| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 2005/8/24-25 [Recreation/Computer/Games] UID:39238 Activity:low |
8/24 New pool player looking to buy a "decent" cue in the south bay. Those
at Copeland sell for about $10 to $40. Have no idea if they are
"decent". Recommendations of places to buy a "decent" cue would be
greatly appreciated. Best if they have some knowledgable staffs to
help me select the right one.
\_ dont buy that crap from those sporting goods stores..
search web for viking, meucci, etc..
\_ This is good advice. Go to a specialty pool/billiards store,
not a general sporting goods store. Going to copeland's for a
pool cue is like going to McDonald's for fine french
cuisine. -mice
\_ I suppose it depends on your definition of 'decent' and what your
budget is. I spent $250 on an 18 Oz. meucci (a very light cue)
about 4 or 5 years ago. I'm still using it, and it's a fun cue
to play with -- the weight and balance are excellent, and it
doesn't look like a cheap POS. Of course, I've had my ass handed
to me by people playing with whatever is at the pool hall, so
ultimately the equipment isn't likely to affect your game unless
you're really good or it's *really* bad. Check out:
http://www.hawleys.com/main.htm
They have a great selection and their staff is really helpful
and responsive. Shoot me an email if you ever want to go shoot
a table or two, or just want to chat more at length. -mice
\_ it is not going to make any difference what so ever. Don't
waste your money unless you get a discounted rate. |
| 2005/8/24-25 [Computer/Theory] UID:39243 Activity:high |
8/24 Computational Geometry question: I have a bunch of points which I
use to generate a tiling of unit sqaure by Delaunay triangulation.
Given an arbitrary point in the unit square, I want to determine which
triangle the point is in. Does this problem have a name? I'm trying
to find see what algorithms are out there for doing this, but my
Google fu is weak. I'd appreciate any tips/links.
By the way, go Republicans! We kick ass! -jblack
\_ Yes, the problem is called 'point location.' You can adopt
binary search for this problem without much difficulty. You can
also use fast randomized algorithms for this problem, see:
http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/cke96fast.html -- ilyas
\_ Yeah, binary search was my intuition, I just wanted to confirm
that. Thanks for the info / link. - op
\_ Without actually computing the triangulation?
\_ jblack, you're still on probation. I'm letting you post this
time, since you signed your name.
\_ Let me get this straight. First you harrass us by constantly
posting freeper crap, hiding URL by using IPs, mass posting,
insulting and provoking liberals, hiding your identity, so on and
so forth even though we asked you to stop, and then you have the
nerve to come back to us and ask for help? HELLO??? Either you're
an autistic socially inept retard, or you simply need help.
SERIOUS help, from a good psychiatric institution.
\_ While I can certainly appreciate your zeal, I'd rather not be
included in your inclusive 'we' and 'us'. While I don't
agree with jblack's politics, he has a right to speak his
agree with danh's politics, he has a right to speak his
peace. On the other hand, I'm absolutely not going to back
up anyone that espouses a philosophy of censorship, and would
rather not be implicitly or explicitly represented by anyone
that does. -mice
\_ I find it amusing that you're not signing your name. -emarkp
\_ also, you've been trolled.
\_ Dude, you're a damn retard. Do you seriously not see the
irony here? You're the one looking unstable.
\_ Pot. Kettle. Etc.
\_ Haha. This response is truly stupid.
\_ This whole thread is stupid.
\_ This whole motd is stupid.
\_ Stupid is as stupid does. |
| 2005/8/24-25 [Science/GlobalWarming] UID:39244 Activity:moderate |
8/24 Global Warming is officially irreversible.
\_ idiot. 2nd law of thermodynamics ; it'll cool down eventually.
\_ sure, in 20000 yrs or so.
\_ Will it be before or after Venus cools down?
\_ Good. Now I won't have to listen to people whine about it.
\_ url?
\_ Why? |
| 2005/8/24-25 [Consumer/Shipping] UID:39245 Activity:nil |
8/24 Crap. My FedEx shipment which was supposed to be delivered tomorrow
when I home is now on the truck for delivery today. Is there any way
I can tell them "come back tomorrow"?
\_ Is it something that you'll have to sign for? or will they drop?
Global Warming is officially irreversible.
\_ idiot. 2nd law of thermodynamics ; it'll cool down eventually.
\_ sure, in 20000 yrs or so.
\_ If it's on the truck probably not. They should automatically make
another delivery attempt tomorrow, though. You can also call them
and have them hold it for you to pick up tomorrow if you choose.
