Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2004:October:26 Tuesday <Monday, Wednesday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
2004/10/26 [Uncategorized] UID:34341 Activity:nil
10/26   Americans burn U.N. flag
2004/10/26 [Computer/SW/Languages/Misc] UID:34342 Activity:nil
10/25   Action movie script for dorks:
2004/10/26 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:34343 Activity:high
10/25   How come no liberal magazine can put this so well?
        Maybe I really am a Buchananite Conservative:
        \_ Buchanan has valid points about WWII.  That said,
           one can not project power in the Middle East from aircraft
           carriers and repeated threats of enforcement become
           ineffectual if they aren't backed up with force.  Assymetrical
           warfare necessitated a new strategy.
           \_ Yes, it's preemptively invade Iraq before the UN inspectors
              can assess Iraq had no WMDs or WMD programs, without enough
              troops to win the peace, and then still say that we should have
              still invaded even knowing what we know today!  In the meantime,
              because of our bungling in Iraq, we possess no credible military
              threat to Iran or N. Korea as they continue building their nuke
              capability.  Yay!
                \_ Iraq was a military fuckup based on political
                   considerations, just like Vietnam was; fucking up a
                   military action like that is as reprehensible as lying
                   about your reasons for doing so (or, if you choose, going
                   about it in an incompetent manner--they're both
                   unforgivable.)  Getting rid of evil dictators, for whatever
                   reason, is not.  -John
2004/10/26-27 [ERROR, uid:34344, category id '18005#2.7' has no name! , , Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34344 Activity:low
10/26   "Stolen Honor" uploaded to /tmp for all those interested. You
        may have silenced Sinclair but not the motd.
        \_ All extremist trolling aside, the reason for not showing SH on
           Sinclair just before the election was that it's propaganda on
           public airwaves; there's nothing wrong with (and indeed much that's
           laudable in) giving the general public the option of viewing the
           film at some private venue (or online).  Political speech is well
           and truly a good thing; it was the time and place that marred the
           Sinclair plan.
           \_ I thought they might have been able to get away with it if
              they at least showed advertising during the showing.  With
              no immediate profit motive, it looked really wierd.
           \_ Does it bother you at all that Kitty Kelly got 3 full days of
              free air time to push her anti-Bush book on TV?  Was that wrong?
              \_ Two things. 1) Your whine boils down to "The FACTS are
                 partisan!" and 2) Kitty Kelly is credible, and you'll
                 note her "anti-Bush" factual book has not gotten her sued.
                 Contrast with Carltoon Sherwood left to you, bitch. --aaron
2004/10/26-27 [Computer/HW/Drives] UID:34345 Activity:kinda low
10/26   Any experiences with Zalman TNN500A cases?  Are they worth the
        huge gobs of cash they cost?  -John
        \_ Holy crap, that's over $1000 for a case...
        \_ Have you tried the Antec Sonata case ($100) with Zalman CPU fan
           and Zalman silent video card cooler? It runs pretty quiet.
           \_ No, but thanks much for the tip.  I have given up on finding
              an external firewire-attached SATA RAID 5 array; the idea for
              the Zalman was to have a server with about 6 big disks in it.
              It's nice & solid too, but that Antec case looks nice. -John
              \_ Arena
2004/10/26 [Computer/Companies/Apple] UID:34346 Activity:nil
10/26   please email me sodans working at apple computer corp.  -dpetrou
2004/10/26 [Computer/SW/WWW/Browsers] UID:34347 Activity:nil
10/26   is it possible/difficult to create a new toolbar button for firefox?
        I want the "up" button from the google toolbar back.
        \_ nevermind I found one.
2004/10/26 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34348 Activity:kinda low
10/26   Insufficient trolling.  Please insert troll to continue.
        \_ I think all illegal aliens should be shot.  What do you think?
           \_ Would you raise taxes to buy the bullets?
        \_ Here's a good one from OSC
2004/10/26 [Uncategorized] UID:34349 Activity:low
10/26   John Peel, RIP.
        \_ Who?
           \_ Siiiiiiiigh.
2004/10/26-27 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia] UID:34350 Activity:high
10/26   so i asked earlier what major media outlets have actually
        endorsed bush this time around, besides the washington times
        and ny post.  I was accidentally watching oreilly last night
        and he was touching on this topic too, and said that
        the LA Times and NY Times had shockingly endorsed kerry but
        that it really didn't matter since no one reads the
        NY Times.  Then I decided ilyas needs to rape oreilly with
        a falafel. - danh
        \_ Too squishy. -- ilyas
        \_ Out of curiosity, dan, any liberal figures you think need
           to be raped with a falafel?  -- ilyas
           \_ probably that coombs guy just for making everyone look
              bad - danh
              \_ Who?
              \_ I've been watching H&C since they started.  I've decided
                 Coombs is actually a really smart guy and is a real liberal
                 but he's also honest and has a good heart so he can't force
                 himself to spit out ridiculous DNC talking points like
                 Hannity does for the RNC.  I think he's a good, smart and
                 honest man.
                 \_ I would agree with you, but if he were so good and
                    smart he would quit or get someone combative enough
                    to counteract hannity, or quit in disgust.  - danh
                    \_ Most people have bills to pay.  It's just a job, not
                       a religion.  I think that's the difference between
                       him and, well, I won't slam anyone.  I like Coombs
                       even though I disagree with 99% of what he says.
           \_ Maybe Andrew Cockburn. Naomi Klein also comes to mind. That guy
              on crossfire, too, for being such a shill. !danh
              \_ I think the guy on crossfire just plays a liberal on TV.
                   -- ilyas
           \_ Ilya: Why do you hate liberals?
              \_ Why do you say 'Why do you hate liberals?'? -- ilyas
                 \_ My suspicion that ilyas is actually an eliza program
                    have been confirmed.
                    \_ Tell me about yermom. -- ilyas
           \_ Poor ilyas can never tell when he's being baited.
              \_ This is probably related to having no sense of humor.
        \_ The LA Times hasn't endorsed any candidate (yet).  They have not
           since 1972, but there is discussion about doing it this year.
           If he were an honest critic, he would mention the Post endorsement.
           Maybe he did.
           \_ Big shock, the LAT is going to endorse Bush!
              \_ Big shock, the Washington Post and the New Republic both
                 endorsed Kerry!
                 \_ Andrew Sullivan also endorsed Kerry.
                    \_ Big shock!
                       \_ Apparently you know nothing about Sully.
                          \_ That he puts his sex politics above all else?
                             Nothing new there.
