft way.

Ah, yes, of course. You've included no less than 4 full virtual webservers with Sharepoint enabled, and you tried to install sExchange and told me that I should disable my DHCP server and firewall, but ASP? That's just insecure, man! You've GOTTA disable serving of ASP pages even when they're specifically added to the web folder and made available, with a 404 error - because, you know, with ultra-verbose maximum-information errors and logging, it might be BAD to possibly tell the SYSTEM ADMINISTRATOR that you've found the page but aren't serving it because you've determined that ASP is insecure while ASPX is just totally okay. You don't even have to throw a line into the log files!

I hate Server 2003.

I really, really hate default behaviours that don't make sense and aren't covered in the setup instructions.

(no subject)

Jim Macdonald at Making Light posts this:

ATTENTION US MILITARY PERSONNEL

You are not required to obey an unlawful order.

You are required to disobey an unlawful order.

You swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

The Constitution states (Article VI):

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

Here is article 3, the common article, to the Geneva Conventions, a duly ratified treaty made under the authority of the United States:

Article 3

In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:

1. Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.

To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:

(a) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;

(b) Taking of hostages;

(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;

(d) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.

2. The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for.

An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict.

The Parties to the conflict should further endeavour to bring into force, by means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of the present Convention.

The application of the preceding provisions shall not affect the legal status of the Parties to the conflict.

Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions is straightforward and clear. Under Article VI of the Constitution, it forms part of the supreme law of the land.

You personally will be held responsible for all of your actions, in all countries, at all times and places, for the rest of your life. “I was only following orders” is not a defense.

What all this is leading to:

If you are ordered to violate Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, it is your duty to disobey that order. No “clarification,” whether passed by Congress or signed by the president, relieves you of that duty.

If you are ordered to violate Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, this is what to do:

1. Request that your superior put the order in writing.

2. If your superior puts the order in writing, inform your superior that you intend to disobey that order.

3. Request trial by courtmartial.

You will almost certainly face disciplinary action, harassment of various kinds, loss of pay, loss of liberty, discomfort and indignity. America relies on you and your courage to face those challenges.

We, the people, need you to support and defend the Constitution. I am certain that your honor and patriotism are equal to the task.

Linkback to the original

(no subject)

Constitu-what?

With little public attention or even notice, the House of Representatives has passed a bill that undermines enforcement of the First Amendment's separation of church and state.The Public Expression of Religion Act - H.R. 2679 - provides that attorneys who successfully challenge government actions as violating the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment shall not be entitled to recover attorneys fees. The bill has only one purpose: to prevent suits challenging unconstitutional government actions advancing religion.

(no subject)

Yet more triumph of truthiness over thought!

At a time when the Earth's climate is at the top of practically every nation's agenda, it might seem perplexing that there's a $100 million, fully completed climate-sensing satellite stored in a warehouse in Maryland.

The Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR) was supposed to be delivered five years ago to the L1 Lagrangian point—a gravity-neutral parking spot between the Earth and the sun...DSCOVR would measure the planet's energy balance and reflectivity, known as albedo, which is critical data for calibrating climate change models and monitoring the ozone layer. Yet the mission was quietly killed this year, so the satellite is sitting in a box at Goddard Space Flight Center.

...For years, Republicans have claimed the need for more data before acting to curb global warming...Project leader Dr. Francisco P.J. Valero, of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, describes the mission as "an urgent necessity." Dr. Robert L. Park, a professor of physics at the University of Maryland, is even more blunt about the importance of DSCOVR's data: "Not knowing may kill us."

...In January 2006, NASA quietly canceled DSCOVR altogether, citing "competing priorities."...Climate analyst Trenbeth said, "It makes no sense to me at all either from an economic or a scientific viewpoint. That leaves politics."

...The Ukrainian government offered to launch DSCOVR free of charge, France made a similar offer. But NASA's response so far has been "no thanks."

Just remember: If you vote Republican, you support the belief that magic is a better solution than thinking and that facts are unfortunate things that are always best ignored.