\_ http://FedEx.com lets you specify the delivery options/date for some pkgs. |
| 2005/8/24-25 [Health/Disease/General, Health/Women] UID:39246 Activity:kinda low |
8/24 Doctor being reviewed for telling fat woman she's obsese:
http://www.theunionleader.com/articles_showfast.html?article=59407
\_ if someone told her she was fat early on, maybe she wouldn't
be obese now...
\_ "My doctor told me I was fat. I said I wanted a second
opinion. He said, 'OK, you're ugly, too.'" - Henny Youngman
\_ This is sick. Good luck to that fat ass in finding another doctor.
What the fuck can she possibly be thinking. I doubt there is a
single person (other than her hired lawyer) who'll side with her.
\_ The fat doctor will side with her.
\_ No doctor will side with her. |
| 2005/8/24-25 [Academia/Berkeley/CSUA/Troll/Jblack] UID:39247 Activity:low |
8/24 I'm usually the one deleting jblack's posts but this time I didn't
do it. Someone else beat me to it. Justin Black, I guess you've
exhausted our kindness and patience. I have nothing more to say
except to wish you luck finding conservative motds somewhere else.
You're free to post your Delaunay triangulation question on the
Freeper site since you're such a loyal member. Take care.
\_ Um who declared the soda motd conservative or liberal, exactly?
\_ Woah there Putin. Let's try to back of the censorship a bit there.
Question restored.
\_ When the revolution comes people who don't know what the word
censorship means will be the first against the wall.
\_ My friend, the revolution has already begun and to speak
ill of it is unpatriotic and borders on treason.
\_ Since soda is a government resource, being selectively
denied use of it is a form of censorship. Especially
if the one doing the deleting is a government employee.
\_ This argument is so breathtakingly bad, it must be
satire. I don't support censorship of jblack, but come
on...By this logic, any student denied entry to Berkeley
is having his rights taken away, since it is a government
resource he is being denied access to.
\_ Hey, does someone want to figure out who is doing that, so I can
laugh at them? -- ilyas
\_ Uh, I'm not sure exactly what happened, but your information
is mistaken -- I, not Justin Black, posted the original question.
Sorry, if I'd realized that the identity of the poster was so
important, I'd have signed the post. - ciyer |
| 2005/8/24 [Computer/HW/Printer] UID:39248 Activity:nil |
8/24 Is there something like a firmware update for a HP LaserJet 4M
printer with an internal card ethernet JetDirect print server? |
| 2005/8/24-25 [Computer/HW/Drives] UID:39249 Activity:nil |
8/24 What's the difference between Alcohol 1.9.5.2802 and 1.9.5.3105?
\_ 0.0.0.303, obviously.
\_ lazy mofo: http://www.videohelp.com/tools?changelog=144
\_ THANK YOU. HOW did you get this help? Like, what keywords
in Google did you type to get to this page? Teach me how
to fish so I don't have to keep asking for it. Thanks.
\_ I'm not the grandparent poster, but searching Google for
"alcohol 120% changelog" returns that as the first result.
\_ http://videohelp.com is one of the best sites around for anything
codec-related as well, just as a note. -John |
| 2005/8/24-25 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:39250 Activity:low |
8/24 Bush approval rating at 36%. Schweet.
http://americanresearchgroup.com/economy
\_ what does it matter? he is free to fuck up the world
until the next guy gets elected.
\_ Stop it! You're making Mr. Justin Black angry! Don't you realize
how expensive psychiatric therapy is? You guys are cruel.
\_ link:csua.org/u/d50 (graph with many polls)
You can compare the AmResGp data with other data. The recent
Harris data point backs it up a little bit.
\_ why does this matter? Its not like we can chose to not reelect him.
\_ It shows that, for whatever reason, the American people are
finally rejecting the Project for a New American Century,
which gives hope for the future. -tom
\_ No, actually, all it shows is that Bush is not popular right
now. The rest is all in your head. -- ilyas
\_ His war is also not popular.
\_ But at least he's not letting gays get married!
\_ Priorities, man, priorities. |
| 2005/8/24-25 [Science/GlobalWarming] UID:39251 Activity:moderate |
8/24 Why can't we burn trash to power turbines which give us electricity?
(Selected trash)
\_ It's done now. Google "waste to energy" or "trash to energy".
\_ Because it doesn't involve invading another country.
\_ Heard of "biomass"?