2004/10/26-27 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34351 Activity:low
10/26   Creepy.  Rat brain cells + computer control F-22 simulation
        \- ChimpBrain controls world's largest economy and military. --psb
           \_ You're one post too high troll boy.
           \_ Is this the real psb?  I didn't think he was this brain dead, and
              he's supposed to end with "ok. tnx".
              \_ Don't you know, psb is a 'kantian.'
                 \-IAJS,YSTL. --psb
                 \-Hello, ok tnx.
2004/10/26-27 [Recreation/Computer/Games] UID:34352 Activity:very high
10/26   I haven't played any computer games in a very very long time.  What is
        a fun game to play in cooperative mode?  I'm primarily looking for
        first person shooter type games, but would be interested to hear
        alternative suggestions.
        \_ Bubble Bobble
        \_ Star Wars Battlefront allows you to play coperatively, and you're
           part of a massive group effort.  It may start to lose appeal in
           frequent replays, but right now it's a blast.  Also, I just bought
           Jedi Knight: Jedi Academy, and I'm loving it.  There's a multi-
           player version, but I don't know if it's cooperative; if it were,
           that would be tres sweet. (And why did this get overwritten?)
        \_ Cooperative mode as in buddies vs AI or buddies vs other players
           over the internets [sic]? I've had a lot of fun playing BattleField
           1942 on the internets [sic] if you find a good server it's a nice
           teamwork game (4 players per bomber, 4 per battleship, etc.)
           \_ BF1942 AI is teh suck, don't bother with coop mode against the
              computer, but yeah, the teamplay is really nice.  Have yet to
              try BF2.  -John
              \_ BF:Vietnam is fairly additive.  With the latest patch, you
                 now have maps that have added tunnels and sewers.  There is
                 also a mod that updates the BF:1942 maps to the newer engine
                 with is very fun.  Another game thats fun multiplayer is
                 Unreal Tournament 2004 in Onslaught mode.  -rollee
        \_ If the last LAN co-op you played was Serious Sam 2, you haven't
           missed anything.  Not much else.
           For online team v team co-op, CounterStrike: Source is fun.
           Unreal Tournament looks fun against bots, but it looks too twitchy
           to me.  There is an Aliens UT mod strictly against the AI, kinda
           \_ The last good co-op game I played was doom2, haha -!op
        \_ I've heard co-op in Halo is great (on xbox--co-op isn't available on
           the PC port).
        \_ MMOs like world of warcraft are good for coop play. It's required
           really, to avoid some of the tedious stuff. Still takes too long
           to play though.
           \_ Is WOW out yet?
              \_ Not yet.  Will be in open beta soon, I suspect. -geordan
                 \_ Alpha bastard. -- ilyas
                    \_ I know. -geordan
           \_ MMOs are a niche market, imho. -- ilyas
              \_ how do you figure? they have many millions of users among them
                 and make lots of money.
                 \_ Well, lots of koreans and japanese play.  A typical
                    American kid/teenager/young adult doesn't strike me as
                    a MMO type.  *shrug*.  MMOs are built on timesinks and
                    'character-building-as-work.'  I don't think that sort of
                    fun is very widespread in American culture. -- ilyas
                    \_ Your suppositions are belied by the facts:
                       \_ Wtf?  I am well aware of MMO demographics.  What
                          does that have to do with my assertion that
                          most young people will not play everquest?
                          How many subscribers do you think everquest has?
                          Do you understand the difference between
                          'most people who play everquest are young males'
                          'most young males do not play everquest'?
                            -- ilyas
                          \_ Don't bring logic to a video game discussion.
                    \_ Video games are still basically a geek thing in
                       the popular culture. But would you consider Diablo
                       a niche market? MMOs have a lot wider appeal than
                       that with some of the same timewasting dynamics.
                       \_ Diablo is much more accessible than a typical
                          MMO.  I think Diablo is pretty mainstream.
                          It's about as close to mainstream as an RPG
                          will come. -- ilyas
                          \_ Well I've only tried WoW but based on that you're
                             just wrong. I've seen a lot of interest from young
                             males (again, only a certain class of them even
                             play PC games and a further subset stray from the
                             FPS genre). WoW is very comparable to Diablo in
                             basic "get quest, go kill stuff, keep upgrading
                             weapons/armor/skills" gameplay. The combat is
                             slower paced and doesn't have the action-game
                             aspect of Diablo (frantically clicking and running
                             around). It's just a far more rich game world,
                             and has more to do besides just constant combat.
                             The social aspect is something you can't find in
                             regular games and appeals to a lot of people.
                             The Sims is the best seller and doesn't try to
                             target the teenage boy demographic, which Diablo
                             was all about.
                             \_ Blizzard is a good company, and WoW is a good
                                game.  If any MMO has a chance at 'mainstream
                                status,' WoW is it.  I don't think it will
                                reach it in the US, simply because most
                                US gamers aren't really into these kinds of
                                RPGs.  Anyways, this entire thread is strung
                                out on dorkosterone.  I am stopping, before
                                someone trolls me into a long rant about
                                MMO design, that I will later regret.
                                Guildwars is more likely to be mainstream
                                than WoW, I think. -- ilyas
                                \_ fwiw I don't plan to buy WoW and only played
                                   a few days. just takes too much time to do
                                   anything. Playing in teams is fun but you
                                   have to play long periods to make the most
                                   of that and find a good group. Or if you
                                   make friends in the game you have to keep
                                   up with them and regularly stay in touch.
                                   I have a real life to attend to thanks.
                                   It could work by scheduling times with a
                                   friend so you keep in sync. Going solo is
                                   unrewarding and the game punishes it.
2004/10/26 [Politics] UID:34353 Activity:moderate
10/26   Since yesterday's doonesbury link was deleted, here's a somewhat
        more humorous one:
        \_ I don't delete comic links but I don't see a point in posting
           well known ones like doonesbury.  He has a known and very clear
           perspective that some like and others don't.  His fan base is
           static because he already has every reader he's going to get.
           \_ Very true, but yesterday's deleted post was specifically about
              that weird bulge, and how it's starting to get mainstream
              attention.  I wouldn't post it otherwise.
2004/10/26 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34354 Activity:high
10/26   BoingBoing has a list of news organizations that typically stay away
        from political endorsements (or otherwise would predictably be in the
        Bush camp) that are currently endorsing Kerry:
        \_ My favorite are when they advertise articles from anti-Bush
           conservatives but when you read closely and look up the authors
           they're all card carrying libertarians.  I got a big kick out of
           the Cato Institutate article that Salon posted in full for free
           because they felt the message was "so important".
2004/10/26 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34355 Activity:high
10/26   Why are you a Democrat?  Why are you a Republican?  What is the
        top reason you belong to either party?
