| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 2005/12/15-16 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:41024 Activity:moderate |
12/14 I'm a Republican but switched to I after the Iraq War. However,
Bush has since then grown up and admitted mistakes and took all
responsibilities, and in doing so he gained my faith in the
party again. It's good to be back. -Republican 2008
\_ After watching a recent interview with Bush, I have to admit that
he seems like less of a complete retard. He is actually admitting
that he has made mistakes. Of course, this still doesn't alliviate
the fact that he IS still a retard.
\_ So the unprecedented expansion of the size and power of the
government doesn't bother you? Endless deficits and total
fiscal irresponsibility doesn't bother you? The lack of any
realistic longterm plan to deal with America's energy problems
doesn't bother you? And I suppose you're probably proud to have
a president who is either so fucking stupid he actually believes
there is a real scientific controversy over "intelligent design"
or so craven that he's willing to lie about it to score points
with the theocratic wing of your party. Yep. You sound like a
typical republican to me. I'm sure your fellow bible thumping
pigfuckers are glad to have you back.
\_ They have a great plan:
1 - Get control of the white house
2 - Manipulate the "free" market
3 - PROFIT!!
\_ Is this a troll?
\_ Eh... could be. Why not be safe and throw rhetoric back?
\_ Dubya is channelling hillary, who "took responsibility" for her vote
for the war a few weeks earlier.
But don't worry, there's still three more years of the country
being run by a frat house president.
\_ Reagan showed the way to "accept" responsibility without having
to worry about consequences. It also worked for Rumsfeld.
\_ So you voted for his distant cousin in the last election who,
oh nevermind, don't let facts bother you.
\_ why so angry at a fellow sodan?
\_ Disappointed. Not angry.
\_ "When we made the decision to go into Iraq, many intelligence
agencies around the world judged that Saddam possessed weapons of
mass destruction. This judgment was shared by the intelligence
agencies of governments who did not support my decision to remove
Saddam. And it is true that much of the intelligence turned out
to be wrong. As President, I'm responsible for the decision to go
into Iraq -- and I'm also responsible for fixing what went wrong
by reforming our intelligence capabilities. And we're doing just
that." -GWB, 12/14/05
In other words, like Tookie, he did no wrong, and anyway it wasn't
his fault if he did.
\_ I bet you are much less tolerant to those who lied about his sex
life. 15,000 US casuaties, 30,000+ Iraqi casualties, versus
a blow job... hmm...
\_ Don't forget the cigar stuff. That has to be worth maybe a
squad of Marines and a small Iraqi village.
\_ Interesting. I was an R, I supported (and still support) the Iraq
War, but switched to I because of Bush + congress' ineptitude at the
border and at spending. I have no interest in returning to the R
party anytime soon. -emarkp |
| 2005/12/15-16 [Reference/RealEstate] UID:41025 Activity:kinda low |
12/14 http://www.ziprealty.com/buy_a_home/logged_in/national_housing.jsp?src=zn This says in the 80s, mortgage interest was 13%. If we have 13% today, there'd be a great depression. What the heck happened between the 80s and now? \_ Nothing happened, the monthly payment just balanced. BTW, my parents rate was 18% on their house in the 80's, it depended on other things as well (income, credit, etc). Fact is, the interest rate is meaningless because the monthly payment will always reflect the market rate. If the interest is high, the prices of houses will be low (parent's place was $38k), if the rate is low, the place will be high ($600k equivalent house now). Simple economics, people will base the price of house on monthly payments, not on interest rate or real price of the house. The key is to get in when there is a swing in either one. BTW, provide the ID & PW to the site next time, bugmenot doesn't work on that site. \_ Carter got kicked out of office. \_ No, Nixon got kicked out of office. Carter lost an election. Not the same thing. Ask GHWB. \_ If you want to get that anal, Nixon didn't get kicked out of office either, he resigned. Nobody in U.S. presidential history has ever been technically kicked out of office, although Johnson and Clinton did get impeached. |
| 2005/12/15-16 [Computer/Companies/Google] UID:41026 Activity:moderate |
12/14 I just accepted an offer from Google. The HR lady with whom I
\_ I'm sorry.
had a lot of contacts with was very very nice, patient,
knowledgeable, and helpful in all aspects (and may I add that
she's hot and looks like Tyra Banks). She's the coolest HR lady
I've ever spoken with in my life and I'm very happy with the
overall process and I'd like to thank her. I know it's not really
appropriate to buy her gifts, so what are some other ways to
show her my gratitude? Thanks.
\_ A certain sodan was visited by a Google recruiter at home
and tied to his bed, lashed and whipped into submission.
\_ Was she hot? Are they hiring now?
\_ Thank you note.
\_ booty call
\_ find an excuse to treat her lunch. I don't know about you, but
I discover I don't hang out with HR very often.
\_ Treat her lunch at the company cafeteria! |
| 2005/12/15-16 [Computer/SW/WWW/Browsers, Uncategorized/Profanity] UID:41027 Activity:moderate |
12/14 Panexa is the right choice, the safe choice. The only choice.
http://www.panexa.com -John
\_ http://blog.stayfreemagazine.org/2005/11/cafepress_copyr.html
\_ Fuck Cafepress. I've been censored there with no warning
or explanation also, and I would not give them my business
again even for something that would clearly not be censored.
Fuck them straight in the ear.
\_ Get a life. -tom
\_ Get a life. -motd
\_ Get a life.
\_ Get a life.
\_ Get a life.
\_ Get a life.
\_ Get a life.
\_ Get a life.
\_ Get a life.
\_ Get a life.
\_ Get a life.
\_ Get a life.
\_ Get a life.
\_ Get a life.
\_ Get a life.
\_ Get a life.
\_ Get a life.
\_ DAMN!