\_ good idea:
http://www.nrel.gov/clean_energy/bioenergy.html
\_ I believe in the future we will be mining garbage dumps ... If we
burn it all up we can't mine it.
\_ Mining them for what? Minerals? We burn it all up, those
minerals will be in the ash...
\_ Actually some are already being "mined" for methane.
\_ Mined for the materials we will have run out of, presumably.
\_ Pollution?
\_ Mr. Fusion won't be invented for another 100 years. |
| 2005/8/24-25 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:39252 Activity:high |
8/24 "You know I don't know about this doctrine of assassination, but if
he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really
ought to go ahead and do it. ... We have the ability to take him out,
and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability."
-Pat Robertson, previously
"I didn't say 'assassination.' I said our special forces should 'take
him out'. And 'take him out' could be a number of things including
kidnapping. ... I was misinterpreted ..."
-Pat Robertson, yesterday
"Is it right to call for assassination? No, and I apologize for that
statement."
-Pat Robertson, today
\_ How do you apologize for being a total lunatic?
\_ Oh and I like it how figures like Robertson, Rumsfeld will deny
saying X when shown direct VIDEO proof of them saying X and think
that's just fine.
\_ For posterity, which Rumsfeld quote? Are you talking about
the WMDs east/west/south/north of Baghdad/Tikrit quote?
Did you mean Cheney instead?
\_ http://www.buzzflash.com/analysis/04/03/ana04004.html
\_ An extremist religious figure preaching violence! What's that? He's
an American citizen and free to say what he likes? Wow, how the
a private citizen and free to say what he likes? Wow, how the
tunes vary.
\_ He has the freedom of speech to advocate murder, but it's a shame
more moderate leaders in his sect don't condemn him for it.
\_ That freedom is going away in the UK.
\_ While I'm no apologist for Robertson, I'd like to see the sentences
preceding the "it". People tend to be a bit sloppy about
antecedents, especially in spoken English.
\_ Corrected. I took the original quote from http://cnn.com, guess they
cut out the "You know" part in the text. Watch video here:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/08/24/robertson.chavez/index.html
If you ask me on the whole it still means the same thing --
his most recent statement spells it out pretty much.
Also, http://cnn.com should not have cut that part out. -op
\_ Still not enough context. I think he was talking about
assassination but I'd like to see the entire discussion, not
just that clip.
\_ For the sake of argument, what would sufficiently qualify
the posted statements for you?
Are you just interested in what he was talking about,
or are you really looking for some "out" for him?
\_ Well, ideally the entire conversation up to those
comments would be best. I'm not looking for an "out".
I've just seen enough stuff taken out of context to be
skeptical of any clip less than complete.
\_ The biggest out for Robertson would be pointing out
that if he said "Assassinate Saddam! Save money!
FREEDOM!!" pre-invasion, people who complained would
have been beaten down as Saddam-lovers.
Theoretically Robertson could have been talking about
how similar Chavez was like to Saddam (torture, WMDs,
he would destroy the U.S. if given the chance, etc.)
before talking about killing him.
Just an analysis by me, not statements of fact.
\_ I'm not interested in an "out". I'm interested in
figuring out precisely what he was saying.
\_ Why? Why are people supposed to pay attention
to what this guy says? Who the fuck is he?
\_ He's someone who meets with your president
on a semi-regular basis to discuss policy
and politics.
\_ Maybe we should concentrate on 'taking out' bin Laden. Do we
have that ability?
\_ Video of the statement: http://mediamatters.org/items/200508220006
\_ Longer than the http://cnn.com clip, but still incomplete. It could be
interpreted to be saying "okay, assassination is off the table,
but we should do anything else to get him out of power." I'd
still need to see the whole video.
\_ It could be interpreted that way, but you're really stretching
now. I think it's pretty damn obvious what he is saying.
\_ Yes, especially when he releases a statement saying:
"Is it right to call for assassination? No, and I apologize
for that statement."
\_ Which strongly suggests he didn't mean assassination, or
he wouldn't backpedal from it. He makes crazy
statements all the time and doesn't back off from them.
\_ Uh...
\_ Okay, here's Robertson's official press release with the apology
http://www.patrobertson.com/pressreleases/hugochavez.asp
You tell me what he REALLY meant.
\_ Well okay then. So he clearly says that he said we should
assassinate him, and has now apologized. That clears it up for
me. |
| 2005/8/24-25 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:39253 Activity:very high |
8/24 We should go back through the motd archives and dig up all the
arguments that Ah-nold was going to be above corruption:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/latimests/20050824/ts_latimes/nonprofitscloakdonorstogovernor
\_ Shrug. I voted for Ah-nold because (a) Davis deserved punishment,
and (b) his wife spoke up for him after people pointed out he was
a groper.
