1/29    Anyone skiied lately? How's the snow? Powdery? Icy?
        Did the rainpour from 2 weeks ago help?
        \_ Yellow.  See below.

1/29    Man pees his way out of avalanche:
        http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_1261997.html?menu
        \_ This is so 3 days ago
           \_ This is so 2 days ago.

1/30    Interesting work from JHU re RFID chips used in cars:
        http://rfidanalysis.org

1/30    Hilarious 1980s TV commercials from Soviet-dominated Estonia
        http://www.lehvalehva.ee/inc/teenused_reklaamfilmid_sisu.php
        \_ A totally unrelated VW one:
           http://70.85.14.98/photos/commercials/video/vwbomber.mov
           \_ OMG ROFFLE
           \_ link doesn't work
                \_ Works fine; some of them are no longer on that page.

1/30    Never mind that PETA seems to be confusing their cause of animal
        rights with the cause of male sexual health, but this is pretty funny.
        http://www.petatv.com/tvpopup/Prefs.asp?video=super_bowl_60

1/30    Department of Energy in promoting drug use in children shocker!
        http://www.eere.energy.gov/kids

1/30    Preliminary reports say that Iraq vote is a success.  Fuck.
        \_ If less than 50% of eligible voters vote, massive idiocy
           causes votes to get miscounted all accross the country,
           the two dominant parties engage in blatant voter fraud while
           banding together to shut out any other party, and most politicans
           run for office with essentially no chance of losing, what do you
           call it?  The United States of America.
        \_ I call bullshit on you.  No one on the motd actually opposses
           democracy for Iraq.  You're a republican troll trying to make
           liberals look bad in the eyes of the gullible (like ilyas).
           \_ You are new here, right?  Is this honestly the first atrocious
              thing you've seen from motd liberals?  -- ilyas
              \_ Fuck you, ilyas.  Find me one post from the archives where
                 anyone is actually hoping that the Iraq election will fail.
                 Why is there no follow up by the supposed op?  Or by the
                 theoretical hordes of evil liberals who want Iraq to fail.
                 \_ Oh, just watch the liberals try to spin it into a failure.
                    In fact, it's started already, as evidenced below.
                    \_ *shrug*  And if the positions were reveresed, the
                       conservatives would be doing the same.  Are you new to
                       politics?
                       \_ Whatever.  It's still the Democrats who will be
                          doing the spin this time.
                          doing the spin this time.$a
                          \_ So?  You're a tool for the soulless political
                             machine.  It's sad.
                             \_ *shrug* And if the positions were reversed,
                                some conservative would be saying the same
                                thing as you are now.  Are you new to politics?
                                [It's called satire, son.]
                                \_ The irony is that I'm not liberal, but
                                   I'd still be deploring the two-party
                                   polar all-or-nothing foolishness that the
                                   system encourages...and you'd still be a
                                   partisan tool without independant thought
                                   or an original thought in your head.  Poor
                                   guy.  Perhaps this whole subthread ought to
                                   be nuked....   [brain cramp corrected]
                 \_ [ Dumb-asses removed.  FOAD, the both of you.]
                    \_ Uh oh.  Out or order deletion.  Shouldn't this thread
                       be ilyased now in the name of equal treatment?
        \_ This makes me laugh. -- ilyas
           \_ Makes me ill.. -scotsman
           \_ I'm so sick and tired of hearing you liberals moaning and
              bitching about the current administration. Perhaps the
              decision to go to war was not a good one, but what
              alternatives do you liberals have? You keep criticizing
              that Bush has no exit plan, blah blah blah. Did Kerry tell
              us what he would do differently? No. Do you guys have
              better alternatives? No.
              \_ Yes, we did.  The alternative was NOT to go to war.  Duh.
                 \_ War is bad.  Elections are good.  Reasonably functioning
                    elections are better.  Calling those responsible for war
                    on false premises to account is good.  Getting on with
                    things and trying to help make the world a bit sunnier
                    despite initial false premises is good.  I don't
                    understand the black-and-white attitudes about
                    conservative/war/election vs. liberal/no war/no elections-
                    a slightly differentiated approach would be nice.  -John
        \_ Um, dude.  You'd rather it was a total failure?  I'm glad the
           death toll so far has been low, and i hope the 72% turnout is
           not a staggering overestimation, but the failure to pull in the
           sunnis is a BIG problem.  I have the feeling that our being there
           is the only thing preventing a civil war, and this election is not
           going to change that, or get us closer to an exit. -scotsman
           \_ The election being successful makes it harder for us to justify
              bringing our troops home.
              \_ OK, we're there for false reasons.  However, we are there,
                 and the chaos, while it may not be our fault directly, is
                 certainly a result of our actions.  I don't know about you,
                 but I consider it the moral duty of my country to clean up
                 messes it helps create, and to call to account our elected