        \_ I am independent but I hate Democrats because they want to decide
           everything for you, except what happens in the bedroom.
        \_ I am a democrat for exactly one reason: George W. Bush.  I was always
           an independent before.
           \_ Yes, I am precisely democrat for the same reason. I was pretty
              neutral before, but GWB truely showed me what Republicans
              are made of.
              \_ I wouldn't go that far.  If anything, i've become much more
                 willing to listen to moderate republicans over the last
                 four years, and  I have in fact found that I have far more
                 in common with them than I would have thought.  It's
                 just that one man, and some of his more wingnut cabinet
                 \_ You are right, it is also men like Tom Delay and Bill
                    First.  The moderates are totally cowed by the extreme
                    wing of the party, and until that changes there is no
                    moderate republican party.
        \_ I'm a Democrat because I want to work within the system to improve
           it.  The Republican Party is full of assholes who justify their
           beliefs and actions with survival of the fittest - and who wants to
           party with people like that?  If Republicans were just about smaller
           government and having a safety net for the poor without this asshole
           attitude and the derived characteristics, I'd probably be a
           Republican.  Why not just be an independent?  You can always vote
           for the other guy or criticize other Democrats as a Democrat.
           \_ Independents get no say in the primaries.
        \_ I grew up poor, and I believe in the "democrat" policies that helped
           poor families like mine and now my family is pretty well off.
           I don't mind paying more taxes to paybackk for the government
           services I received in school like financial aid.  I am democrat.
        \_ I am democrat because I hate Republicans.  They tend to be arrogant
           and have no respect for other people.
           \_ Nice troll!
           \_ I am a Republican because I am stupid and evil.  Once, a long
              time ago, I was smart and good and a Democrat just like you.
        \_ I was ignorant and blandly neutral until I came to Cal.  After a
           few years of seeing the left completely unfiltered, I found them
           deeply intellectually dishonest, hostile, angry, mean, bitter,
           and unworthy of serious consideration.  I vote Republican because
           they're the other major party and I've never met Republicans as
           vicious and mean spirited as the left I met at Cal.
           \_ I didn't have this experience when I attended 92-97, but I would
              say (like Affirmative Action by Any Means Necessary) they're
              just stupid liberals, and stupidity is common to both parties,
              and to independents as well.  I would actually say my experience
              (during Cal and since Cal) has actually been the opposite of
              yours. -liberal
        \_ I have the impression that states tend to be more strongly
           polarized Repulican or Democratic.  What are the top R and D
           states?  Do R or D states tend to do better (not in the fun-to-
           live-in sense, but in the fiscal/crime/social services/education
           sense)?  CA is pretty screwed up.  Is the equivalent Republican
           state (TX?) equally screwed up?  Does anyone know of relevant
           \_ I realize this is not exactly what you're talking about, but
              it's interesting:
              Blue states have higher per capita state domestic product.
              If you broke it down by county, I think you'd see something
              much more dramatic.  When you actually look at the numbers,
              it's the republicans who are the non-productive welfare
              whores.  Just look at the water projects in the western
           \_ Do you really need to ask motd?
           \_ Most D states are along the coasts.  R states are anywhere in
              between.  You be the judge.
              \_ You don't know either, huh?
           \_ What you have to understand is that there are really three
              American political parties, the Republicans, Democrats
              and Appropriators (to quote Dick Armey and Trent Lott).  Most
              Dems are Appropriators, and alot of Repubs (RINOs) are also.
              The fiscal discipline (and other successes) of the 1990s
              resulted when the small government conservative contingent
              of Congress was able briefly take control in the 1994 elections,
              aka the Contract with America.  After Newt left, Congress
              slowly returned to normal, although with a different letter in
              \_ Fine.  The question remains though.  Which states are doing
                 better?  Is TX as screwed up as CA?  Is NY as screwed up as
2004/10/26 [Recreation/Dating] UID:34356 Activity:high
10/26   What's with this constant "my wife...." on Soda? This is the CSUA
        for crying out loud. If you want to brag about the fact you have
        a gf/wife, remember this, "A man is never complete until he gets
        married, he is then finished!" Hahaha. -lonely sodan.
        \_ I agree, enough about this "my wife blabla" shit. No offense
           to anyone, but bragging about your wife is not welcome here.
           \_ Well, if you live with someone and spend most of your spare
              time with them, it can be difficult not to mention them.
              Would you find it less offensive if we said "roommate", like
              gay couples do when introducing their S/O to their asshole
              conservative relatives?
           \_ I haven't seen anyone "bragging" about a wife.  What's your
              \_ I wouldn't attack op like this myself, but I am curious what
                 has upset him. Could sb post a reference to a particularly
                 offending post or posts? Myself, I want to know whatever
                 happened to bdg.
        \_ Trust me, your joke is accurate.  If you had a wife, you'd know
           that mentioning her in a post is not bragging; it's more like a
           cry for help or for commiseration.
           \_ BDG, is that you?!  --BDG #3 fan
              \_ I'd say I am the BMG, but then every married guy is a BMG...
        \_ My wife and I don't see anything wrong with mentioning a wife if
           it is in context.  What does your wife think about it?  Having a
           wife isn't "bragging".  It is a legal and social state that you'll
           never find yourself in as long as you see a wife as an ownership
           object and not a person you're sharing your life with.  Why would
           anyone want to share their life with a bitter person?
           \_ Misery loves company.
        \_ My wife says you're a moron.
           \_ The wife part just makes the motd looks like some place
              that old people hang out. We need more talks about how to
              get girls, not my wife this and my wife that.
2004/10/26-27 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:34357 Activity:nil
10/26   Just to get away from the presidential trolling, what do people
        think of Prop 1A?  The counter arguments in my voter guide just
        talk about lack of oversight for how the money is used, but I
        don't really see how that applies to normal general use tax
        funds.  motd, Yea or Nay?
        \_ When in *any* doubt I vote "nay" on everything.
2004/10/26 [ERROR, uid:34358, category id '18005#8.67931' has no name! , , Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:34358 Activity:nil
10/26   <DEAD><DEAD> (NBC News, dated today)
        "At the Pentagon, an official who monitors developments in Iraq said
        U.S.-led coalition troops had searched Al-Qaqaa in the immediate
        aftermath of the March 2003 invasion and confirmed that the
        explosives, which had been under IAEA seal since 1991, were intact.