I didn't vote for him because I thought he would be a great
governor, or do a better job than Davis.
I /am/ going to vote him out next election, because purpose (a) has
already been served.
\_ What, people don't like Arnold, I didn't vote for him and I think
he has done WAY better than any reasonable expection. -phuqm
\_ I still have not heard anyone say why Davis 'deserved punishment'
\_ He was an idiot who sold the state out to his pet
campaign donors, like Edison. He sat on his hands and
\_ntm Ellison
did nothing as the power crises escalated.
\_ Davis didn't sign deregualation.. He pushed for long
term contracts to staunch the bleeding. Then when the
causes became more clear he went to court to try and get
those contracts renegotiated.
\_ I thought selling the state out was done by Pete Wilson
and the legislature BEFORE Davis became governor.
\_ Because he allowed car registration fees to go back to what
they were before the brief CA tax surplus years.
\_ http://csua.com/?entry=10325
See second response. Eh, to answer your question, it was
mainly the hugeness of the budget deficit combined with the
hiding of it until the last moment. Energy brokers and
special interests too, as someone else wrote.
\_ CA government is fucked anyway. Governors can't fix it.
http://www.chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=16350
\_ I voted for McClintock becuase Arnold was a scumbag groper and
wasn't really conservative. I'm disappointed that he's been taking
money in hand over fist considering his promises. He hasn't gotten
my vote and won't in the foreseeable future.
\_ Did anyone on the motd actually make that argument? On the
other hand, if Arnold can get that Gerrymandering law passd,
he's my hero.
\_ He wouldn't be my hero, per se, but it would be a really great
thing if that were passed, I agree.
\_ How do you figure?
\_ I went with this editorial
http://csua.org/u/d58 (Wash Post)
\_ An editorial which presumes corruption. What corruption
can you point to in the process? The "no seats changed
hands" argument doesn't hold water without evidence
\_ "replace the state's corrupt system for drawing state
and federal legislative districts with a cleaner one
in which a panel of retired judges -- rather than
the very politicians who have to run for office --
would draw lines without regard for protecting
incumbents"
I believe they're saying they just don't like
politicians doing the districting, even if they were
benevolent politicians. You could say we have a
system that invites corruption, if it wasn't already
present.
\_ Can anyone point to a arguments _against_ this?
\_ If it didn't call for an immediate redistricting, I MIGHT
support it. If it were to pass, whatever plan they decided
on would take effect without voter approval for the 2006
elections. Ludicrous.
\_ What's ludicrous is Republicans openly being against it
because it might be unfavorable to them right now. Way
to think about justice and the future there boys. Anyone
making that kind of comment publically should be
automatically blacklisted for reelection.
\_ What kind of comment?
\_ Even given that it might take effect immediately, I
think that's better than the situation we have now.
\_ Then you're an idiot.
\_ Cram it with walnuts, ugly. Our legislature is
dismal. And our lines have been drawn such that in
the last election not a single seat changed parties.
We have a horribly unresponsive and unrepresentative
democracy. I'm willing to put up with a lot to make
it more responsive and representative.
\_ This is as foolish as the more idiotic arguments
for term limits. Show me where on the map they
drew broken, unreasonable lines. For comparison
look at TX's current map. If you want a more
responsive democracy, find some way to get the
voters to actually get interested.
\_ Are you asking if there is anyone who is pro-gerrymandering?
\_ Anyone who believes unelected judges are slimier than
elected officials. I think only elected officials believe
this and then never with a straight face.
\_ Tom DeLay is pro-gerrymandering. At least when it creates
more GOP seats.
\_ The whole gerrymandering debate is overblown; in the
states which have judges draw up the districts, no
seats changed hands in the 2004 elections. It just won't
\_ Um, the 2000 map was judge-drawn, the 2003 map was
Republican-drawn. R's gained from their own map.
make that much difference. -tom
\_ In TX, R's gained 6 seats from a judge-drawn map
\_ No, you have it backwards. When they went from
a judge drawn map, to the DeLay Gerrymandered one,
they gained six seats:
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040106-115653-7008r.htm
http://csua.org/u/d56 (Wash Times)
\_ "We will look at an unaccountable, arrogant,
out-of-control judiciary that thumbed their nose
at Congress and the president...The time will
come for the men responsible for this to answer
for their behavior." T. Delay
\_ Oop. You're right. My brain is tired.
