| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 2006/10/2-3 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44620 Activity:very high |
10/1 When a Democrat has oral sex with an intern, whatever. When a
Republican writes gay letters to one underaged boy, he quits.
\_ When a Democrat has oral sex with an intern, they spend $100
million to investigate. When 3k people die in the worst mass
murder in American history, whatever.
\_ I wouldn't call two wars and a trillion dollars "whatever", but
that's just me.
\_ "I really don't spend that much time on him"
\_ Which is different than him not actually spending much time
or resources on him.
\_ Iraq is not about Osama bin Laden or Al Quaeda. -tom
\_ Bin Laden and Al Qaeda disagree with you.
\_ Yes, yes, it's just about Bush Junior avenging his
daddy and HALIBURTON! and Blood For Big Oil! and
making the top 1% richer and Israel who actually
lew up the towers and turning the US into a
dictatorship and establishing and expanding American
Hegemony(tm) through the world and probably a few
others I forgot. Please fill in where I left off.
\_ It's about the Project For a New American Century.
You know, the group including Cheney, Rumsfeld,
Wolfowitz, etc., who sent an open letter to
Clinton in 1998 that America should assert its
strength to remake the world to our best
interests, and that we should start by invading
Iraq. This is not a secret conspiracy.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm
-tom
\_ That letter doesn't imply anything close
to what you assert. What it says is that
Saddam must be removed as a threat. Where
are you getting this "America should
assert its strength to remake the world to
our best interests, and that we should start
by invading Iraq" stuff? I never figured
Tom to be a tinfoil hat type.
\_ Statement of Principles, June 1997:
"As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States
stands as the world's preeminent power. Having led the
West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an
opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have
the vision to build upon the achievements of past
decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape
a new century favorable to American principles and
interests? ... We seem to have forgotten the essential
elements of the Reagan Administration's success: a
military that is strong and ready to meet both present
and future challenges; a foreign policy that boldly and
purposefully promotes American principles abroad; and
national leadership that accepts the United States'
global responsibilities."
stands as the world's preeminent power. Having led the West to
victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a
challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build
upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States
have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American
principles and interests?
...
We seem to have forgotten the essential elements of the Reagan
Administration's success: a military that is strong and ready
to meet both present and future challenges; a foreign policy
that boldly and purposefully promotes American principles
abroad; and national leadership that accepts the United
States' global responsibilities."
http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm
You really need to open your eyes. -tom
\_ So now you are introducing an entirely different document
and it *still* doesn't say what you said above, or even
imply it.
\_ You clearly aren't reading. You don't think there's
any connection between the foundation started in 1997 by
the group of chicken hawks now in power to promote American
militarism, whose first open letter advocated the invasion
of Iraq, and the fact that the same group of chicken hawks
decided to invade Iraq on trumped-up evidence? -tom
\_ Maybe, maybe not. You are reading into it what you
want to read into it. There's a lot of inferences
being made. The first letter just said that Saddam
should be removed from power. The second letter
advocates a string military, a global leadership
position, and foreign policy which puts US interests
first. You might be right that there's a conspiracy
to US global domination at all costs, but you can't
prove it based on the evidence you've presented.
\_ I agree entirely with you. It would be
better if our nation did not take action
to reshape the world to be favorable to
American interests, but instead reshaped
it to be unfavorable. Er uh yeah! So,
back to reality for a moment: what is
wrong with a nation attempting to reshape
the world in a self-interested way? That
is the reason for being for all nations.
Now then, if you're opposed to the
existence of nations, that's another
story, but any nation that does not try
to serve self-interest will be tossed in
history's trashcan. You may disagree with
their methods, you may disagree with the
specifics of what is self interest and
what is not, but railing against national
self-interest is senseless.
\_ It seems to me that there are many
ways to define national self-interest,
and that none of them apply to the
Iraq debacle. A stable middle east?
Access to cheap oil? Less power for
Islamic extremists? A stable and
financially sound U.S. government?
The spread of American values and
diplomatic capital with other nations?
It's a failure on all counts. Unlike
most motd liberals, I actually supported
the invasion of Iraq. But unlike the
motd conservatives, I'm willing to admit
I was wrong and that the present
clusterfuck is worse for America and
the world even than Saddam.
\_ I agree the post-invasion was and
continues to be screwed up. But
let's do a what-if. What-if they
had declared martial law on day 1,
rounded up and destroyed the zillion
tons of free floating weapons,
sealed the borders to Iran+Syria,
and then held elections of some sort
once the country was stable and
under control? Same invasion, but
very different post-invasion with
a different "today". If you can
agree that this was a possible
outcome of the invasion, then the
invasion itself was in American
self-interest, they just botched the
aftermath. And btw, yes, I'm
\_ Ok, we agree.
conservative in foreign affairs
but generally leaning one way or
the other doesn't require blind
knee-jerk responses to real world
issues and questions. Even those
evil conservatives can make
rational evaluations. You just
won't find that kind of conservative
on the freeper zones any more than
you'll find rational liberals on
dailykos.
