Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2004:July:21 Wednesday <Tuesday, Thursday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
2004/7/21 [Recreation/Music] UID:32394 Activity:very high
7/20    Does anyone know where I can get the track names for the songs on the
        NOLF soundtrack? Google didn't really turn up anything, and cddb
        just gives track1...N. tia
        \_ liberate the cd and i'll liberate the track names.
           \_ the music just wants to be free (as in beer)!
           \_ huh?
2004/7/21 [Industry/Startup, Finance/Investment] UID:32395 Activity:very high
7/20    M$ pay $$$$ special divident
        Can someone explain why this makes financial sense to M$?
        Why don't they buy back some stocks with that money?  Isn't this
        like cash down the drain, not that they are short on cash.
        \_ Why does any company pay a dividend?  Why does any company go
           \_ Well, a company goes public to raise cash.  When it had more
              than enough, it should purchase the stock back.  It's not
              that they have never paid any divident.  They are not a dot
              com after all.
        \_ in the end, the value of a stock is the dividend or promise of
           future dividends.  sometimes, profit making companies don't
           pay dividends because the company feels that the cash is
           better invested for growth (and the hope of a bigger dividend
           payout in the future).  microsoft has too much cash, more than
           it knows how to use, so it just pay it out to shareholders.
           makes sense to me.
           it knows how to use, so it just pays it out to shareholders.
           makes sense to me.  a stock that will never pay any dividend
           is like a bond that will never pay any interest; it's value
           would be zero and nobody will want to buy it.
           \_ I disagree.  It could still be worth something on the basis that
              eventually they will get bought our or will liquidate their
              operations.  Both are essentially a single large delayed
              dividend.  Now if you say the company will never pay a dividend
              and is planning on going bankrupt...
              \_ It could still be worth something, but the idea is that
                 the profits get returned to the investors. Somewhere
                 along the line people forgot this fundamental of
                 incorporating a business.
                 \_ Well all that really matters is that you can find someone
                    to pay more for your shares.  In a growing company with no
                    dividend, that's not a problem.
                    \_ This is the key for "growth" stocks. M$ has kept this
                       attitude for a long time. Now that it has "stablized"
                       it either starts paying dividends or it starts losing
                       value as an investment (as noted above, a zero interest
                    \_ Not really. Say you incorporate your business and
                       it is doing very well. You're making lots of money,
                       but not paying it out to the stockholders. Would
                       you sell for merely $1 more than the value of the
                       stock (assets) if you're generating a massive cash
                       flow? The bottom price for a stock is the assets of
                       a company, but *profit* is what you really want. A
                       huge company and no money for the investor (you)
                       does you no good.
             \_ well, like you said, they are like a "single large delayed
                dividend".  in other words, you don't disagree.
        \_ The cash reserves are causing M$ problems. Internal protests when
           M$ tried to cut benefits, investors upset by "no dividends" stance,
           and antitrust supporters all point to the huge cash reserves as
           evidence of M$ stinginess and power. For business, money in the
           bank is not being used on investment or R&D. Buybacks and dividends
           are programs to keep stock prices stable and reward investors.
           M$ is implementing both. It's a different mindset than the paranoid
           one that M$ has been selling where any moment now, they might
           collapse and need that money to defend themselves.
2004/7/21 [Science/GlobalWarming, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:32396 Activity:very high
7/21    Uhm, ok... this is scary.  Assuming this story is true but noting
        that it isn't yet confirmed:  3 nuclear armed missiles were found
        buried in a trench near Baghdad under six meters of concrete.  What
        are the odds that something like this could self detonate in the coming
        years (or do some other really bad thing like leak into nearby wells
        or I dunno) if it was left unmaintained and forgotten?
        \_ Moonie owned newspaper.  Moonie owned wire service.  Why don't
           you start posting links from the Final Call?
           you start posting links from The Final Call? -danh
           \_ Mexican Air Force documents UFOs
           \_ I'm not going to respond to your Moonie trolling anymore.  If
              you ever come up with something more than "It's a Moonie paper!"
              then we can chat.  Go away Moonie Troll.
                \_ calling you out on relying on Moonie owned news services
                    is perfectly valid.  Moonie Moonie Moonie Moonie! - danh
        \_ So Iraq had "WMD" all along?  Or were these just nuclear materials,
           not fissionables?  Has any other news org picked up this story?
