SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
http://heavy.com/news/2017/10/michael-christopher-estes-asheville-airport-bomber-suspect/
A 46-year-old man is facing federal charges accusing him of leaving a jar filled with explosives at a North Carolina airport as part of a war he pledged to fight on U.S. soil.
Michael Christopher Estes was arrested October 7 and charged with attempted malicious use of explosive materials and unlawful possession of explosive materials in an airport, according to a criminal complaint unsealed Tuesday.
The improvised explosive device, or IED, was found inside a jar at the Asheville Regional Airport about 7 a.m. on October 6, the FBI said in the complaint. Bomb technicians from the Asheville Police Department rendered the device safe. The baggage claim and lobby area of the airport were evacuated and shut down for about 2 hours. No one was injured.
also at USA Today and The Independent
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 16 2017, @12:01AM (4 children)
Well, immediately after the Constitution was ratified (y'know, the thing which said that a black slave was only 3/5 of a person), the very first thing done by the very first Congress was to draw a racial line for citizenship. [google.com]
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 16 2017, @12:19AM (2 children)
I have trouble learning from these links to Google, because Google has blocked me ("Our systems have detected unusual traffic from your computer network.") Unless I already know what you meant, I have to first work out what you searched for, then search for it with another search engine, then try to guess which, if any, of those pages you wanted us to see. I wish you would instead pick a pertinent, credible page from the search results.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 16 2017, @01:15AM (1 child)
Are you using a proxy such that other people's sins are getting you in dutch?
Being routed through a company server?
"Our systems have detected unusual traffic from your computer network."
If you're not using a proxy (which will tar you with the same brush they use to tar other, miscreant, users of that proxy) then I suggest that you straighten up, fly right, and quit doing whatever got you on their shit list.
N.B. Whenever I've seen that message, it was because I had tried to narrow down a search, lost track of what I had already tried, and repeated the -same- search multiple times.
(Taking my browser offline and doing a drag & drop to a new tab now alerts me to repeats that are already in cache; if it's actually new, just go back online and hit Reload.)
Back a while, they used to bitch if I included site: in too many searches; they got over that nonsense.
...and, worst case for me, the message has gone away in a few hours.
...and, if you do JavaScript and don't block images, there has been a CAPTCHA associated with that when that message came up for me.
(It's been a long while since I encountered this stuff.)
.
...and when a page won't work for me (I typically block scripts and CSS), a proxy that almost always works just fine is archive.li [archive.li]
...also available as archive.is|archive.eu|archive.fo.
They run all that stuff on their machines and deliver the result.
Very nice.
Here's your first one, on the house.
http://archive.li/yQhBD#selection-745.0-745.10 [archive.li]
I wish you would instead pick a pertinent, credible page from the search results
When it suits my purpose, I do that.
In this case, it doesn't.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 13 2017, @12:50AM
Thanks for the response. I do use a proxy; when Google offers me a captcha and I solve it, sometimes all I get for my trouble is a 403 error page. With Google Translate, that happens consistently. For a long time (around a year), archive.{li | fo | is} was on CloudFlare and it also had a captcha.
(Score: 2) by Arik on Monday October 16 2017, @06:10AM
And the 'racial' (more accurately 'pseudo-racial') line was more accurately ratified by the first Congress, it entered our legal tradition a bit earlier, in 1655 with Johnson v Parker, or more broadly we might say that from about 1640-1660 what became the modern US black-white racial paradigm rose quite suddenly (and, in large part, for plainly economic reasons,) and by the time of the first Congress it was no innovation but old and well established precedent in common law.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?