        The site was not secured by U.S. forces, the official said, speaking
        on condition of anonymity. ... Mohammed J. Abbas, a senior official at
        Iraq's Ministry of Science and Technology, reporting the theft of the
        explosives. The materials were lost through 'the theft and looting of
        the governmental installations due to lack of security,' the letter
        said. The letter informed the IAEA that since Sept. 4, 2003, looting
        at Al-Qaqaa had resulted in the loss of 214.67 tons of HMX, 155.68 tons
        of RDX and 6.39 tons of PETN explosives. It was not clear how Iraqi
        authorities arrived at that date."
        "Reporter Lai Ling Jew ... embedded ... 'There wasn't a search ...
        The mission that the brigade had was to get to Baghdad. That was more
        of a pit stop there for us. And, you know, the searching, I mean
        certainly some of the soldiers headed off on their own, looked through
        the bunkers just to look at the vast amount of ordnance lying around.
        But as far as we could tell, there was no move to secure the weapons
        nothing to keep looters away.'"
        \_ Woops, once again NYtimes and CBS are exposed as frauds
           \_ I can't tell if you are being ironic or not, please
              help me. - danh
           \_ "Cliff May over at the Corner writes ... Sent to me by a
              source in the government: 'The Iraqi explosives story is a fraud.
              These weapons were not there when US troops went to this site in
              2003. ...'"  Uh, I think "government source" just saw the first
              NBC News article (incorrectly reporting HMX/RDX as already
              missing) and echoed that.
2004/10/26 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:34359 Activity:nil
10/26   Media Watchdog: 'October Surprise' Blows Up in Faces of
        NY Times
        NyTimes pulls a CBS
        \_ "Cybercast News Service"? Whoizzat?
           \_ right-wing news outlet.  Media Research Center is a right-wing
              source as well.  You better believe the right-wing is spinning
              this as much as they can:  Dubya lost 380 tons of HMX and RDX
              (not just artillery shells and general-use explosives) at a site
              we knew about and that the IAEA explicitly warned the U.S. about
              before the invasion ("hey dumbshits, don't forget about the
              Al-Qaqaa site with the stuff that can start a fissile reaction").
        \_ Uhh, it is becoming increasingly clear that the NBC story
           was wrong.  The troops were jsut there for a resting stop
           and no inspections were done.  If there were 380 TONS of high
           explosives taken from the facility in the month leading up to
           the start of the war don't you think people would have known?
           I mean shit you don't think we had every single satalite we could
           looking at places like MAJOR AMMO DUMPS.  you can spin away but
           it might be better if you jsut faced facts for once.  There was
           NO postwar planning.  Bush and co really thought that the iraqis
           would rush to love us and everythin would be wonderful.  The fact
           that they are still refusing to admit their mistakes is leading
           to disaster after disaster in Iraq.
           \_ Like the Bush ANG memos eh?  I should just believe the 'facts',
              as in whatever the Jayson Blair says is a fact.
              \_ NBC pulled the story.  Get a grip.
        \_ Uh, hardly any of the oil refineries were affected during the same
           time period, unlike Al-Qaqaa; the "it was gone before we got there"
           excuse is incredibly stupid.
        \_ Of course it was gone before we got there.  If you take your sweet
           ass time guarding sites other than the oil ministry it gives the
           bad guys plenty of time to steal explosives.  The only alternative
           "It was stolen right under our noses" makes no sense because if you
           actually assigned people to guard the stuff nobody could have simply
           waltzed off for it.  Saying "It was gone before we got there" is a
           bit like saying "Things are always in the last place you look".
           \_ Uh, it was last seen before the war, like 5 years before.  Do you
              have any clue about this story at all?  Let's blame Bush for
              the missing gas Saddam used on the Kurds.  After all, it could
              have been there JUST before the Americans got there...
              \_ What was last seen before the war, like 5 years before?
                 Are you talking about the RDX and HMX at Al-Qaqaa?
              \_ No it was last seen shortly before gulf war 2.  There were
                 inspectors in iraq shortly before the US told them to bug
                 out because war was coming.  This was one of the sites they
                 had under inspection.
2004/10/26 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:34360 Activity:nil
10/26   Discovered papers: Hanoi directed Kerry
        \_ Yes, but what is Weekly World News' take on the story?
           \_ KERRY IS A SPACE ALIEN!
           \_ WWN >> WND
2004/10/26 [Recreation/Computer/Games] UID:34361 Activity:moderate
10/26   PC Computer Games?  Xbox?  PS2?
        \_ Context?
           \_ what do you prefer to play/buy.
              \_ PC.  I like turn-based strategy games which are few and far
                 between on consoles, and for non-action games, keyboard+mouse
                 input is really nice to have.
                 \_ Nectaris: military madness is an awesome PS1 turn-based
                    strategy game.
        \_ Gamecube. My favorite system for get-togethers, with the most fun
           4-player games (Super Smash Bros Melee, Mario Kart, etc)
           \_ gamecube = teh gay
              \_ whoops. sorry. lemme go back to my games where i blow shit
                 up and endlessly accumulate frags.
                 \_ You've been baited -troll
           \_ Donkey Konga!
2004/10/26-27 [Consumer/Audio] UID:34362 Activity:nil
10/26   Might be lost amidst the hype over ipod photo and ipod U2, but the new
        iTunes can locate duplicated music files and optionally delete them.
        I think about 50% of my music files are duplicates.
        \_ Oh, fuck this... it's just name id3 tag matching.  I want MD5 hashes
           (with and without consideration for id3/meta data) and heuristics
           for determining how close a song is to a duplicate.
2004/10/26-27 [Computer/SW/OS/FreeBSD] UID:34363 Activity:nil
10/26   I need a few standard icons for a small web app I'm doing (up/down
        arrows, +/-, that sort of thing).  Is there some sort of BSD-licensed
        collection of these online?
        \_ I'd just find some BSD app with ones you like and rip-off theirs.
           When I needed something along these lines I just spent an hour or
           so in an image editing program using simple geometry tools.
           Also, have you considered just using the icons from Apache (which
           has a BSD-style license)?
2004/10/26-27 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Israel] UID:34364 Activity:nil
10/26   Knesset approves Sharon plan to yank out the settlers: (Bloomberg)
2004/10/26-27 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34365 Activity:very high
10/26   So now that almost every major newspaper has endorsed Kerry does
        this prove the notion of a liberal media? Why would newspapers
        controlled by mega-national corporations throw in with Kerry?
        \_ No, and because Bush is a radical.
           \_ Dude! I totally agree!  Bush is gnarly!