           \_ I only know what this link says.  It's in the "breaking news"
              section.  It says they're real nuclear tipped missiles.  --op
              \_ Funny how no other news outlet is carrying this story.
                 \_ Let's try again: It's in the "breaking news" section.
        \_ zero.  The story is almost certainly false.
           \_ Good motd answer.  True, yet doesn't actually answer the
              op's question.
              \_ Chance of exploding?  Almost nill.  For a nuke to go off, all
                 the conventional explosive charges surrounding the uranium or
                 plutonium must explode at exactly the right time.  If the
                 different charges go off at the wrong time, you just spread
                 nuclear material over a small area.  During the cold war,
                 when we were keeping nuclear bombers airborn 24/7 (think
                 Dr. Strangelove) one of our bombers crashed in Spain.  No
                 nukes went off and the only ocnsequence was some radioactive
                 contamination of the crash site.  -!PP
                 \_ True, but he also asked about nuclear materials
                    \_ He asked about detonation and leakage.  To answer the
                       leakage question:  It would depend on the casing of the
                       bomb (can water corrode or penetrate it?) and on whether
                       the particulars of its burial allow it to seep into the
                       groundwater.  If it gets into the groundwater if would
                       be bad, but at that point you don't have a bomb, you
                       have a pile of rusty radioactive waste.
        \_ Asked by Reuters about the report, a spokesman at the Interior
           Ministry said: "It's stupid."
           So the gist of it is that Iraq's 'National Inquirer' claims to have
           found weapons and the Moonie Times picked up the story.
           \_ Yep. "Al-Sabah opened last year with backing from the former
              U.S.-led administration in Iraq." --aaron
           \_ Possibly it's stupid.  Possibly it's true.  It is unconfirmed
              and the odds that some newly hired flunky of the provisional
              government knows everything going on in the country instantly
              are zero.  I was asking about the danger involved in the
              situation assuming it was true.  I don't care at all what you
              think of the sources.  That isn't important to my question and
              like I said above, this is the last time I respond to your
              Moonie Trolling in a serious way.  I've tried many many many
              times over the last year or two to get a reason out of you
              other than "it's the moonies!  gasp!" and got zippo.  Go away
              Moonie Troll.
              \_ I love how you think the only person who has this opinion
                 is some lone motd nut.  Ask any ten people about the
                 washington times, and eight of them will say "times? don't
                 you mean post? never heard of it."  And the other two
                 will say "oh, yeah.  that rightwing nut rag by the moonies."
                 Believe me.  I've done this experiment.  In fact, the *only*
                 place I've ever "met" *anyone* who's heard of washtimes
                 and doesn't think it's crazy rightwing propoganda by
                 a dangerous cult is here on the motd, in other words:you.
2004/7/21 [Uncategorized/Multicategory] UID:32397 Activity:very high
7/21    So, if you were the national security guy for a previous admin and
        went into the national security archives to look at hot topic papers
        that a very closely watched bi partisan commission investigating
        terrorism and our response to it wanted for their report and jammed
        some of those papers down your shorts and in your socks and took
        them home and only fessed up when you got caught but completely
        destroyed some papers that there weren't any copies of would you
        expect to get off by saying it was just an honest mistake or expect
        serious jail time for your criminal act?  I think you're all being
        far too 'gotcha!' on this and need to understand that Sandy Berger
        was just following orders.  He's a loyal servant of his country and
        a good man who made an honest mistake and we should not engage in
        the sort of gotcha politics that we're now seeing.  Free Sandy!  Let
        Sandy come home to his family!
        \_ Seems like criminal misconduct to me.  If someone ordered him to
           do it they should be prosecuted too.
        \_ The whole "sock stuffing" thing is a completely unconfirmed leak.
           Nobody knows if its true.  What I'd like to know is who leaked
           the whole thing, and who is spreading the rumors.  Anyone want
           to vote?  My guess is:
           Karl Rove: .
           \_ I don't care who leaked it. He's already admitted to sneaking
              documents out and he should be prosecuted for that at least and
              an attempt should be made to find out if we was working with or
              for sb else. As for the socks and the actual destruction of docs,
              I'm waiting to see if any of that is true. I suspect a bit of
              "Drudge"-ery here. -- ulysses
              \_ The word is that the same person who compared Max Cleland
                 to Osama Bin Laden is the one pushing the sock stuffing
                 rumor...Saxby something?  Can't remember his exact name.