\_ BTW, has anyone done research on algorithmic ways of
redistricting that involve as little human input as
possible?
\_ Consider the source, the LA-Times hates Arnold and has been, and
continues on a quest to make him look bad and keep him
out of office. -ax
\_ Fuck Arnold and his quest to reduce the quality of life
in California via tax reduction, infrastructure quality
reduction, and Republicanism. |
| 2005/8/24-25 [Uncategorized] UID:39254 Activity:kinda low |
8/24 R.I.P Tom Robinson
\_ who's Tom Robinson?
\_ To Kill a Mockingbird (Brock Peters) |
| 2005/8/24-25 [Computer/HW/Drives] UID:39255 Activity:nil |
8/24 Anyone have any sites with recommendations for ideal/max operating
temperatures for "average" PCs? I have a server with a bunch of
SATA drives (8x), a PIV-1.7 and two 120mm fans (plus the ones on the
PSU); the case temp gauge indicates 35-37 deg. C at the hottest
spots, and I can't get over the sneaking suspicion that the PSU
is somehow unhappily hot. -John |
| 2005/8/24-25 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:39256 Activity:very high |
8/24 Sheehan refers to terrorists in Iraq as "Freedom Fighters" to a CBS
reporter. Not reported in the news anywhere.
\_ I am sorry, but those fighters in Iraq are freedom fighters.
They are trying to end US occupation and remove puppet
government set up by US. Read UN's charter on self-determination
if you are bored.
\_ I'm sure Iraqis beleive they'll have freedom when the
insurgents have power. Just as I'm sure all the insurgents
are Iraqis. With people like you, who needs enemies?
\_ They freed her son, so what is she bitching about?
\_ Because she couldn't have misspoke. Only Robertson, Rumsfeld,
Cheney, and Bush can do that
\_ You're comparing a housewife with the secretary of defense, the
president, the vice president, and a very prominent religious
leader.
\_ No, the people getting in a flurry over a comment she made
in one of dozens of interviews over the last month are
forcing the comparison.
\_ They can't be freedom fighters. Bush hasn't sold weapons to any
nation sworn to destroy the US in order to fund them yet. But it
is a neat idea.
\_ Freedom fighters don't blow up little children getting candy from
US soldiers.
\_ As opposed to just killing children anonymously via air
strikes like the US? Ooo.. look at the pretty yellow box.
Care package or cluster bomb? Let's find out!
\_ If you don't understand the difference between
intentionally targeting children and collateral damage,
you're a waste of skin.
\_ "Iraqi Body Count" stated that civilian death due to
US Air raid and other military activites is four times
of those who died in suicide bomber. Collateral
damage or not, people hold US for it. If your family
members are accidently killed by foreign occupation
force, you will pick up arm and fight too, regardless
rather the death was intentional or not.
\_ And you're still totally missing the point; if you
went to war to prevent other peoples' families from
being blown up, intentionally or not, you wouldn't
go blow up children intentionally. Dig? -John
\_ sucide bombers don't blow up childrens
intentionally neither. These
bombings are not senseless violence. Targets
was select to serve specific purpose to undermine
US military/political effort. You can blame
resistant for the failure of try to minimize
civilian casuaties, but that is a completely
story than trying to paint them as someone
who is stupid enough to waste precious military
resources on blowing childrens up. Mind you,
that while you see *PLENTY* of dead bodies
due to Iraqi resistance, you don't see *ANY* of
of twenty-thousands plus civilian death on
CNN/BBC.
\_ Ah, intellectually I do, but ask the parent of a dead
child to draw the line and you'll see it is not so fine.
\_ Yet you present a case where you assume that the
children were the target, not the US soldiers.
How does that fit in with your "collateral damage"
POV and as a reflection of your own character?
\_ But the measure of the character of those responsible
isn't whether the death occurred, but whether it was
intentional, negligent, or whether efforts were made
to avoid it.
\_ Yet you present a case where you assume that the
children were the target, not the US soldiers.
How does that fit in with your "collateral damage"
POV and as a reflection of your own character?
\_ The children were all around the soldiers. I
doubt we would bomb a target if it were clear
there were tons of innocents around.
\_ you doubt, but two NGO's finding stated
the contrary. 75% of civilian death
is due to US military activities.
\_ Right, like Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima...
\_ You do realize there's a difference
between tactical and strategic, right?