Get a life. _/
Get a life. _/ |
| 2005/12/15-16 [Computer/SW/OS/OsX] UID:41028 Activity:low |
12/14 Does anyone know of a free tool to convert a wmv into a mpeg2?
(Preferably for OSX, but Windows/Linux is okay)
\_ MPEG2 is patent-encumbered and doesn't really allow for free
encoders. That said, look for QuEnc. --jameslin
\_ AviSynth + QuEnc. http://www.doom9.org/index.html?/mpg/quenc.htm
--jameslin
\_ ffmpegX |
| 2005/12/15-16 [Reference/Religion] UID:41029 Activity:very high |
12/14 emarkp, how do you reconcile the supposed authority of the various
and sundry versions of the Bible with the glosses and errors made
by the various scribes who contributed to the current version of
the KJB? Also, what do you think of Bart Ehrman's "Misquoting
Jesus"? See:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5052156
\_ I assume you mean KJV (which is the common acronym for the King
James Version of the Bible). Beyond that I'd be happy to discuss it
with anyone who signs his name. -emarkp
\_ Sorry, it didn't really fit on the line. --erikred
\_ Okay. I understand the process by which we have the Bible.
That is, while I believe the authors were inspired by God,
they were still mortal and fallible. Hence I don't claim that
the Bible is inerrant. Also, there are many conflicts in
manuscripts, so I don't think there's an objective way to
determine which translation is superior. I disagree with
Wescott and Hort's rules for disambiguation. That's the point
of the Book of Mormon and modern revelation--the more
witnesses of truth you have, the better shot you have of
understanding it. I haven't listened to the npr story, but
I'm downloading the audio and will listen to it later. -emarkp
[addendum: I prefer the KJV because of the language--I find
NASB and NIV boring.]
\_ Cool, I hope you enjoy it. So, would you consider yourself
less of a strict interpretationist (sorry, I lack the
proper Biblical scholarship lexicon) and more of a,
I dunno, Gnostic? Or Bible as philosophy sort? --erikred
\_ I don't know if I could pigeonhole myself so easily.
Educated believer? I believe that Christ is my Savior
and performed miracles. I don't believe the earth is
only 6000 years old, but Adam and Eve did exist as
individuals. I believe that there was a great flood and
Noah built an ark, but it may have been localized
(that's more and more likely IMO) instead of worldwide.
I believe we're children of God, but that Evolution is
fact. -emarkp
\_ Fair enough. Thank you. --erikred
\_ Quite honestly, emarkp has never been nearly as
radicalized as been expressed by some on the motd.
\_ Did Adam have a navel?
\_ Does it matter?
\_ YMWTR "The Natural History of Nonsense" by
Bergen Evans.
\_ hmm... i would subscribe to Christianity if I knew
any churches that would actually support this
particular, and if I may say so, enlightened view
of the Bible.
\_ Well, we're called Mormons. Feel free to ask
more. -emarkp
[Addendum: I'm sure there are people in other
faiths that address the Bible similarly.]
\_ Is riding around on bicycles a matter of policy
or of convenience? Does your religion have
any official position on cars vs. bikes?
When I find a religion that believes cars are
as evil as I believe they are, I might just
join.
\_ Uhm, cars are nonsentient -- they can't be
evil. That's like believing wrenches are
evil, or lollipops are devilspawn. The sad,
sad thing is that you were admitted to
Berkeley. I guess they'll take anybody
these days.
\_ Do you want to fight?
\_ Over what? That you're clinically
deranged or that cars aren't evil?
\_ either. both. sticks. whatever.
maybe I'll just kick my chairs
ass again.
\_ GUN DUEL!!!!!
\_ Are you scared?
\_ Are nuclear weapons evil? How about
a rack on which hundreds had been
tortured? I don't think the definition
is as simple as you do, but then again
I don't believe in God, so "evil" is
kind of a strange concept to me.
\_ Objects are not evil. People are.
You find this a difficult concept?
Why would a rack or a weapon or a
whatever object be evil? So without
a concept of good and evil your moral
sense is based on what? The laws men
make? So there can be no bad laws?
Or it just comes magically from
within?
\_ Actually, evil applied to nouns
is an accepted usage. It's not
the same meaning as morally evil
but it's a meaning all the same.
\_ It's a useless meaning in the
context of a conversation about
good/evil in a religious
context. Context counts.
\_ Utility mostly. The most utility
for the most people. I find nuclear
weapons odious because of their
capacity to cause great suffering
for so many so easily. I concede
that they may have collectivly
kept WWIII from happening.
\_ Nuclear power doesn't cause
suffering. People do. Nuclear
science/engineer can be used to
kill people. It can be used as
a power source. So can fire. I
wouldn't get rid of fire because
arsonists burn down orphanages
or claim fire is evil or odious.
Don't blame the tool, blame the
wielder. Smart people invent
a lot of cool stuff for us. It
is unfortunate that some people
will always find an evil way to
put any technology to use.
\_ What's the significance of the miracles? Would you
still have believed if he didn't do miracles? How
does this fit into the faith concept and telling
people not to expect proof? Why did Jesus rise up
from the dead, what was the point? Why do you
believe he even did miracles or rose when we have
no reliable sources? Why did dying on a cross have
any significance, especially since he didn't die?
\_ The greatest miracle was the suffering he went
through in the garden and on the cross which paves
the way for our forgiveness, and his physical
resurrection afterwards. That gives us all hope
of resurrection and Eternal Life. And yes, he
really did die. -emarkp
\_ How/why did it "pave the way" to anything?
Many people have suffered as much or more than
someone being crucified. Hell, even in the
story he has a couple other nobodies suffering
along with him. We also have no reliable source
for verifying his death or resurrection so it's
pointless even if it had a point to begin with.