                 As for the sneaking of documents, he definitely fucked up
                 but right now I can't really see genuine criminal intent -
                 more like negligence.  There isn't any credible motive.
                 Some republicans are claiming he might have been trying
                 to help advise Kerry on port security, but you don't need
                 classified documents to show how badly Bush has screwed
                 that up...
                 \_ He was negligent?  He snuck high security papers out of
                    a high security facility and destroyed a bunch of them and
                    you think it was mere negligence?!  That's incredible.  The
                    port security documents were from the Clinton time period.
                    Everything he was looking at was from the Clinton time
                    period.  If it was a Republican busted red handed for
                    stealing papers like this by *stuffing them down his
                    shorts!* you'd be calling for his execution.  Hypocrite.
2004/7/21 [Computer/SW/Unix] UID:32398 Activity:high
7/21    Are there any circumstances under which, e.g., fileno(stdin) would
        not equal 0 on a Unix system (besides obvious things like
        assigning something else to stdin)?
        \_ Nothing obvious.  It's assigned to be that so unless you change
           it or your system is broken, etc.
2004/7/21 [Health/Disease/AIDS] UID:32399 Activity:insanely high
7/21    Bible aids in Prison Beer Run:
        This is funny.  They absolutely should not be charged with escape,_\
          that is crap.  (unless they were caught on the outside, which does
          not seem to be the case).
          \_ Why the hell not?  Escape is escape even if they came back.  And
             why are our prisons so cushy that escapees come back?
        \_This is funny.  They absolutely should not be charged with escape,
          that is crap.  (unless they were caught on the outside, which does
          not seem to be the case).
2004/7/21 [Computer/SW/OS/Windows, Computer/SW/OS] UID:32400 Activity:kinda low
7/21    Web enabled update patent lawsuit:
2004/7/21 [Recreation/Food] UID:32401 Activity:very high
7/21    Finally, the truth about ketchup as a vegetable!
        \_ dammit!  I can't believe that cliffhanger at the end.  I want to know
        \_ wdammit!  I can't believe that cliffhanger at the end.  I want to kno
           the story of the french fries and the bankruptcy settlements!
        \_ Thank god!  Now that this minor footnote to history has been cleared
           up, I can breath easier!  THANK YOU MOTD GODS!
2004/7/21 [Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia] UID:32402 Activity:insanely high
7/21    Heh, so much for Air America Radio being "doomed" (yahoo news)
        \_ Well, that's more of a commentary about O'Reilly's worthless radio
           show. -emarkp
           \_ But he won the Peabody Prize for outstanding journalism, didn't
           \_ Speaking of the worthlessness of O'Reilly, you should really
              google O'Reilly and Jeremy Glick.
              \_ I'm quite familiar with that interview.  I think O'Reilly went
                 over the top but was basically right, and should have cut the
                 mic and ended the interview. -emarkp
                 \_ So what about the followups where O'Reilly repeatedly lied
                    about Glick's positions?  And a year later when he accused
                    Glick of advocating murder?  It was definitely a tale that
                    "grew in the telling."
                    \_ In case you couldn't read, emarkp only defended
                       O'Reilly in that particular interview, not in
                       general.  Therefore your comment does not apply.
                       emarkp would agree with you that O'Reilly is an
                       \_ You are such a computer scientist.  My original
                          reference was to "google O'Reilly and Jeremy
                          Glick."  This would imply their entire relationship,
                          not just the single interview.
                          \_ I guess that was supposed to be
                             condescending, but I'm not sure why it's bad
                             to expect people to restrict the subject of
                             their replies to be <= subject of the pp. Is
                             it because it makes it more difficult for you
                             to insult people with completely random
                             subject matter?  Or maybe it's because you
                             don't have very good reading comprehension
                    \_ What about them?  I've already dismissed O'Reilly as
                       either a credible news source or insightful commentator.
                       I think Glick was an idiot in the interview and is also
                       worthless.  Why would any follow up that made either of
                       them look like /more/ of a jerk matter to me? -emarkp
2004/7/21-22 [Uncategorized/Profanity] UID:32403 Activity:high
7/21    Robotech
        \_ Ghost in the Shell: SAC
        \_ Protoculture
        \_ poll:
           Lin Minmai: .
           \_ Biggest bitch ever.  Hated the entire series.
           Lisa Hayes: .
           Miriya: .
                \_ big... pussy...
           Rook: .
        \_ New series coming out titled Shadow Force (go to
           \_ I don't see it.