              \_ If you're not trolling, you may wish to look up the word
                 \_ Try googling "define:joke"
        \_ This will be only the 3rd time that the democrat presidential
           candidate has had more endorsements from newspapers than the
           republican, since Editor and Publisher magazine started tracking
           them in 1940 (the other two were Johnson in 1964 and Clinton in
           1992). At least 35 papers that endorsed Bush in 2000 are endorsing
           Kerry this time, while only four who endorsed Gore are endorsing
           Bush. And this is despite a tendency of papers to endorse sticking
           with incumbents. So no, it doesn't "prove the notion of a liberal
           media," it helps demonstrate just how terrible Bush has been.
           \_ Nooo!  Do not you bring your facts here!  They are not
              compatible with my blind partisan indoctrination!!!     -op
           \_ Question:  if Bush wins, does that mean the print media is out of
              the mainstream?  Shouldn't the paper endorsements roughly follow
              the country's nearly-even split?
              \_ Yes. No, unless you want the papers to tell the people
                 what they already think.
                 \_ BZZZT! on point 2.  These are editorial opinions.  If the
                    newspaper people are "just like the rest of us" then they
                    should have roughly the same opinion split.  Unless of
                    course you feel newspaper people are somehow more
                    enlightened and posses superior intellect and moral
                    status.  If you believe that you haven't met enough
                    newspaper people.
                    \_ newspaper editors have significantly more education
                       than the general population, and also pay more
                       attention to the news; therefore they should, on
                       average, have "better" opinions than the median
                       American.  -tom
                       \_ Am I the only one who sees a certain circularity
                          to this argument?
                          \_ No, it's just a tom thing.  At least he's honest
                             about his mistaken belief that newspaper people
                             are better than the rest of us.
                             \_ What is mistaken about my belief? Specifically,
                                I think newspaper editors have more education
                                and pay more attention to the news than the
                                median American.  I think they are more likely
                                to know Kerry's and Bush's positions on the
                                issues, for example.  I don't think they are
                                "better"; they just have a more educated and
                                informed opinion than the general population.
                                The same is probably true of computer
                                programmers.  -tom
                                \_ Here tom, let me spell it out for you.
                                   Newspaper editors help create the news we
                                   see.  Therefore, when the editors 'pay
                                   attention to the news' as you say, they
                                   are paying attention to something
                                   that other newspaper editors helped create.
                                   There is a circularity in this system.
                                   \_ I gave a specific example; I think
                                      newspaper editors are more likely
                                      to know what Bush and Kerry's positions
                                      on the issues really are.  I don't have
                                      a poll of newspaper editors to show you,
                                      but there are a number which show that
                                      the American public has no fucking clue.
                                   \_ You guys should be arguing specifics,
                                      say, the Washington Post.
                                      I don't think you'll get anywhere talking
                                      about "newspaper editors" and "the
                                      median American", apart from irritating
                                      each other.
           \_ Link? Which papers? I don't care about the Podunk Review in
              Lincoln, Nebraska. I disagree with the definition of 'major'
              below but certainly it is not so wide as to have 35 papers
              flipflop. I am not sure the universe includes 35 papers.
              \_ You should care about the Podunk Review.  Millions of people
                 read the PR across America and take it seriously.
              \_ [editorandpublisher]
                 \_ Thanks. So what do you think a reasonable cut-off for
                    circulation is?
                    \_ Since the circulation numbers are being rigged (they're
                       outright fabrivations to boost ad dollars), it doesn't
                       outright fabrications to boost ad dollars), it doesn't
                       make sense to have a circulation based cut-off.
                       \_ The alternative? I imagine they are 'rigged'
                          equally. Only relative size matters, not
                          \_ Why do you imagine all newspapers are equally
                             criminal?  But let's follow your reasoning
                             anyway: a newspaper with a real 100,000 readers
                             inflates by 10%, another one with 1,000,000
                             readers inflates by 10%.  The first has created
                             10k non-existing people, the second has created
                             \_ Uh, so? The idea is to identify the
                                largest papers, not to guess at their
                                actual circulation.
              \_ Your "universe" is small and tiny, as yermom described among
                 other things.
                                      \_ Even if we grant that newspaper people
                                         may know better what each candidate's
                                         beliefs and policies are (which I
                                         still dispute but enough on that), to
                                         know more about a topic is not the
                                         same as being correct about ones
                                         conclusions on that topic.  Having
                                         knowledge does not make one's opinion
                                         more "right".  Don't confuse raw fact
                                         oriented knowledge with wisdom.
        \_ The major newspapers are:
           The Washington Post, the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times,
           USA Today, and the Wall Street Journal. (the latter three have not
           made an endorsement)
           \_ Don't forget The San Francisco Examiner and the Washington Times.
              \_ These are tier 2 or lower, along with:
                 the Chicago Tribune, the Boston Globe, and all the other
                 \_ Tribune owns the LA Times.
              \_ These aren't even second tier. Neither one is in the top 100
                 papers in the country by circulation.
              \_ The Washington *Times* has endorsed Kerry?  Seriously?
                 \_ Follow the sub-thread, please!  The topic is:
                    Identifying the major newspapers.
           \_ funny, how most of these majors also called Kerry a crackpot
              for making a link between Iran/Contra and CIA cocaine trading,
              and after the CIA said it was true years later, put the news
              well behind the front page.  irony.
              \_ What are you talking about?  The CIA has never admitted
                 links to cocaine trafficking.
                 \_ CIA Inspector General Fred Hitz admitted that "there are
                    instances where the CIA did not, in an expeditious or
                    consistent fashion, cut off relations with individuals
                    supporting the contra program who were alleged to have
                    engaged in drug trafficking activity."
                    \_ Which is nothing like, "The CIA engaged in the cocaine
                       trade to fund secret off-book programs" which is what
                       the original accusation is about.  The Cold War was a
                       dirty fight for survival.  The CIA existed to do
                       exactly that sort of dirty work and deal with those
                       sorts of people.  Lesser of two evils and all that.
                       \_ Shrug.  The original thread was about how Kerry
                          was not off his rocker about there being a link.
                          It also directs evidence against the guy who wrote
                          "What are you talking about?  The CIA has never
                          admitted links to cocaine trafficking".
                          \_ A "link"?  Of course there was "a link".  That
                             is who the CIA was created to deal with, duh.
                             Did you really prefer the Carter version of
                             Cold War intel where the CIA wasn't supposed to
                             talk to "bad people"?  You're still mixing two
                             different issues: a "link" vs "selling" cocaine.
                             A "link" is meaningless FUD.
                             \_ You're off-topic, sodan.  The comment was
                                directed toward the "CIA never admitted" guy.
        \_ Isn't it obvious by now... based on Sandy Berger, Jayson Blair,
           ANG Memos, SVFT, Kerry's post war activities and now this
           'missing explosives' fraud??