\_ Nice straw man. I noticed you
completely stopped trying to
address the point, which is
that invading Iraq is part
of a very specific plan by
a very specific group of
people, who had decided to
do it before they were even
in power. -tom
\_ That isn't a strawman. It is
a direct response to "unlike
motd conservatives...". And
what exactly is your point?
That some guys with no power
wanted to invade Iraq? I have
no power and want a lot of
things, too. So what? What
is your point? I'm dumb, so
if you spell it out for me,
I'll address it.
\_ You realize you're
responding to two different
people, right?
\_ Yup. And one of them
called accused me of
strawmanning for
replying to the other.
I was clarifying.
\_ The guy to whom you
were clafifying
interrupted your
clarification to
agree with you, and
has returned to
attempting to do
useful engineering
work.
\_ "Iraq is not about
Osama bin Laden or
Al Qaeda." That's the
point I raised up above.
The Iraq invasion is
the culmination of a
strategy planned and
implemented in the open;
you do not have to posit
the existence of secret
conspiracies or anything
at all; you only need to
read what these people
wrote. Whether you think
their strategy was a
good idea or not is
not really relevant to
my point. -tom
\_ Uh, sure... who was
disputing these guys
wrote an *open* letter
in the 90s or claimed
there was a conspiracy
or whatever? Me and
the other person
ignored that and went
on to other topics
because there was no
"there" there. It was
an *open* letter. What
was your point again?
Slowly for me this time
because I'm really
really dumb. Thanks.
\_ I agree, you're
really dumb. -!tom
\_ If there's a
point, you or tom or anyone else are welcome to make it. As
far as I can figure the point is "there was a public document
and uhm...". That's about it. Personal attack is always a
good substitute for substance. Keep it up, you'll go far.
\_ Tom's point: Iraq was not about UBL. Your response:
WDYHA? Yeah, you're a fricking debating genius.
\_ No one but tom was talking about that. I'm not a
debating genius but I can stay on board as a conversation
shifts and moves on. tom seems to get that. Why don't
you?
\_ See below.
\_ Tom said Iraq was not about UBL or AQ but about the PfaNAC.
You then replied with a parody of conspiracy screeds, which
appeared to imply that Tom was a conspiracy nut. Tom then
elaborated on his point by suggesting that the PfaNAc was
behind the invasion of Iraq. He then provided a URL to a
letter from PfaNAC suggesting "that America should assert
its strength to remake the world to our best interests, and
that we should start by invading Iraq." You then said that
the letter did not say anything of the sort, and then you
\_ no sorry that was someone else. i never said the
letter was anything but exactly what it looked
like which was a bunch of powerless guys who wanted
to invade iraq. i didn't write anything at anytime
that disputed tom's take on their open letter.
implied that Tom was a tinfoil-hat-wearing conspiracy nut.
Tom then posted a portion of the PfaNAC's Statement of
Principles that matches, closely, the policies of the
current administration; this would seem to suggest that the
PfaNAC, of which Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and other
architects of the invasion of Iraq are active participants,
dictated the policy that led to the invasion of Iraq. You
then switched tacts and chose to turn the debate to whether
the policy advocated was effective or not. When confronted
\_ no i was talking with someone else at this point
as previously mentioned.
on this, you denied disputing the point to begin with.
\_ because i didn't. there was no dispute.
Now, I see you launching two ad hominem attacks against
Tom and then denying a position you held half a page up.
\_ no, i'm glad to see tom and i agreed on the basics
and were done which is about where someone else
stepped in with personal attacks on me.
That would appear to be the substitute for substance you
later mentioned. Per your own advice: "Keep it up, you'll
go far."
\_ thanks, i've done fine but the rest of your
analysis is based on a confusion as to who was
responding to what and who wrote what at various
points. it was a pleasure chatting with you.
have a nice day.
\_ You do the same. In the meantime, would some
eager young CSUA member like to write a command
line tool for proper conversation threads on the
motd? TIA.
\_ Let's see: oral sex between two consenting adults or solicitation
(and possible corruption) of a minor, which one's illegal?
Hell, which one's even potentially illegal?
\_ Adultery and oral copulation are still on the books in many
states. Age of consent in DC is 16, isnt it? That makes the
IMs legal, does it not? -devil's advocate
\_ Is adultery and oral copulation illegal in DC?
\_ absolutely no idea, but just saying.... -da
\_ From what I understand, it would be legal, but for legislation
that the guy himself backed specifically related to actions
done over the Internet. The irony is piled high.
\_ Right on. Which legislation was this?
\_ The blah blah Child Protection and Welfare blah blah
Act. I'm pretty sure he's in violation of his own law.
\_ Does anyone know if he has any previous anti-gay quotes?
It would seem like a southern republican should make some
asinine statements while stumping against gay marriage...
\_ No idea, but he sure did a lot of work for the Co$:
http://www.fso.org/en_US/news-events/pg005.html
\_ Clinton was impeached. I also think making unwelcome advances toward
a minor is rather different than receiving oral sex from a (by all
accounts) willing adult.