        \_ Fuck Robotech/HarmonyGold.  Give me Macross.
           \_ Fuck all that shit.  Gimme Cap'n Harlock and Esmeralda!
              Throw in some Grandizer and Mazinger Z.
              \_ Did you see the recent Esmeralda remake OAV? La-ame!
                 It's like people have forgotten what made Harlock and
                 such great! (That being, incrediable Japanese
                 Nationalism, but hey.)
           \_ Macek did a pretty good job taking a largely incoherent plot line
              with pretty uninteresting characters, and turning it into a
              pretty watchable story.  Macross Plus was pretty, but basically
              ass.  Macross Zero has been pretty entertaining.  Macross isn't
              THAT cool, dude.
              \_ Macross one was ok. I don't think that Macek's version
                 of Macross was really any better. Macek's feat was taking
                 3 totally unrealated robot series and turning them into
                 one fairly coherant story line.  I personally like
                 Macross Plus, but Zero is getting a little "magical" by
                 my standards.  (Although it's certainly fun to watch) Now
                 Macross II, and 7, those are pretty much pure,
                 unadulterated, crap. -jrleek
        \_ Bah! Star Blazers.
        \_ Bah! Full Metal Panic!
2004/7/21 [Reference/Law/Court] UID:32404 Activity:very high
7/21    Has any sodan had a stint in prison?  Is it really as bad as the
        stories say, that rape is rampant and if you are not in a gang you
        are totally doomed?
        \_ this is your butthole: o
           this is your butthole in prison: O
           any question?
           \_ my butthole looks more like this: *
        \_ so, not just stuck in jail for holding, but actuall convicted
        \_ so, not just stuck in jail for holding, but actually convicted
           of something and incarcerated?
           from /etc/mail/aliases:
           jail: blojo,dougo,seidl,oj,jwang,sky
           \_ According to some movies, even holding can be risky.
              \_ According to some movies, computers need 9-track tape drives.
        \_ Not to mention that about half of all prisoners have HepC.  Don't
           know the statistics for HIV but I'm sure its bad.
        \_ Why is it that no prisons have been held liable for the abuse that
           goes on in prisons?  Prisoner safety is obviously the jail's
           responsibility, it would seem obvious that raped inmates could sue
           the prison for megabucks.
           \_ Primarily because convicts have little or no credibility, and
              because, in general, the spirit of anti-authoritarianism is so
              strong, you'd have a bitch of a time getting anyone to testify.
              I mean, seriously, who's going to want to bring down the wrath
              of a fellow inmate that's willing to rape another man?  An it's
              more than just the rapist's wrath -- it's the entire community's
              code of silence that you'd be up against...and the entire
              community's reprisals.
           \_ Because nobody cares about prisoners, and nobody cares about
              rehabilitation.  The overwhelming public attitude is "prisons
              as punishment only" and "lock em up and throw away the key."
              Pretty much all the lessons of Attica and others have been
              \_ what's Attica?
                 \_ what's google?
                 \_ Sigh.
                    \_ Dang. I thought you meant GATTACA
        \_ I have not been in prison, but a family member has been in LA
           County. Anything can happen in prison, but nothing is
           guaranteed to happen. The uncertainty is scary. What happens
           to any given individual depends on who they are, how tough they
           are, and what their personality is like. I'm sure luck plays
           a part, too.
           \_ So if you're a short Asian guy with smooth skin in LA County,
              what's the best personality to have to avoid trouble?
              \_ sucky sucky $5!
                 \_ I think they like those with milky white cheeks
                    better though.
        \_ Why can't they just put a fucking bullet into the rapist's head?
           Oh that's right, prisoners have rights too. Right my ass. You make
           trouble, a bullet awaits you. It'll end the rape.
           \_ It'll end a lot of things in Oakland and SF too.
           \_ RACSIST!
           \_ Are you kidding?  It may be easy to smuggle certain things into
              a prison, but gun is not one of them.  And if it is smuggled,
              guess who is more likely to get it?  Prisoners have no right,
              and the law of the jungle applies there.  The strongest gets
              access to every thing, including the ass of their fellow imates.
              \_ I think he was talking about the justice system putting a
                 bullet, not other inmates doing it.
                 \_ Why would it be in the interest of the justice system
                    to do that?  If the situation is really that bad, the
                    system probably prefers it that way.
                    \_ Bullets are cheap and you can send the bill to the
                       family anyway.