           \_ I can't see all that through the bottom of my kool aid glass.
        \_ When the media pushes Kerry as hard to sign Form 180 as they
           beat up Bush over his military records, I'll believe they're
           something other than partisan left wing hacks.  When they tell us
           about Kerry meeting Madame Binh in Paris while still an active
           duty officer for the US military, I'll believe.  When they say
           they're sorry and they fucked up with the bogus Bush documents
           instead of spinning it into some bullshit "false but accurate"
           which only an extreme leftish partisan finds acceptable, I'll
           believe.  When they stop write large print headlines in response
           to positive Bush admin job news that say, "BONDS DROP ON JOBS
           REPORT!", I'll believe.  The list goes on, but my fingers are
           getting sore.  You get the idea.
           \_ It's hard work.  I know how hard it is.
              \_ Yes, being an honest and unbiased media person is hard
                 work.  Our mainstream media has failed miserably.  Mostly,
                 because they're not even trying.
           \_ Bush still has not signed his form 180 and Bush documents
              are still leaking out.
              \_ Thank you for making my point.  The media has bashed the shit
                 out of Bush on this issue but has completely ignored it in
                 Kerry's case.  In trying to attack Bush you have made my
                 point on this thread's topic which is about the biased Media.
              \- Does anybody know how many papers that endorsed BUSH2000 are
                 endorsing KERRY04. Are there any papers that endorsed ALGOR
                 who are now endorsing BUSH? Even 1? [chicago?] --psb
                 \_ There are about 37 switches for kerry.  i can't remember
                    how many for bush.  one of the links above has the totals.
                 \_ The Denver Post endorsed Gore and is endorsing Bush.
                    There are two others.
                 \_ Fortunately, the people decide, not newspaper editors in
                    this country.  Endorsements will carry little weight as
                    most papers have a bias which leads to readship which
                    shares that bias.  The SF Chron wouldn't survive in OC,
                    for example.  The OC Register wouldn't make it in SF.
                    \_ you don't think nazi sympathizing and union busting
                       would play in OC?  The SF Chron recently fired a
                       reporter for attending an anti-war rally; they are
                       not any kind of liberal bastion.   -tom
2004/10/26-27 [Reference/Military, Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:34366 Activity:high
10/26   Awesome.  Children's puppet show encourages massacre.
        \_ I love You, You love me
           We'll murder the Zionist Enemy...
        \_ that's hilarious, sad it's true.. sheesh..
           \_ If your livelihood was an olive grove, maybe you'd want to shoot
              the people ripping it out.
              \_ Oh please.  Did you catch the palestinians were using the
                 trees to hide rocket launchers?
                 \_ I knew that, but the people firing rockets from olive
                    groves are not the same people who live/work there.  The
                    Israeli Army's distinct lack of sympathy for innocent
                    farmers is not exactly winning them friends.
                    \_ And how would you suggest an army deal with this
                       situation?  Ask them to stop?
                       \_ Look, if they feel the need to destroy an olive grove
                          for security reasons, that's OK, but you need to pay
                          them a fair-market price if you're going to take away
                          their means of earning a living.  From what I've
                          heard they just send in the buldozers and say
                          'tough shit'.
                          \_ Did you know that if the police destroy your
                             property while pursuing a suspect, etc. they are
                             not liable for damages?  Sounds like you don't
                             know much about established law.
                          \_ From what you've heard?  Still reading dailykos?
                             Or is that the PLO website?
                          \_ Wow, the governments on your planet must be
                             really fucking cool.  Could you kindly cite an
                             actual example of any existing government
                             compensating individuals (in this case
                             non-citizens!) for property destroyed/seized
                             for security reasons within a reasonable
                             timeframe following the destruction/seizure?
                             \_ The US Army routinely reimburses non-citizens
                                for property damage incurred during training.
                                I know this for a fact, since I saw it happen
                                in Panama. -Vet
                        \_ I am unaware of any police department deciding
                           they are in the business of punishing people,
                           that is a matter for our correctional system.
                           \_ If the army flattened your house while persuing
                              terrorists in this country, you would probably
                              be reimbursed but it isn't guaranteed.  If your
                              property was being used to hide weapons and you
                              didn't report it and the military destroyed your
                              house, tough shit.
                              \_ Actually, you probably wouldn't be reimbursed,
                                 even in the case where you were just an
                                 innocent bystander.
                                 \_ There's no need to speak hypothetically
                                    here.  One word: Waco.
                                    \_ But they were religious nutters so they
                                       don't have any rights.  Just because
                                       Reno could have had Koresh picked up
                                       in town when he made shopping trips,
                                       usually alone, twice a week.
                              \_ yea, easy for you to say.  report it, and
                                 the next day, you will be killed by those
                                 bastards for "collaborating with the
2004/10/26-27 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:34367 Activity:insanely high
10/26   Lawrence O'Donell exposes O'Neill of SVFT as a liar.  This
        must be what the media means when it says these guys have
        been discredited.
           \_ Well O'Donell is also the guy who has stated he doesn't
              care if troops in Iraq become demoralized, that they should
              shut up.
              \_ This sounds like either a quote taken out of context,
                 or a very liberal paraphrase.  Do you have a URL or decent
                 news source showing the quote and its surrounding context?
                 Honestly, both of those gentlemen strike me as partisan
                 mouthpieces furthering The Party's agenda with, at best,
                 coincidental regard for the truth.
                 \_ "MR. O'DONNELL: Look, it's not our job to lie about
                     war to make troops feel good. And I don't care what
                     they feel."
                    "MR. O'DONNELL: I don't care if they're demoralized.
                     They have to go to war and be prepared ..."
                     \_ gee I wonder why you didn't provide the context.  -tom
                        \_ It's a McLauglin group transcript.. search for it,
                           I don't want to corrupt you with the link I'd give.
                           \_ what's so bad about
                              All he's saying is that you can't bury your head
                              in the sand and squash all debate about whether
                              the war is a good idea, just because you need to
                              "support the troops."  Lying about the war
                              doesn't support the troops. -tom
                              \_ True, lying about the war doesn't support
                                 the troops.  Write a letter.  Ask your media
                                 to tell us both the good and the bad, not just
                                 the bad.
        \_ This is yucky, and really proves nothing -- aside from the fact
           that both sides are pretty passionate.
           \_ Well O'Donell is also the guy who has stated he doesn't
              care if troops in Iraq become demoralized, that they should
              shut up.
              \_ This sounds like either a quote taken out of context,
                 or a very liberal paraphrase.  Do you have a URL or decent
                 news source showing the quote and its surrounding context?