\_ That's why the Garden of Gethsemane and the
resurrection are part of the story. -emarkp
\_ You're not really answering. (1st q,
and I don't see why the garden was
much of a suffering either.) And for the
"rez", again it seems pointless to
come back and just basically say "hay
look at me! lol" to a few people and then
"ascend". There's more evidence of Elvis
resurrecting.
\_ How can you pick and choose and still call yourself a
resurrecting. (btw: My point is less that
*you* shouldn't believe, but that it is
reasonable and logical for me not to
believe. Would you accept that?)
\_ Certainly, it's impossible to
objectively prove the efficacy of
Christ's sacrifice, or the validity of
his claims. They can only be verified
by being sampled and the proof is
inherently subjective. It's not
rational in the strictest sense. My
proof of Christ's sacrifice is the
spiritual witness I've received.
Period. -emarkp
\_ In regard to miracles, a few things we see from
the bible:
(1) God is sovereign, and God decides when and
where to perform miracles.
(2) Miracles often did not lead to faith. The
Israelites had seen many miracles when led
out of slavery in Egypt, yet their faith
was constantly lacking, and that prevented
them from entering Canaan, the promised land.
(3) A display of faith by a person often
prompted Jesus to perform a miracle for
said person.
(4) Pharisee witnessed many of Jesus's miracles
but claimed that Jesus's was in league with
demons and that that was Jesus's source of
power to perform miracles.
(5) Miracles does not solve the problem of sin.
(5) Miracles do not solve the problem of sin.
(6) While faith includes some elements of
belief, it is more than that. In James,
in discussing faith and deeds, the bible
says that "Even the demons believe [God] -
and shudder." "Faith without deeds is
dead." "Show me your faith without deeds,
and I will show you my faith by what I do."
In regard to Jesus giving his life on the cross,
the two important things are:
(1) He has led a sinless life, and only a
sinless life has the power of redemption.
(2) He died for all mankind, but at the same
time he died for each one of us. I have
heard one school of thought that says
that during the three days between his
death and resurrection, Jesus endured the
combined sufferings caused by the sin of
each and everyone of us.
that during the three days (and time may
have different meaning in the spiritual
realm) between his death and resurrection,
Jesus endured the combined sufferings
caused by the sin of each and everyone of us.
\_ I always thought this was the gist of the
passion in the garden. It's not that our
sins nailed him up. It's that he took our
sins upon him, willingly. Are you a
Calvinist?
\_ Both are true, in my mind. I do
not know what a Calvinist mean.
(note: I removed the part about
each one of us nailing Jesus to
the cross because of our sin,
which was what the above poster
was responding to. I removed
it because I had wanted to keep
things simpler, but above poster
already responded to it.)
\_ Do you believe in ghosts? Spirits?
Evil as an entity?
\_ Cars!
\_ Yes, I believe in the existence
of a spiritual realm.
\_ How does a death have "power of redemption"?
What is that anyway? What does his death
save, and from what, and by what/whom?
I don't see the relevance of his suffering.
The fundamental concept of "dying for us"
is meaningless to me. And afterwards he
comes back fine anyway. That controverts
the whole notion of sacrifice, which
involves loss. If I, as an atheist, were
to sacrifice my life to save others while
believing that I'm throwing away the only
thing I've got in the universe, well I
think that would mean a lot more than
someone who believes he's gonna float
to heaven.
Re: miracles, I guess we can say they
had no significance of themselves, and
were not any form of proof.
BTW: I applaud you for getting into this
because many would not and it really helps
understand what is going on in your heads.
\_ You raise many deep questions. In
regard to miracles, I've said all I
wanted to say, so you are free to
draw your conclusion. In regard to
your other questions, I think we
should not think too abstractly such
that we are no longer grounded in
this world. This life is not a game
where one score points to get into
heaven. It has meaning in and of itself.
What does redemption mean in this
world? How is it tied to guilt and
sin? How is it tied to justice? How
is it tied to love and faith and hope?
One other thing to ponder is that Jesus,
as Christ, was not omnipotent or
omniscient. He has emotions, sorrows
and joys. He cried. He loved. He was
a flesh and blood person. Not
all Christians will agree with me on
this, but I believe his divine power
and divine self knowledge comes from
his oneness with the Father through
following the word of the Father, love
of the Father, and faith in the plans
of the Father.
following the word of the God, love
of the Father and of us, and faith
in the plans of the Father.
-----------------------\
Adding to the above,
I really appreciate your question regarding redemption,
because it led me to examine things and discover new
revelations.
"For God so LOVED the world that he GAVE his one and only
Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have
eternal life." John 3:16
"Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels,
but have not love, I have become sounding brass or a
clanging cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy,
and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and
though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains,
but have not love, I am nothing. And though I bestow all
my goods to feed the poor, and though I GIVE MY BODY TO
BE BURNED, but have not love, it profits me nothing."
Corinthians 13
"Above all, love each other deeply, because love covers
over a multitude of sins." 1Peter 4
I think the above passages would help us understand
redemption. With justice and retribution, you injured
or caused someone a loss, you pay for it, you murdered
a man, you pay with your life. This country's laws are
still very much based on that. Redemption, on the
other hand, both in the scripture and in our world,
cannot be seperated from love and sacrifice, both of
which are necessary. When you love someone, you can
forgive the person; when you forgive the person, you
renounce the justice and redress you were due. The
Les Miserable story of the bandit beating up and robbing
the father to steal his silverware, and when he was
caught, the father telling the police that he gave the
bandit the silverware. And of course there are countless
real life examples.
LDS? If you let people ignore the inconvenient bits of
the Bible, people can make it say anything they want.
What's the point of pointing to it as a source of truth
at all?