                    \_ Hey, kill the ruined humanity that rape people in prison
                       and you don't have to feed them anymore.  And they're
                       definitely out of society.
                       \_ I thought the purpose of prision rape is deterence.
                          Like the joke about the size of asshole before and
                          after, people would have to think twice before doing
                          anything that could possibly lead them to jail.  The
                          ruined humanity is actually employee of the state.
        \_ just learn from my country Singapore and use caning.  Very
           effective!  Hardcore criminals also scared to death.  Would
           rather go to prison then get caned.  Criminals become tame
           like pussy cats when you show them the cane.
           \_ I wish the system here is as practical.
        \_ mitch igusa was my cs250 ta back in the day.  no horror stories
           from him.
           \_ Who is igusa?  And why would he tell?
              \_ there's this thing called google...
                 \_ Which explains who he is but not why he would tell.
        \_ I have not, but I have a step-brother who has been in. I can
           ask him if you like. I understand that it really depends on
           where you end up. If you are in a Federal prison, you are
           basically safe unless you piss off the guards. If you are in
           a state prison, you are safe if you are in a rehab or CRC
           unit, not safe at all in maximum security. As for county jail,
           it depends on the county. If you piss off the guards in any
           prison, they will "set you up" for rape, so you have to walk
           a fine line between avoiding the wrath of the guards and
           not looking like a snitch or kissup, in which case you
           will get beaten up at the least.
           As for prisoners suing, well they have tried. This is the
           worst case I know of, and the jury let the prison guards off:
2004/7/21-22 [Uncategorized] UID:32405 Activity:moderate
7/21    AARGH!  Would it be that fucking difficult to have fopen and company
        support both back and forward slashes as directory separators?
        \_ isn't fopen just a front to the open() syscall?
        \_ Then you can't have backslashes in filenames.
           \_ And you also can't use the backslash to escape other characters
              in the shell.
2004/7/21 [Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:32406 Activity:nil
7/21    Oh look. Another WMD "find" debunked. Think Fox News will report it? (yahoo news)
        \_ Think anyone will report it?  LOOK!  SANDY BERGER!  EVILLLLLL
           CLINTON GUY!!!!11!!
        \_ In May a sarin shell was found.  Anyway, Bush says America and the
           world is a safer place now that Saddam is gone.
           \_ and if Bush says it, it must be true!  After all, he said the WMDs
              were there!  Oh wait...
2004/7/21-22 [Uncategorized] UID:32407 Activity:very high
7/21    I don't mean to be ilyas or anything, but I just came up w/ a
        hypothetical scenario and was wondering if anyone has written about it.
        If there were a zoo that taught fish to actually speak english and the
        fish talked about how they didnt want to be in aquariums and so forth,
        what sorts of ethical issues would we run into? would it be slavery for
        entertainment, etc?
        \_ They would only teach them "enough" and make them watch TV, so they
           won't know how to think for themselves.
        \_ Did Koko the gorilla that knew sign language ever complained about
           being kept in captivity?  Just curious.
           \_ when they taught her to paint, the first thing she painted was
              the bars of her cage
           \_ When they teach southerners to write, the write "patriotic
           \_ When they teach southerners to write, they write "patriotic
              country" songs.
              \_ Let us know when they've taught you to write.
2004/7/21 [Recreation/Dating, Health/Women] UID:32408 Activity:nil Edit_by:auto Entry has been invalidated. Access denied.
2004/7/21-22 [Health/Disease/AIDS, Recreation/Media] UID:32411 Activity:insanely high
7/21    Does anyone else think that the 1950's movie beuties were better
        looking than the modern oversexed plastic surgery display cases we're
        bombarded with today?  And I'm not just talking Audrey Hepburn.
        \_ The SF/BA is not the entire world, neither is it all of the US
           even.  Unfortunately, the movie starlettes are picked by contacts
           and what their willing to do... not by any means of grace or
           \_ Huh?  I don't know what SF/BA has to do with the topic.  I
              was only refering to movie stars.  (Well, I guess models
              too, but I don't have many pictures of 1950's models.)
        \_ miss the days when Blacks can only sits at back of bus, huh?
           \_ Now *this* is a troll and way off topic, too.
           \_ Hi stupid troll!  (Was supposed to be here)
        \_ yes, more natural beauty, more brains, more taste, more patriotic
           \_ more patriotic? more brains? more taste? Were you alive in the
              1950s or do you just have a received stereotypical image of them
              via other people's nostalgia? I think I've just been trolled,
              although I agree on the natural beauty part.  Marilyn Monroe
              would have been called "fat" by today's standards.