                 Honestly, both of those gentlemen strike me as partisan
                 mouthpieces furthering The Party's agenda with, at best,
                 coincidental regard for the truth.
                 \_ "MR. O'DONNELL: Look, it's not our job to lie about
                     war to make troops feel good. And I don't care what
                     they feel."
                    "MR. O'DONNELL: I don't care if they're demoralized.
                     They have to go to war and be prepared ..."
                     \_ gee I wonder why you didn't provide the context.  -tom
                        \_ It's a McLauglin group transcript.. search for it,
                           I don't want to corrupt you with the link I'd give.
                           \_ what's so bad about
                              All he's saying is that you can't bury your head
                              in the sand and squash all debate about whether
                              the war is a good idea, just because you need to
                              "support the troops."  Lying about the war
                              doesn't support the troops. -tom
        \_ Wow.  That O'Donnell is a fruitcake.  When someone talks over his
           opponent, it pretty much proves to me that he doesn't know what he's
           talking about.
           \_ Shrug.  It suggests to me that the guy is too emotional at the
              time to make a reasoned argument, unless he does it all the time.
              \-Hmmmmm ... ok, I sort of agree LO'D went a little nuts there,
                but your characterization of his comments on McL Groups is
                preposterous [I saw the show]. If anything I think Bush's
                comment during the 3rd debate:
                BUSH: The best way to take the pressure off
                      our troops is to succeed in Iraq.
                is more incoherent and insensitive. That comment is also
                in line with his view "it's not a draft if we dont call
                it a draft". The troops are not demoralized because of
                Kerry suggesting Iraq has bogged down, or has suggested
                our allies are few and far between, but because they are
                being kept there longer than promised and are being blown up.
                To be a little more charitable than LO'D: you are either a
                liar or stupid. --psb
                \_ The military vote is roughly 80% for Bush, that should
                       \- what %age of teachers vote for the "education
                          president" ?
                          \_ wrong question.  "what %age of parents vote for
                             the education president?" is what you're looking
                             \- the military is the group paid to deliver
                                "national security" ... everyone is a
                                comsumer of national security. similarly
                                parents are the consumers of ecucation,
                                not the agents to deliver it. anyway, my
                                point was that military number doesnt mean
                                much. --psb
                                \_ That's fine about the military number.  My
                                   point about parents still stands.  I don't
                                   care in particular if teachers like/dislike
                                   the president as a block.  They're a left
                                   wing union group.  I do care if parents are
                                   happy with the education system.  They are
                                   not an organised political block.  Parents
                                   are real people, not an axe grinding PAC.
                   tell you something.  The military is especially cognizant
                   that Kerry, in his antiwar antics and petitioning to
                   completey abandon Saigon, is a traitor.  You can not
                   sign on to war and then say, 'oh that's not what I really
                   intended' - its a complete disgrace and is not behavior
                   befitting a CIC.Exactly which allies are you pining about?
                   The French, who in GWI sent an aircraft carrier
                   with no planes?
                   \- i am not pining for any allies. i think the un and the
                      rest of the world fairly reasonably see this as america's
                      mess to clean up. if a serviceman feels he can never
                      forgive kerry for his antiwar activities after vietnam
                      i think that is reasonable enough, just like i think
                      people are entitled to have been anti-clinton on the
                      grounds he was a draft-dodger who also cheated on his
                      wife. i just think it is odd they are not equally
                      disgusted with a coke addled rich kid who used family
                      connections to not even set foot "in country". --psb
                      \_ You were ok until the last line.  At that point you
                         became "false, but accurate" as CBS would say.
                   \_ Could you post a URL for that 80%? All I found was this:
                      which gives 57% Rep among soldiers, in general (I think)
                      and 66% Rep among officers. Those show a stronger lean
                      than the country at large but far from 80%. The same
                      article also mentions that "Rep officers outnumber their
                      enlisted counterparts 9:1" according to "surveys" (no
                      source given) -- ulysses
                  \_ Why do Cons love to go over and over how they have "the
                     military vote"? Do soldiers count for more vote or
                     something? I think it is an implicit coup threat,
                     personally. If we have another Florida 2000 on our
                     hands, do you plan on calling out the troops to enforce
                     election results when half the country goes ballistic?
                     \_ Coup threat?  Damn, dude, stop eating tinfoil!  You're
                        supposed to wear it on your head.  It is not a food
                     \_ Why do Libs love to go over and over how they have the
                        "insert random small demographic here" vote?  Does
                        "random small demographic" count for more vote or
                        something?  The point is the military is just another
                        of those demographics.  There isn't a plot.  Stop
                        eating tinfoil.  Wear it on your head for safety.
        \_ You see, I remember a time when two people on a news show would not
           shout over each other, when a moderator would not put up with such
           behavior, when guests would not hog the mic, when longwinded
           discourse actually lost you credibility, and when the integrity and
           logic of your argument counted for more than the volume of your
           voice.  When did we agree to accept the opposite?
           \_ When ratings went up with all the yelling on certain shows.  I
              agree they've gone way too far and I see it swinging back the
              other way now.
              \_ God, I hope you're right.
2004/10/26 [Uncategorized] UID:34368 Activity:nil
10/26   apple corp employees, please send me an email.  -dpetrou
        \_ why should they?
           \_ Because King David has decreed it.  MOTD rules do not apply.
2004/10/26 [Uncategorized] UID:34369 Activity:nil
10/26   estupid request for $company employees deleted until further
        explanation produced.
2004/10/26-27 [ERROR, uid:34370, category id '18005#6.21875' has no name! , ] UID:34370 Activity:nil
10/26   Litigate the vote 2004!
2004/10/26-27 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:34371 Activity:moderate
10/26   Majority of Bush supporters believe things that simply
        are not true:
        \_ Being a Bush supported would have to mean you at least partially
           believe that "Bush is a good President", so you're already in a
           world of make-believe!
2004/10/26-27 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34372 Activity:very high
        (username / pw = bobbob)
        Mr. Bush's score on the Air Force Officer Qualifying Test at age 22
        again suggests that his I.Q was the mid-120's, putting Mr. Bush in
        about the 95th percentile of the population, according to Mr. Sailer.
        Mr. Kerry's I.Q. was about 120, in the 91st percentile, according to
        Mr. Sailer's extrapolation of his score at age 22 on the Navy Officer
        Qualification Test.
        \_ The difference is that Kerry didn't spend his 20s and 30s doing
           \_ That explains a lot. :-P
        \_ Boy, it sure is a good thing that IQ tests and ratings are such a
           meaningful and credible measure of an individual's intelligence.