\_ I don't pick and choose. The LDS church has no
position on the age of the Earth or Evolution. I
don't ignore "inconvenient" parts of the Bible, etc.
-emarkp
\_ I wasn't talking about specifically age or evo.
You said you believe the Bible is divinely
inspired, but inaccurately transcribed. So you
get to say to any of the OT stuff you don't agree
with "that's superceded" and any of the NT stuff
that contradicts itself "that's human error" You
don't find that remarkably convenient? -pp
\_ But that's exactly the point! The Bible pretty
clearly describes creation. If you're going to
say "oh, it was just symbolic, it was really
evolution.. see 'days' really meant..." and so on,
then what's to stop doing that to any part of the
Bible? And if, as you already said, you believe
it has human-introduced mistakes... it really
doesn't feel like a useful text.
\_ You realize the stories of Adam and Eve and
Noah are quite obviously not real, right? -tom
\_ you're just pissed off that you don't have
a navel.
\_ I realize that much of them is not literal.
"not real" is not a terribly precise statement.
-emarkp
\_ OK, how's this for precise. The human race
is not descended from two individuals.
(Verifiable by DNA analysis). The rest of
the Adam and Eve story (and the idea of
original sin) makes no sense in that
context. Also, there was not a guy named
Noah who gathered up all the animals by
twos because the world (or even a region)
was flooded. (Also verifiable by DNA
analysis and fossil/sedimentary records).
-tom
\_ DNA has been traced back through women
to a trivial number of individuals in
Africa. I'd like to see a URL that
shows DNA or fossil/sediment record
evidence showing that "not even a region"
could have had a flood that limited the
animal population to a trivial number of
each species. I'm certain you won't find
this. Also, there is actually sediment
evidence showing that there likely was a
flood of some sort on a large scale in
the distant past although not necessarily
in the last 6000+ years.
\_ I disagree with your statement out the
DNA evidence of a single couple as
parents of all humans. In the case of
Noah, that's why I'm open to the "local
flood" idea. -emarkp
\_ The local flood idea requires zero
leap of faith. Floods large enough
to destroy a tribal civilization's
whole world are common enough that
it seems reasonable that many
civilizations will have stories about
it which are based on fact.
\_ The history of religious dogma is
an evolution from claims which
became easy to disprove (such as
heliocentricity) to claims which
are more difficult to disprove.
Once a piece of dogma has been
proved incorrect beyond a reasonable
doubt, it seems fanciful in the
extreme to weaken the same piece
of dogma to make it less disprovable.
Unless you're just believing what
you want to believe. -tom
\_ EMarkP: Do you think William Cosby
has accurately told the story ofNoah?
has accurately told the story of Noah?
\_ "When you forgive the person, you renounce the
justice and redress you were due."
This is the part of the Bible I find most compelling
too, but the part that many people who call themselves
Christians don't put into practice. I'm curious if you,
whoever you are (emarkp?), supported the war on Iraq.
- quaker
\_ I accepted the Afghanistan war, but I did not like
the war on Iraq from the start. The administration
was too eager to go to war, too flippant in regard
to the potential consequences, suffering and loss
of lives, both American and Iraqi, too arrogant in
our capabilities, which I believe was the cause
of many of the mistakes we made. The purpose of
the war was unclear, the motives questionable.
My current church is a small Chinese church
affliated with ELCA. I went to a Baptist church
affliated with ELCA. I went to a baptist church
while in grad school. I didn't go to church
regularly while in Berkeley, but when I went, I
went to 1st Presby, or the Chinese for Christ.
church. Before college, I go to a Presby church.
Before college, I go to a presby church.
My girlfriend went to a quaker church while in
college in taipei, where she accepted christ.
\_ I see no conflict between saying to Osama Bin Laden, "I
love you as a person and forgive you of your crimes" while
shooting him between the eyes. It is up to me to forgive
all men. But while I can forgive, I will still protect my
family. [BTW, I can't find that verse anywhere--you want
to give chapter and verse?] -emarkp
\_Everyone should shut the hell up and just read the Jefferson
Bible or the Gospel Of St Thomas.
http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2005/Jesus-Without-Miracles1dec05.htm
- danh |
| 2005/12/15-16 [Uncategorized] UID:41030 Activity:nil |
12/15 I once saw an old pamplhet that was a quick guide
to street numbering in Manhattan. Has anyone ever
seen something like that on the web? - danh
\_ Do you mean this? - ciyer
http://www.bigapplevisitorscenter.com/gakmsts.htm |
| 2005/12/15-16 [Recreation/Food] UID:41031 Activity:nil |
12/14 Woman hires hitman to kill 4 in order to get their cheese. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/06/AR2005120601038.html \_ She's not too bright. What's to stop the hitman from keeping the cheese? \_ turns out the hitman was a rat.. (singular/plural mistake fixed) |
| 2005/12/15-16 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:41032 Activity:high |
12/15 Yeah, Congress has the same access to intelligence as the President...
Except for the fact that they don't.
http://feinstein.senate.gov/crs-intel.htm
\_ Why would you expect them to have the same access? The
intelligence agencies are part of the executive branch, which
has a responsibility at very least to restrict access to primary
material which may identify the source of that material. I can
understand arguing about whether the President restricts access
to intelligence too much or too little, but asserting that
Congress should have exactly the same level of access as the
President seems misguided.
\_ I wouldn't "expect them to have the same access". But that's
exactly what the president has used recently to defend his war.
He said that they had the same information on Iraq that he did
for their debate on authorizing war in some highly misguided
effort to create some large scale mea culpa. It's what he's
hinged every speech this week on. He's a liar.
\_ Did he hinge that on congress *always* having the same access
or having the same access before the war?