                 (legitimately or not) officials afterwards.  To
                 cut and run and to leave those poor bastards (yes, some of
                 them actually _want_ and believe all that freedom and
                 democracy and mom's apple pie crap) in the lurch would be the
                 most craven and unworthy action I could imagine.  -John
        \_ It went like everyone predicted.  Lots of turnout in Shiite areas,
           little or no turnout in Sunni areas.
           The 72% number is a preliminary number from the Iraqi election;
           they have backpedaled to 57% now.
           The "success" comes from the Shiites being able to vote and
           preventing the Sunnis from crashing the party, since the U.S.
           didn't invest too much in Sunni participation, anyway.
           The tactical success comes from a military standpoint comes from
           restrictions on vehicle traffic and the ringed security system
           (U.S. on outside, Iraqi police on inside), which limited attacks
           to mortar fire and suicide belts, and encouraged Shiites who
           got to the inside of the ring to see only Iraqi folks working.
           \_ Quoth NYT: "The figure [55 to 60 percent] was based on national
              returns, Mr. Ayar said, and included the provinces of Anbar and
              Nineveh, which have large Sunni populations.  The predicted low
              turnout in Anbar, a hotspot of Sunni resistance to the American
              occupation, was exceeded to such an extent that extra voting
              materials had to be rushed to outlying villages, where long
              lines were formed at polling stations, Mr. Ayar said...
              Even in the so-called Sunni Triangle people voted, too.  In
              Baquba, 60 miles north of Baghdad, all the polling stations that
              reported indicated a huge turnout.  In Mosul, the restive city
              to the north, large turnouts were reported, even in the Sunni
              Muslim areas, and despite threats and scattered attacks with
              bombs, mortars and small arms fire."
              http://csua.org/u/aws
              \_ Updated news --
                 The fact that polling stations indicated a "huge turnout" in
                 Baqubah, "large turnouts" in Mosul, and other Sunni areas
                 most likely came from there being few polling centers there:
                 "Voting was almost nonexistent in the largely Sunni provinces
                 of Al Anbar, Salahuddin, Nineveh and Diyala, Western
                 officials said. For instance, in Baqubah, a city of 300,000
                 north of Baghdad that has a substantial Sunni population,
                 just 17,000 people voted." [5.7% turnout, Baqubah]
                 http://csua.org/u/awu (LA Times, 1/31 Monday)
                 "But some U.S. officials estimated that 175,000 had come out
                 in Nineveh province, of which Mosul is the capital. About
                 54,000 voters were said to have turned out in the city of 1.8
                 million." [3% turnout, Mosul]
                 http://csua.org/u/awv (LA Times, 1/31 Monday)
        \_ I'm heartened to hear that so many people voted. I hope there's no
           election fraud, and I hope this means we can now begin withdrawing
           our troops. I still disagree with BushCo's lying to get us in in
           the first place, and I still think Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld should
           be pilloried for the cock-up they made of the initial security
           situation. Looking forward, this will mean nothing is Allawi
           continues to allow torture and ignores the desire of the Kurds to
           break away and form their own independent Kurdistan. For now, an
           excellent turn-out is a great step forward. --erikred
           \_ Dubya didn't lie.  He honestly believed there was "no doubt"
              Saddam had weapons, as he realized his own intellectual
              limitations and trusted CIA Director Tenet, who said it
              was a "slam dunk" and in a recent speech was still confused
              as to how wrong both he and his agency were.
              As for WMDs, the final Duelfer report will be released in
              Feb, and Dubya might finally say something about the lack
              of WMDs in Iraq.
              \_ he already said something about the lack of WMD, jctwu:
                 http://www.depresident.com/bush-joke-wmd-iraq-video.asp
           http://www.prisonplanet.com/Pages/033104_Bush_makes_sick_jokes.html
              \_ I don't believe it. The administration decided to do the war
                 and then went all out seeking whatever justification it could.
                 Not the other way around. I believe Dubya knowingly
                 misrepresented both the case for the war and the projected
                 aftermath. I believe he thought it would all turn out ok
                 and that they probably would find something to justify it
                 and in any case Saddam was bad etc. I'll laugh if Iraqis
                 end up voting themselves back into a monarchy or something.
        \_ Even though I was against the war, this is great news.  People in
           Iraq were threatened, yet went to the polls in great numbers, even
           Sunnis.  And the death toll was pretty mild compared to previous
           death tolls, probably due to the insane security precautions.
           Unfortunately, given past performance, there is a good chance BushCo
           will fuck up something else over there.  There's definitely a
           lesson there for us -- those of us who don't vote because it's too
           much effort or they don't care ... Wanting the Iraq vote NOT to go
           much effort or too much apathy ... Wanting the Iraq vote NOT to go
           well because it makes Bush look good is pretty pathetic. -eric
           \_ Sunnis did not go to the polls in great numbers, as polling
              centers were reported as suggesting.  See LA Times links above.