           I'm glad I can estimate either candidate's intellectual fiber
           based on this decisive piece of information.  -John
        \_ Whoops, there's a small problem here.  Gottfredson, the psych. prof.
           who made the correlation, took the candidates' rankings on their
           respective Officer Qualifying Tests and directly correlated those
           ranks to IQ tests.  Since Bush was in the 95th percentile of his
           class for the AFQT, Gottfredson extrapolated that he had an IQ
           of corresponding rank.  However, the 1960s AFQT, like the ASVAB,
           was an aptitude test, not an IQ test. Drawing correlations between
           the two is more like comparing Fujis to Grannies than apples to
           oranges, but it's still prone to significant errors.  What the AFQT
           does tell us, however, is that GWB is not a moron, but Bush-watchers
           already knew that; he's much too cunning to misunderestimate.
           \_ psb said Bush was a ChimpBrain.  Surely, the great psb was not
              wrong.  You have a fault in your reasoning somewhere.
                      \- When Bush first emerged on the scene, I thought he
                         looked like Alfred E. Newman. I have since decided
                         he looks more like a Chimp. I do not believe he is
                         an especially bright fellow, but I also dont believe
                         most people are especially bright. I agree that he is
                         smarter than a lot of the people who call him an
                         idiot ... same goes for Rush Limbaugh. Most of the
                         people calling them idiots could not give a 30min
                         talk and a fair number of them probably could not
                         tell you who Francois Mitterand was. Of the presidents
                         since 1980, Bill Clinton is the only one I would
                         call "really smart". BUSH's and RUSH have serious
                         character defects but they arent idiots [which doesnt
                         make them geniuses either]. It's actually fun to ask
                         people ranting about how dumb Bush is "do you think
                         he is dumber than <name some dull acquaintance>".
                         As I asked on wall previously, "who would you rather
                         have as president: bush or saarp?" --psb
                         \-BTW, I also think intellectual curiosity counts
                           for a lot. A friend of mine at Berkeley who used
                           to get A+ in upper div physics classes [including
                           from people like Steiner, if that means anything
                           to you] once said "I thought Cambodia was in
                           Africa ... because that is where all the starving
                           people are." This guy was a genius when it came
                           to physics problem sets but you dont want him
                           running the world. I am not sure I want somebody
                           who says "jesus is my favorite philosopher" or
                           "sovereignty is sovereignty" running much of the
                           planet. Yes, I know Bush understand legislative
                           nuance and is being disingenuous with comments
                           like "he voted for/against it". Yes I agree not
                           one person in 50 who laughed at the sovereignty
                           comment could have defined sovereignty. --psb
              \_ Wait, not being a moron somehow equates to not being a chimp-
                 brain?  Being smart is no defense against being wrong and
                 morally bankrupt (cf. Richard Cheney).
           \_ I'm confused.  I keep hearing Bush is stupid and incompetent.
              If so, how did he get the Whitehouse, is ahead in polls for a
              second term, foll John Kerry and others into voting for the war,
              fool millions of Americans and the media on a continuous basis
              and pack the supreme court with right wing partisans?
              \_ You *are* confused, but it has nothing to do with the
                 fallacious "points" you bring up.
                 \_ Could you please explain?  Thank you.
                    \_ Sure.  You believe that getting into the White House,
                       maintaining a good approval rating, and lying to a bunch
                       of Senators about how he's only going to use war as
                       a last resort somehow requires intelligence and the
                       ability to be a good President.  It doesn't.  You can
                       do much the same with a well-oiled political machine,
                       a popular tough-guy image, and a heaping serving of
                       arrogance and bravado.  That's where you're confused.
                       You're welcome.
              \_ Hey confused boy:  Dubya delivered his GOP convention speech
                 very well, spreading the gap as much as 51% Dubya, 39% Kerry.
                 Yet, he looked like a total d00f during the debates,
                 especially debate 1.  Therein will you find your answer.
                 \_ Who would win in a debate between W and PSB?
                    \_ That's easy, PSB would just get thrown in Gitmo.
                 As for "foll [sic] Kerry ... into voting for the war", Kerry
                 voted for war authority, not for war.  Purportedly only the
                 President has the best intelligence and perspective to make
                 the final call to take the country to war.  Let me remind
                 you that the Senate never saw conflicting reports on aluminum
                 tubes from the Energy department, unlike the President.
                 \_ Kerry wouldn't have seen any reports anyway since he
                    hardly ever showed at any Senate Intelligence meetings.
                 \_ Now I'm reaaaally confused.  Since the polls you're
                    implicitly citing changed their voter mix calculations
                    at the same time as the debates and I keep reading that
                    the polls don't mean anything anyway, at least when GWB
                    is up.  Please help!
                    \_ Where do you keep reading this? Certainly not on the
                       motd. Wherever you keep going to read misinformation,
                       stop it.
                       \_ It's standard (D) spin.  I watch the news shows, I
                          see the Kerry people saying the polls don't matter.
                          The Kerry campaign is my source of misinformation.
2004/10/26-27 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:34373 Activity:high
10/26   Woops
        \_ I read it... didn't get it.  What's noteworthy here?
           \_ Meaning that someone who stockpiles large amounts of nerve
              agent antidote and documents on how to "engage in chemical
              warfare" is likely to possess large amounts of actual nerve
              agent, which is likely to be floating around somewhere, and
              is probably a whole lot easier to thieve or hide than 380 tons
              of conventional explosives, meaning it's likely to be a Bad
              Thing (tm).  -John
              \_ Sorry, are you suggesting that the 380 tons of conventional
                 explosives reportedly stolen may have actually been nerve
                 agent and that no one wants that out in public?  That's scary.
                 \_ No, I think he's saying that there are stockpiles of Iraqi
                    WMD floating around somewhere that Bush never found.
                    \_ Sorry, the WMD that EVERY SINGLE REPORT says do not
                        \_ Look, the reports just say they never found any,
                           nor did they locate evidence to the contrary.
                           Relax, nobody is saying GWB & co. knew something
                           you didn't.  But c'mon, we (or at least the Kurds
                           and Iranians) know that the Iraqis had poison gas
                           at some point, and this sort of thing sure makes
                           me wonder whether there still isn't a bunch of it
                           around somewhere.  Plus, weren't the WMD inspectors
                           looking for some grand nukular bomb building
                           scheme?  -John
                           \_ I thought you were on our side, John!  WTF?!
        \_ This was posted as evidence of NYTimes fraud on the missing
           explosives as an exposition of the timeline. -op
2019/04/22 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2004:October:26 Tuesday <Monday, Wednesday>