\_ "One of the blessings of our free society is
that we can debate these issues openly, even in a
time of war. Most of the debate has been a credit
to our democracy, but some have launched irresponsible
charges. They say that we act because of oil, that
we act in Iraq because of Israel, or because we
misled the American people. Some of the most
irresponsible comments about manipulating intelligence
have come from politicians who saw the same
intelligence we saw, and then voted to authorize
the use of force against Saddam Hussein. These
charges are pure politics."
\_ Right, so we're talking about pre-war intelligence
there, not current intelligence.
\_ I don't see what you're getting at. Do you?
\_ Which we know was not distributed equally before
the war.
\_ We do?
\_ Of course. We know now, therfore we must have
known before.
\_ Not to mention that Bush is personally
knowledgeable of everything known and done
by people in the executive branch.
\_ He may not be knowlegable, but, whether
he likes it or not, he is responsible.
it's his fucking administration.
\_ No no no it's Clinton's fault somehow.
\_ No, I agree completely. Bush should
be held accountable for the actions
of his administration. However, I am
a little confused. I thought here
we're taking him to task for claiming
Congress had the same access to
intelligence. So is he at fault for
making a claim when he didn't know
the facts, making a claim when he
should have known otherwise, or making
a claim when he did know otherwise.
And how do we decide which one that is
from the available information?
\_ No no no it's Clinton's fault somehow.
\_ Ah, the old "is he a liar, or is
he just incompetent" question. I
posit it REALLY DOESN'T MATTER.
And How do we decide? We tell
Congress (who is the only party
with the ability, not to mention
the DUTY to do so) to find out.
\_ You mean we shouldn't just hang
him first? I'm pretty sure
we're going to hang him first
and determine the facts later.
\_ He's not a carjacker, son.
He's the president, and the
only body qualified to
investigate is sitting on
their hands. In such an
event, saying "wait for
the facts" is unpatriotic.
\_ Wow. Maybe the truth *is*
out there! Have you been
talking to jblack about
the black helicopters
circling overhead? You
think that's part of the
Congressional plot to
sit on the impeachment too?
\_ Yes we do. The PDB for example, is not
shared with Congress. Are you really this
ignorant or are you playing faux naif?
The President knows he has access to
information that Congress does not have,
too, so he just lying his ass off now.
\_ You know, I'm pretty sure Bush isn't
telling the Congress what he's getting
the wife and family for Christmas too.
So the question is not whether Bush knows
something the Congress doesn't, it's
1. whether Bush knows something material
that the Congress doesn't, and 2. whether
Bush knows that the Congress doesn't
have access to that material information.
In the case of the daily briefing that
you specifically mentioned, you will
have to show that the relevant bits in
the briefing do not eventually reach
the Congress.
\_ http://tinyurl.com/94otb
\_ So you have one website quoting
another website plus some
conjecture. Wow. You have me
totally convinced now. Do you
information reguarding black
helicopters that are equally
helicopters that is equally
persuasive?
\_ http://csua.org/u/eco
Second paragraph. Look this is
shooting fish in a barrel.
\_ OK, by abandoning your first
website I assume you agree
that your first reference is
silly. Great. We're making
progress. Now let's look
at this one. On 9/5/02,
Graham & Co demanded to
see the National Intelligence
Estimate. 3 weeks later
(I assume that's 9/26/02),
Tenet produced one. One
10/10/02, Congress voted
to approve the use of force.
What's your point again?
\_ There is overwhelming
evidence that you are
wrong. I am just posting
it as fast as I can
google it:
http://csua.org/u/ecp
\_ To quote your reference,
"The report does not
cite examples of
intelligence Bush
reviewed that differed
from what Congress saw.
If such information is
available, it would not
be accessible to the
report's authors."
That Bush had
information unavailable
to Congress is a given.
The question is whether
the information was
material, and you
have yet shown nothing
to substantiate that
claim.
\_ You are trying to
use the fact that
the White House
classifies any
information that
proves that it is
lying as evidence
in *favor* of their
claim? Bizarre.
\_ At least you are
admitting that Bush
lied about this.
Now we are getting
somewhere.
\_ I think I agreed
half a page up
that Bush must
know something
the Congress
doesn't. The
question is
whether it's
material, and so
far claims of
"overwhelming
evidence" have
been under-
whelming. All
you have shown
are unreferenced
claims and
innuendoes.
\_ Did you even bother to
read the second paragraph
in the above cite?
"However, this
declassified version was
more like a marketing
brochure: 20 pages in
length, slickly produced
with splashy grahics and
maps, and with none of
the caveats contained in
the original...The
intelligence material
Congress had was what the
administration was willing
to give them, namely a
promotional piece whose
lies of omission outweighed\
what was included."
\_ [Sorry, broke up your
post to respond to
your points separately.
Hope you don't mind.]
The full classified
version was available
to House and Senate
intelligence committee
members.
\_ Right, but that
is not Bush's claim.
He claims "all 100
Democratic members
of Congress" had
He claims "more than
100 Democrats"
in Congress had
access to the same
material he did.
http://csua.org/u/ecq
\_ Boy, do you even
read your own
references?
1. Your quote
is completely
misleading and
*invented*.
Please use
quotations
correctly.
2. I assume
you mean "more
than 100 Democrats
in the House and
Senate". OBTW,
*that* is a
correct and non-
misleading quote.
3. Next
paragraph from
that quote, the
article article
specifically
mentioned the
daily briefing,
but it's not
clear if relevant
info from that
made it into
reports in other
forms, and the
National Intel
Estimate, which
even the artcile
agreed were
available to
the Congress
before the vote.
4. Given that
you have proven
to be dishonest
by inventing
quotes on the fly,
why should I even
waste my time with
you? Please addr
point 4 before
more arguments.
5. I see that
you've now gone
back to "fix"
your quote. Again
why should I waste
my time with some-
one shown to be
dishonest and
without honor?