\_ Your example is flawed in that it is
single incident. One person, one bomb,
dozens of victims. His load is shot.
If the US kills innocents on a less
spetacular level, but more of them,
does that make it more moral? If each
soldier kills only one innocent, is
that better than one man killing many?
that better than one man killing
many?
\_ Well, no -- it's the difference b/t
the commander in chief making the
call, and the guy pulling the
trigger making the call, ie,
strategic vs tactical.
strategic vs tactical. I'm not
making a moral rationalization,
I'm saying the Hiroshima guy is
making an illogical comparison
at least partly based on an
emotional appeal.
That this whole conversation is more at
tactical level...?
\_ So it is better to be a mass murderer
than to kill a few???
\_ No, I'm saying that comparing with
Hiroshima is a red herring in this
context.
context because the decision
making apparatus (I sincerely hope)
was wildly different.
\_ My Lai. Very tactical.
\_ my grind is that most people
involved in My Lai gotten away
with murder. Calley only got
slap on the wrist.
\_ My Lai was a calamity and a crime.
Stop taking the intellectual
coward's route of saying "well they
did it, so it's OK if we do." That
is fucking stupid. Dresden was
probably wrong _in restrospect_.
Idiot. -John
\_ Yah, that's a good point. That
was at least partly the result
of what amounts to strategic
policy in vietnam (free fire
zones, etc). Just as a side note,
I don't condone or see anything
\_ Your example is flawed in that it is
single incident. One person, one bomb,
dozens of victims. His load is shot.
If the US kills innocents on a less
spetacular level, but more of them,
does that make it more moral? If each
soldier kills only one innocent, is
that better than one man killing many?
\_ Well, no -- it's the difference b/t
the commander in chief making the
call, and the guy pulling the
trigger making the call, ie,
strategic vs tactical.
justifiable in the killing of
civilians -- I wasn't a supporter
of GWII. It's abhorrent when
'collateral casualties' become
part of an 'equation' relating
human lives to some politician's
notion of acceptable or cost-
effective or something.
notion of cost-effective.
\_ Do you think they were aiming for the kids or the soldiers?
Is the US aiming for the kids or the terrorists? Whee!
\_ Our freedom fighters flew jetliners into the World Trade
Center.
\_ Yes, it was Iraqi freedom fighters that are to blame for
the September 11th attack. Hmm...Good Kool-aid.
\_ Read it again with your brain turned on. Think
"Afghanistan"
\_ Full quote for those interested
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/8/24/90434.shtml
I guess it will mean different things to different people.
I mean, if you asked Cindy Sheehan: "What did you mean by
justifiable in the killing of
civilians -- I wasn't a supporter
of GWII. It's abhorrent when
'collateral casualties' become
part of an 'equation' relating
human lives to some politician's
notion of cost-effective.
'freedom fighters entering Iraq'?", that would clarify things a lot.
Currently you have people interpreting her quote to mean that she
approves of suicide bombings in Iraq.
\_ That sounds like she was just instinctively spouting back one too
many government-endorsed euphemisms (in previous eras).
\_ Or intentionally using Reagan's term for the Afghani fighters
we were supporting against the Russians (that later became
the Taliban). -tom
\_ I'd go with "poor choice of words" without any further
explanation from her.
\_ Reagan called the Contras, who targeted civilians, Freedom
Fighters. So she was just using it in tribute to him. |
| 2005/8/24-25 [Uncategorized] UID:39257 Activity:nil |
8/24 Obviously Rove engineered Sheehan's protest, just to get himself off
the front page.
\_ OBVIOUSLY Rove gave Sheehan's mom a stroke, and hoped she would
ignore her. r00l! |
| 2005/8/24-25 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:39258 Activity:nil |
8/24 See, Dubya's administration isn't totally fucking things up:
"Al-Banna has been accused of carrying out one of Iraq's deadliest
suicide bombing ... the Jordanian government and al-Banna's family said
he carried out a different suicide bombing in Iraq ... The Homeland
Security memo ... said al-Banna was carrying a valid Jordanian passport
and valid work visa [when he previously tried to enter the U.S. at
Chicago O'Hare]. But the Customs agents believed the passport was
falsified, and ultimately rejected al-Banna's entry after secondary
security screening and questioning ..."
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/08/24/suspicious.traveler.ap/index.html |
| 2005/8/24-25 [Uncategorized] UID:39259 Activity:nil |
8/24 I guess the insurgents haven't figured out how to use bittorrent yet.
WHEW! http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9067891/site/newsweek |
| 5/17 |