        \_ I remember seeing Rear Window for the first time three years ago
           and walking out thinking that Grace Kelly was way more beautiful
           than any current hollywood star.
        \_ in the 50s people like Rosey O' Donald would never have
           any chance of appearing on TV. She would have been discriminated.
           Is that the kind of world you'd prefer living in?
           \_ As nice a thought as that is, it's not true.  Go watch some
              50's TV, there's some dang ugly people on there.
           \_ A world without a Rosie?  Is that possible?  PLEASE?!
           \_ and Marilyn Monroe could never get a role in a movie today.
        \_ Stepford Wives. Nice obedient wives who stay home, cook, clean,
           and take care of the children... unlike modern bitches of today.
           \_ Did I say something about wives?  I just refering to the
              fact that women in old movies are attractive, and the chicks
              in flics today don't even look human, it's kinda creepy.
              \_ I agree 100% about the women in a lot of today's media
                 looking bizarre and inhuman almost, but keep in mind that
                 a LOT of that is due to digital retouching techniques that
                 have gotten out of hand.  In fact Britney (for instance)
                 is rather ordinary looking without the Photoshop army working
                 on her.
                 \_ Tastes have changed. Instead of Rita Hayworth or Liz
                    Taylor we have Jennifer Garner. Muscles and fitness
                    take precedence over classic good looks. We are, I
                    think, more concerned with the body than the face.
                    Maybe Marilyn Monroe started that. Not that Liz Taylor
                    had a bad body, but Jennifer Aniston and J Lo are more
                    about body than about overall good-looks. Also, styles
                    have changed. Everyone looks bad in a midriff and
                    jeans. Women (and men) then had more style in clothes,
                    hair, and so on.
              \_ Stepford wives=1950s women
                 \_ Get over it.  He's talking about the purely physical.  The
                    op hasn't said one word about your stepford wives crap. !op
        \_ This is general perception of the decades:
           1950s: post WW2, jobs even for HS graduates, lots of jobs,
                  great burger/fries/milk shakes joints. Lots of land,
                  suburbia expansion. Sex. Children :) :) :) :) :) :)
           1960s: TV. Cars. Antibiotics/immunizations. Pills.
                  Birth-control pills. FEEL GOOD. :) :) :) :)
           1970s: Gas crunch. Highway jam. :(
           1980s: Pro-corporation era. Work work work. Workers
                  outsourced. Japanese threat. Work work work. :( :(
           1990s: discovery of AIDS. Population boom, highway
                  congestion, suburbia crunch. Work work work :( :(
           2000s: more suckiness to come.
           \_ Dude, your cute little list is one of the shallowest things I've
              seen in some time.  Aids in the 90's?  Vietnam?  60's counter
              culture?  Cold War/Threat of Nuclear armageddon?  Apartheid?
              There are so many more impactful things to talk about both
              historically and culturally.  I suspect you're either very
              sheltered or very young.
           \_ Erm..  Your "discovery of AIDS" is a tad off.
           \_ Interesting.  Do you think the people actually living through
              your :) decades actually felt that way?  Perhaps some of them
              did, but I know that my parents who actually lived through
              them would have a very different opinion than you.  Don't fall
              prey to the declining view of history.  In many ways we have
              made tremendous progress over the last 50 years.  Ask a gay
              or a black person if they want to go back to the '50s, for
              \_ I won't call that progress. Blacks should go back to Africa

                 and gays should be killed. It would make the US a better
                 place. If you want proof, just come down the project.
                 But wait, you are writing this from the comfort of your
                 home in an expensive where you don't see those fucking blacks
                 do you?
                 \_ Worst.  Troll Attempt.  Ever.
                    \_ You. Write. Like. This. Too. Much. .. Please. Stop.
                       \_ Clue--
        \_ While I agree that most of the starlets today aren't very
           attractive, there are some exceptions (personally I like
           Catherine Zeta-Jones). I also think that Movies these days
           rely too much on cg and sex rather than on writing and
           story development. Not that cg is bad, I mean where would
           Star Trek be w/o cg? :-)
           \_ YAY STAR TREK MOVIE GUY!  --star trek movie guy #1 fan
2004/7/21-22 [Science/GlobalWarming] UID:32412 Activity:high
        What about the people who jumped out of the buildings? I remember
        seeing a lot of those footages on that day, but for some reason
        they're rarely shown nowadays.