\_ Blow it out
your ass. I
was trying
to quickly
summarize my
points. I did
not sub-
stantially
change any
meaning
(Congressmen
for members of
The House and
Senate). Why
should I waste
my time with
a crybaby?
\_ Right. You
made up a
quote (and
there is a
substantive
difference
between
"all 100"
and "more
than 100"),
got caught.
You went
back to fix
it without
admitting
responsi-
bility, and
got caught
again. Now
you're
indignant.
Do you have
*any* honor?
That was a typo that I corrected _/
before you even finished with
your counter to it. Your argument
on the facts has failed, so you
have resorted to ad hominem, I
understand. Another nail in the
coffin of your claims that the
Congress had all the same intel
as the White House:
http://feinstein.senate.gov/crs-intel.htm
\_ This is getting *so* tiresome.
I agreed a page up that Bush has
info the Congress doesn't. Now
show that this info is material.
You still have nothing. How about
a quote from Feinstein's website?
Have you learned how to quote now?
Something like "Bush knew X, but
this was not known to the Congress
at the time. If this were known,
the vote might have been
different." That would show that
the info was material. You picked
the Feinstein site. Don't you
have *anything*?
\_ The "material" bit is your
trip, not mine. I don't know
if it would have changed enough
votes to stop the war or not.
But I do know Bush lied when
he claimed that Congress had
access to the same info (on
Iraq, to be pedantic) as he did.
\_ I take it that this means you
*can't* find a reference
that Congress is missing
material information. If
you don't limit yourself
to material information, then
the statement is silly. Of
course Bush knows stuff the
Congress does not. I mean,
did Bush tell the Congreess
when or with whom he lost
his virginity? So you are
limiting the info to info
on Iraq. Isn't that a
material test? Should Bush
tell Congress what his fav.
Bagdhad restaurant is? If
he didn't, would you hang
him for lying? You keep
saying you know Bush lied.
How? On what? You made a
specific claim. Now please
make specific charges. Some-
thing like "Bush knew X, but
Congress didn't or didn't in
time".
\_ Reread the Washington
Post article. Basically
anything that contradicted
the case that the WH
was trying to make was
withheld. There is
literally hundreds of
pages of it (far too
much to try and post
here). One example
noted in the WaPo article:
"For example, the NIE view that
Hussein would not use weapons of mass
destruction against the United States
or turn them over to terrorists unless
backed into a corner was cleared for
public use only a day before the
Senate vote."
\_ To address your quote
specifically, note
that NIE info was not
available for "public
use". Meaning the
info was available to
the Congress, but the
Congressman was not
allowed to release
it to the public. Now
how does that prove
your point? Re the
rest of the article,
it was either the
Congress did not have
enough time to review
the NIE (from your
earlier time line I
would guess the
Congress had 2 weeks),
or there must have
been *something*
missing. What
something? Specific
charges please. I'll
keep trying to help
you. Something like
"Bush knew X, but the
Congress didn't or
didn't in time." When
you have X, then you
have something. Until
then, your claim is
worthless.
\_ Bush didn't say "something material"
he said Congress had the same
information we did. We know the PDB
had information on Iraq. Q.E.D.
\_ Now you're being silly. Yes, I
am certain Bush isn't telling
the Congress what he's getting
the family for Christmas. I bet
he didn't even tell the Congress
when and with whom he lost his
virginity! Impeach the bum. How
are those black helicopters coming?
\_ You are grasping at straws here
and I think you know it. We
are talking about Iraq here,
not Christmas lists.
\_ Hey, you're the one who said
"Bush didn't say 'something
material'". I was just
follwing your when I started
on Christmas lists and
virginity. Now show me
that the daily briefing
information didn't eventually
reach Congress.
\_ Believe it or not, I do
not have the security
clearance to track this
kind of thing. Your blind
faith in the White House
is kind of touching.
\_ No, not blind faith in
the white house at all.
If I am guilty, I am
guilty of blind faith
that you could not
possibly prove what you
are trying to claim.
\_ I think you are
saying the opposite
of what you intend.
\_ You know, you're
right. Mea culpa. |
| 2005/12/15-16 [Computer/Companies/Google] UID:41033 Activity:moderate |
12/15 I'm looking for raw data on the world's cities, does it exist anywhere?
Specifically, I'd like a list of all cities over, say, 5000 population,
what country they are in, which state/province/prefecture/etc.,
location (lat+long) and name in English. Does this exist anywhere?
Couldn't find it with google.
\_ Over 5000? There are raves larger than that. 5000 is too small to
be significant.
\_ Ok, make it 10,000
\_ I agree with pp. You probably want to look at 100k as a low
number. Even that low I bet you would get over 1k cities.
\_ Companies that make an Atlas have to have this info, it
should exist *somewhere*.
\_ http://www.travelgis.com/default.asp?framesrc=/cities
-tom
\- i assume people in the GIS business have something
like this in computer-usable form. howeverm this
sounds ill-thought out.