1/30    Is there a limit to how many characters I can have on a single line
        in my .procmailrc before it doesn't work?

1/30    Not surprisingly, the following headlines appear:
        Fox: Bush Calls Iraqi Vote 'Resounding Success'
        CNN: Bush praises historic vote
        ABC: Iraq Voters Defy Threats, Boycott Calls
        MSNBC: History Vote
        \_ eh?
        CBS: Iraqi Voters Defy Insurgents

1/30    When Germany fell and the US/European/Russia took over, how long
        did they occupy Germany? How long did loyal Nazi youngs and
        insurgents attack the Americans and Russians? How long were
        E/W Germany occupied before each had setup their own
        governments? I'm curious because perhaps we could draw some
        parallels and make better guesses as to how much longer the
        insurgents will continue before they gave up, and how much
        longer our troops will be in Iraq.
        \_ Very good questions. I read about the situation in France in 1945,
           and it was pretty bad.  There was a frenzy of revenge killings of
           'collaborators.'  No courts, or anything.  It was allowed to
           continue for a while too, because it was felt that the people
           needed to 'vent.'  So many unsavory things happened in WWII.
           Maybe time reduces the perceived magnitude of things -- all the
           crap back then was much much bigger than anything today,
           Iraq included.  -- ilyas
           \_ tell us about the Russian Jews!
        \_ Not many insurgents in Germany--they just kind of fell apart, and
           Their sense of order (unlike some places, they're a reasonably
           civilized country aside from the occasional 6-million-worth slipup)
           kept them in line.  Plus they were probably right sick of getting
           blown up by 1000-bomber fleets and hordes of very angry Russians.
           There were some SS plans for and attempts at guerilla gangs (look
           up "werewolves") but all in all nothing came of it.  Occupation
           lasted until present, and they were allowed to have an army again
           around 1954.  The Bundesrepublik itself was set up around 1948, so
           the whole Iraq election would seem to support that pattern.  -John
           \_ present=2004. 2004-1945=59 years. You're guessing that we'll be
              in Iraq for at least 59 years? Hm. Also a lot of good things
              came out from Germany occupation, like getting the best
              scientists. What good things will come out from occupying Iraq?
              In my opinion I don't think Iraq and Germany have much in common
                \_ Try 100+ Billions of barrels of oil, which we cannot live
                   without.
              \_ It would not surprise me.  The western Allies stayed in .de
                 initially to prevent it from arising again, and later because
                 they were facing off against the Soviets.  Scientists, NATO,
                 trying to build a strong democratic partner and establishing
                 permanent bases were just facets of an overall strategy of
                 presence--the US has not been at war with a democratic nation
                 during this century (barring some questionable interference
                 in other countries' domestic politics) so it makes sense to
                 (a) try to build democracies, and (b) stay there to make sure
                 they remain democratic--your ideal result will be an ally
                 which doesn't attack you.  Now take a look at a world map and,
                 forgetting for a moment about whether it's right or wrong,
                 try to convince me in light of current strategic alignments
                 that it doesn't make sense for the US to hang around Iraq for
                 some time.  -John
        \_ Germany was broken by 1945, not like Iraq, where the army just
           melted away to fight as insurgents.  Also, Germany did not have
           1 billion muslim sympathizers supporting them.  Also the Germans
           under the Red Army's occupation were just scared to death, with
           the Red Army's reputation for brutality and mass rape, while
           Germans under Allied occupation were just glad they weren't under
           the Russians, so why make trouble.
        \_ The most important difference: Iraqis didn't kill millions of
           Americans. Heck, they didn't even start the war.
           \_ Uh, overall US casualties in WWII (both theaters) were around
              400k dead.  -John
        \_ Germans weren't relgious extremists either.
           \_ THe people weren't but you cant' say the same thing about
              the leadership. The cult of Nazism was very strong. Look
              at the runes next time you see propaganda film from that era.

1/30    IntelliDiff is back:   http://csua.berkeley.edu/~kchang/intellidiff

1/30    Unemployed German Women can be forced to work in brothels:
        http://tinyurl.com/3mtd2
        \_ Why the hell would a brothel be recruiting using a resume database
           anyway?  I smell a rat.  I'm guessing that the brothel is in on
           some bullshit deal with the government on this.