        \_ There's a big difference in seeing a building on fire and seeing
           someone plummeting to their death.
2004/7/21-22 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:32413 Activity:very high
7/21    If Bush could apologize -- and he won't of course -- he would say:
        Hey, look, my intelligence agencies told me that Iraq didn't destroy
        all their chemical (sarin, VX) and biological (anthrax) weapons, and
        Saddam could have given them to al Qaeda whenever he wanted.  The UN
        wanted to wait while Saddam stonewalled, and in this post-9/11 world,
        I wasn't going to wait any longer.  If al Qaeda got chemical weapons,
        or by god, a nuclear bomb, they would use them in a second to kill
        hundreds of thousands of Americans -- and by then, it would be too
        late to argue about what-ifs.  As for the battle in Iraq, Rummy told
        me we could roll them up, just like in Afghanistan and with my dad,
        and that part was true; his pal Wolfowitz said we could have in Iraq a
        beacon for democracy that would spread throughout and moderate the Arab
        world, and it sounded great -- well, we tried, and we're still trying.
        Finally, it turned out that Saddam didn't have any viable WMD
        programs, but I'm sure he wanted them, and the world is a safer place
        today without him in Iraq.  Why is it a safer place even though he
        didn't have WMDs?  Because we demonstrated how serious the U.S. would
        be when it came to playing games with chemical, biological, or nuclear
        weapons.  We showed that we would go it alone, to take a country down
        if we thought they threatened our way of life.  And we also learned
        our own limitations about postwar reconstruction.  Better now, than
        later, to have gone through all these things.
        [As for me, I'm voting against Bush, because (1) he pulled the war
        card too early, (2) he didn't have what it took to build a coalition,
        as much as Powell wanted to give him one, (3) I don't want a
        President who doesn't apologize over the first two points, because to
        me, that means he hasn't taken responsibility, and (4) I believe a
        smarter individual as President would have better understood just what
        intelligence we had, or would have better articulated this to the
        public -- that he wanted to take the country to war even when we
        weren't sure he had WMDs.  I really think Bush isn't smart enough to
        write his own speeches, or if he wanted to write and use one, his
        people wouldn't let him.]
        \_ Too bad he won't say it.
        \_ If you're going to troll you need to keep it shorter and on message.
           Try, try, try again padawan.
           \_ I'm serious.  Tell me which part doesn't sound like it matches
              Bush's thinking.  Note how I never said he lied or did it for
              the bin Laden oil connections or to make rich people richer.
              Excluding my opinion, I believe this is also exactly how
              Clinton saw it, too -- he supports Bush's call on Iraq, except he
              would have waited for Blix to finish.
        \_ what does phuqm have to say about htis? he's been long absent.
        \_ 1) Saddam was half a year away from a nuclear weapon in 1992, best
              intelligence suggested several years.  Exactly how many more
              resolutions beyond 21 (over 10 years) do you want?? Honestly,
              when would the UN security council say enough?  Never, because of
              the ties between  Russia, France, Germany, and Iraq, and the
              UN oil for food program.
           2) A coalition was unobtainable.  France, with economic and historical
           2) A coalition was unobtainable.France, with economic and historical
              ties, viewed Iraq as a client state.  Russia was owed billions
              by Saddam.  China was arming Iraq with state of (their) art
              weapons systems.  All three of them had ignored UN rulings and
              negotiated oil contracts provided the sanctions were lifted.
              Couple that with pay offs it is any wonder why these countries
              voted as they did???
           4) Bush articulated his vision lucidly, you just must not have been
              listening.  It is the presidents preeminent responsibility to
              protect the country.  It was a judgement call, one history
              will almost certainly vindicate.
           Lastly your interpretation of history and international politics is
           naive.  We have been at war with Islam since the fall of the Shah.
           Each time the attacks have increased in scale and sophistication.
           Ignoring the problem would likely have resulted in a few nuclear
           weapons detonated in American cities.
           \_ No one suggested the problem should be ignored.  The issue is
              that Bush's approach to problem is fundamentally wrong and is
              making things worse, not better.
2004/7/21-22 [Uncategorized] UID:32414 Activity:kinda low
7/21    Did they free him yet?  What about his shorts?
2018/12/15 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2004:July:21 Wednesday <Tuesday, Thursday>