\_ Duh. look at The Almanac, the google of the old days. Or better
yet use google and search for: world's largest cities
and you get it on the first page.
and you get it on the first hit. |
| 2005/12/15-18 [Reference/History/WW2/Germany] UID:41034 Activity:kinda low |
12/15 http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051215/od_nm/germany_salute_dc Hitler salute greets concentration camp visitors. Sorry I can't help it -- Heil John! \_ Huh? Anyway, it might amuse you that I'm moving to Chile, and our landlord is called "Juan Oehninger". -John \_ that's funny. are you moving to Colonia Dignidad I mean Villa Baviera? - danh \_ Nein, but I do tell people I'm going to hunt nazis. For some reason, most of the management types I deal with do not see much difference between IT security and "other" security consulting... -John \_ http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/0,1518,390735,00.html American woman gives birth to 17th child. -- Go American John! \_ What's with you John fetishists? You guys are retards. \_ I attract weirdos, it's a skill. -John \_ In real life also? \_ Yes. I don't quite manage the same dysfunctional demographics in my varied fan groups as danh. -John \_ You, ilyas and emarkp seem to attract quite an interesting following. -mice \_ "The incident took place in Brandenburg, a state in the former communist East, where far right parties get a much larger share of the votes than they do in the West." Interesting. |
| 2005/12/15-19 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:41035 Activity:nil |
12/15 Leon County, FL gets rid of Diebold voting machines:
http://www.bbvforums.org/cgi-bin/forums/board-auth.cgi?file=/1954/15595.html |
| 2005/12/15-19 [Computer/SW/WWW/Browsers] UID:41036 Activity:nil |
12/15 Has anyone tried the Google Safe Browsing Firefox extension?
Does it work well?
http://www.google.com/tools/firefox/safebrowsing
\_ Does it serve the same purpose as other programs like, say, AdWatch?
\_ Are you astroturfing?
\_ I don't know how well it works, but how the heck does it install
itself without Firefox warning that http://google.com isn't in its
list of trusted domains? |
| 2005/12/15-16 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton] UID:41037 Activity:high |
12/15 Clinton vs. Giuliani 2008
\_ Clinton vs. Rice
\_ Pepsi vs. Coke.
\_ Yermom vs. Todo el Mundo
\_ Tastes great vs...
\_ Kirk vs. Khaaaan!!!!
\_ Bring back Powell!!!
\_ He was never interested. |
| 2005/12/15-19 [Uncategorized] UID:41038 Activity:nil |
12/15 Is the current chronic low-level packet loss between UCB
and the outside world a known issue? |
| 2005/12/15-19 [Politics/Domestic/Election, ERROR, uid:41039, category id '18005#11.0662' has no name! , ] UID:41039 Activity:kinda low |
12/15 Tran Blasts Dean: Calls for Solidarity in Iraq
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1536289/posts
\_ Fascinating... not the article, but your persistence.
Can you please shed some light as to why you keep posting
stuff from freerepublic? Is it 1) to educate liberals why
conservatism is better? 2) to humiliate liberals by pointing
URLS that humiliate liberals? 3) to generate knee-jerking
reactions from liberals for entertainment values? or
4) you forgot your medication? Please explain.
\_ I kind of like seeing what those bastards are up to. I find
that I read points of view on there that most of my liberal
friends didn't know existed. For instance, I wouldn't know about
the drooling adulation of Rice by the wingnut right were it not
for freerepublic. A black woman with a phd as an Icon of the far
right? It defies the stereotype of the racist right wing nut
who hates book learnin'. If it weren't for jblack and his
dipshit trolls, I would not come into any contact with the far
right, and given their present power in this country I think that
would be a bad thing.
\_ Are you kidding me? Their worship of Condi is the most
endearing thing about them. It shows that they have
at least mostly abandoned their virulent open racism.
\_ Right. Fine. I'm not dissagreeing with that, I'm just
saying that were it not for jblack drooling his links
all over the motd, I wouldn't know this particular
charming tidbit about the far right. So it's not all bad.
\_ 5) Liberal trolling as a conservative posting strawmen
in order to make conservatives look like nut jobs?
\_ I would think the article speaks for itself. There are
glaring misconceptions about Vietnam that warrant
clarification.
clarification. -jblack
\_ The Vietnam war is over. No one cares anymore. Get over it.
\_ If people didn't care then why do they compare every
non-trivial military action to Vietnam? And if they're
going to compare then it is important that we have the
correct history and not myths. I didn't read the article
and don't read the free republic but I do care in general
about historical accuracy and revisionism. -!jblack
\_ yes, your point jblack?
\_ I don't get it--Dean says "S. Vietnamese couldn't support
themselves". Tran says "RVN fell because Congress cut off
support." Where's the contradiction? -John |
| 2005/12/15-19 [Transportation/Car] UID:41040 Activity:low |
12/15 Is anyone here in the Auto Assault beta or know anyone who is?
I'm just curious what game play is like. Thanks.
\_ It feels a lot like COH in terms of interface. It is kind of
fun but very random. Basically you get a car with different mount
points on it. On the starter car you can have a rotatable turrent gun,
a fixed front mounted gun and a fixed rear mounted gun. Not sure if
you get more weapon mount points as you level. You also get skill
points to buy skills with that do stuff like give you special abilities
or passive abilities that increase attack/dmg/speed/etc. You can also
buy/find/craft upgrades to your car like new tires, new engine, glowy
scoop, etc. And there are 4 classes for each race. A healer/mechanic,
a rogue/bounty hunter (can stealth), a commando/tank, and I forget the
4th one.
\_ It feels a lot like COH in terms of interface. It is kind of fun
but very random. Basically you get a car with different mount
points on it. On the starter car you can have a rotatable turrent
gun, a fixed front mounted gun and a fixed rear mounted gun. Not
sure if you get more weapon mount points as you level. You also
get skill points to buy skills with that do stuff like give you
special abilities or passive abilities that increase
attack/dmg/speed/etc. You can also buy/find/craft upgrades to
your car like new tires, new engine, glowy scoop, etc. And there
are 4 classes for each race. A healer/mechanic, a rogue/bounty
hunter (can stealth), a commando/tank, and I forget the 4th one.
\_ Sounds like the old "Autoduel" I played on my Apple ][.
\_ Car Wars, baby! |
| 2005/12/15-19 [Recreation/Media] UID:41041 Activity:high |
12/15 For Star Trek movie guy: Shatner, Stewart, and Bakula to team up in
ultimate unholy movie of horribleness:
http://www.hollywood.com/news/detail/id/3472202
\_ Why do star trek writers love time travel so much? Do they all
have the fantasy of going back in time and sleeping with their mom?
\_ Because it allows unlimited cross over episodes between the 3
time periods they wrote material.
\_ They have the fantasy of going back in time and child-molest
their own selves.
their own selves. Screwing a young virgin asshole with your big
fat dick while having your young virgin asshole screwed by a big
fat dick ...... oh it's so HOT!
\_ Time travel is a crutch that lets writers to indulge in their
favorite setting. Instead of creating new scenarios and
implications, they go to the past and play "alternate history,"
but somehow they end up back in the same exact world they left
from because the "true" outcome is pretty much the "best" one.
No one kills Hitler, stops WWI, or saves Kennedy. Only small
personal victories are allowed. Sigh. Thinking is hard.
\_ When I was in middle school, my friend and I who were
obscessed with time travel swore that if we ever got our
time machine to work, the first thing we would do was go
back and tell our middle school selves about it. By the
end of 8th grade we pretty much concluded that neither of
us would ever invent a time machine. The difference between
us and those wankers at MIT was that we had the excuse of
being 12.
\_ What was so great about Kennedy? Bay of Pigs? Nuclear war?
\_ More interesting is the time, not the man. Vietnam, civil
rights, and the cold war.
\_ The original plot line for ST2 had Kirk et. al. traveling
back in time to assassinate Kennedy in order to restore
their timeline.
\_ If they're doing this Mirror, Mirror bs, they sure as hell better
bring Avery Brooks back into the project.
\_ Damn straight. They won't, though. He was the most interesting
captain by far, but the ST fan base never took to him.
\_ Pre Shaved Head Sisko was a loser, Shaved Head Goatee Sisko
rocked. He was my 2d best captain in the ST universe (Kirk
being the best; although Spock technically was a Captain by
rank, he doesn't count b/c he never had an independent cmd).
I'd love to see a movie w/ Sisko. -stmg
\_ IMHO, DS9 >> ST:[TNG,TOS,E,V]. I love TOS, but sometimes
you have to get over the first love and move on.
\_ As much as I like DS9 (enough to play both Harbinger
and The Fallen), I still think that TOS is better b/c
of the cast. DS9 had too many losers (Jake, Dr. Bashir,
Rom, Nog, &c.) and they managed to mess up stuff like
the really cool Section 31 plot line. -stmg
\_ It was a better show with losers. Everyone in the
other ST shows were idealized paragons. Blah.
\_ I can agree that in TOS the characters were
nearly perfect, but not in the other shows.
The only near perfect characters in TNG were
Data and Lore. There were no perfect characters
in Voyager. Seven of Nine was not bad, but you
can only watch so many episodes where she walks
around in a one piece with a concussion phaser
rifle :-). -stmg
\_ That's because it's B5 with the serial numbers filed
off. And of course B5 is LotR with the serial numbers
filed off.
\_ B5 was ass. About the only good things on B5 were
Kosh (good and bad), Chekov and Marcus and JMS
killed off Good Kosh and Marcus. Pox on JMS. LotR
is even worse than B5. About the only thing worse
than LotR I've ever seen was Attack of the Clowns
(Yes, even Final Frontier was better). -stmg
\_ Lord of the Rings is worse?
\_ If B5 was ass, it was supermodel ass. Don't let
your love of the One True Space Opera cloud your
ability to appreciate other well-done series.
\_ You mean Dune? Cause that's what Lucas copied
\_ The only good thing about Dune was that
Picard was in it. -stmg
\_ You suck.
\_ I like SG-1. I've watched ever eps. of B5
and I still think it is ass. My opinion
might have been different if (1) JMS didn't
might have been different if JMS didn't (1)
make Evil Kosh act like a sniveling child
in front of the first one and (2) JMS didn't
kill off Marcus. -stmg
in front of the first one and (2) kill off
Marcus. -stmg
\_ Huh, I don't really see how B5 is LotR. Please
elaborate.
\_ There were some obvious nods. The First One named
Lorien. Sheridan's leap into Z'ha'dum to come
back later (compare to Gandalf's plunge into
Khazad dum). The Elder races going away to leave
man (the Third Age of Man). Etc.
\_ As you say, those are nods. "B5 is LotR
with the serial numbers filed off,"
suggests wholesale lifting of the plot.
/
http://www.bbspot.com/News/2003/07/babylon_5.html
\_ If you go to Khazad-dum, you will die. -geordan
\_ I thought DS9 would be B5 with SNs filed off at
first, too, but subsequent viewing proved me
completely wrong. It was its own original thing.
\_ DS9 has actual plot arcs and something unique
to offer ST viewers, conflict.
\_ Except their entire war thing was stolen from
B5. The thing with the gods dragged on way too
long too. At least it wasn't like ST:TNG,
"Sir! We're under attack!" "Raise shields,
conference!"
\_ No, I'm pretty sure war existed before B5.
What you did have was shifting alliances
and actual reasons for war. And DS9 touched
on religion as an actual subject matter in
character lives instead of a plugin addon.
\_ Even better, TAS might be coming to dvd next year:
http://www.thedigitalbits.com/rumormill.html#1215
-stmg
-stm |
| 2005/12/15 [Computer/SW/OS/FreeBSD] UID:41042 Activity:nil |
12/15 What differences between Linux and BSD could explain the difference
in the speed of output from simple text commands that spew several
lines of output. From my Mac, when I run these commands on a linux
box there is a lag. Looks like the lines are printed one at a time.
When I run the same commands on a BSD box, it looks like all the lines
print together, and it is much snappier. When I login from linux to
linux, there is no noticable lag. |
| 3/15 |