\_ This doesn't have to be partisan. This guy's a scumbag. The GOP
leadership screwed up by not investigating this earlier. And
whoever leaked it saved it for an October surprise. I'm not seeing
any good guys here.
\_ Your post already defines the good guys: anyone who didn't send
the IMs, cover up the incident, or save the reveal for an
election season surprise. Right now, there seem to be plenty of
people on both sides of the aisle who fit that definition,
including Nancy Pelosi.
\_ Nice censorship for deleting my response. Since we don't know
who was involved, how can you claim that Pelosi wasn't one of
them?
\_ As for censorship, I'm using motdedit, so it wasn't me
deleting your post. As for Pelosi, yeahbuhwhaaat?
\_ Yeah no kidding. They're all politicians. Anyone who got
themselves into Federal office and especially the repeat
offenders is almost certainly a slime and a "bad guy" in
more ways than their voters could stomach if they knew.
\_ We don't know who saved and leaked the IMs. How can you claim
Pelosi isn't involved when we simply don't know? |
| 2006/10/2-3 [Computer/SW/OS/Windows] UID:44621 Activity:nil |
10/2 Anybody run dual boot AND parallels virtualization on a macbook pro?
I'm trying to figure out if it's possible for the dual boot and
parallels to share one copy of windows XP. Or do I need to keep
two separate copies of windows XP of disk for this to work. Thanks.
\_ My understanding is that this is currently not possible:
http://tinyurl.com/etyy2 (forum.parallels.com)
It is supposed to be available in the next version of Parallels.
\_ You must use a separate partition for dual boot and for Parallels |
| 2006/10/2-4 [Recreation/Food] UID:44622 Activity:nil |
10/2 For a normal adult, what is the maximum amount of canned tuna that is
safe to eat on a regular basis to avoid problems with mercury?
\_ IIRC it's about a can/week and you're pushing it. But really,
mercury never leaves your system once you've got it so it builds up
over time. The Mad Hatter was insane because he was a hatter and
they used mercury in the dying process for hats in that era. Just
something to think about when having your next tuna roll.
\_ http://www.nrdc.org/health/effects/mercury/tuna.asp
\_ http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/food/fish-safety-704-fish-tuna-mercury/overview/index.htm
\_ From consumer reports: http://csua.org/u/h3j |
| 2006/10/2-4 [Uncategorized/Profanity] UID:44623 Activity:nil |
10/1 Suppose the Iranians declared that it has launcheable nukes today
and that it is willing to use it if any Western power interferes,
what are some steps we can do to neutralize them?
\_ "neutralize" them. Let me guess, you're a big white dick and you
have the right to fuck whoever you please because you're a bad
ass American and you are free to fuck whoever you want.
\_ So, pussies may get mad at dicks once in a while, because
pussies get fucked by dicks. But dicks also fuck assholes
\_ Announce that we're going to saturation nuke them in 3 days to remove
the threat unless they disarm, and if the civilians don't take
matters into their own hands to remove the antagonistic leadership,
they assume complicity. Hope our missle defense works in case they
retaliate. Follow through.
\_ I wonder whether we'd have our first born-and-bred coup
\_ Enter detente just as we did with Soviet Union.
\_ Of course, they might just be pulling a Saddam trying to make
everyone think they have nukes when they really don't, to try to
goad an invasion--remember, the Iranian pres. actually believes he
needs to start a massive conflagration in order for the Mahdi to
return. |
| 2006/10/2-4 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia] UID:44624 Activity:moderate |
10/2 http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/9/20/141615.shtml Karl Rove says there will be an "October Surprise" to help GOP candidates. What do you think it is, and how effective do you think it will be? \_ Karl Rove is brilliant and understands that election is never about issues but instead, personal characters. Having that said, I will bet $50 that the October Surprise will most likely be reports of certain Democrats saying bad things about God, or going to prostitutes, having affairs with interns, or anything of that sort. The average American doesn't care about the number of deaths in Iraq or Iran having nukes. The average American cares more about Jacko molesting children and such. \_ This is absolutely true, but I would classify Rove as sociopathically brilliant, not generally brilliant. He's got the morals and ethics of a cockroach: survival/domination at any cost. \_ If he's a real sociopaths he'd know he's lying. But in reality he believes he has high morals and ethics. By supporting the R party he's getting rid of evil homosexual that's polluting America and such. So no, he's not a sociopath. He really believes in the righteous cause. \_ His stepfather, whom he considers his real father, is openly gay. Rove has never demonstrated an emotional reaction to any of the things that moral Republicans seem to object to. Also, sociopaths quite often describe themselves as highly moral or ethical people because they understand that other people seem to give them more if they do so. \_ I'm thinking "terrorist assassination attempt". For effect, Bush wrestles the guy to the ground shortly after his shirt is shredded by the guy's katana. Oh, did I mention the terrorist is also a ninja? Cuz he is. \_ A democratic rep will resign in disgrace after his emails and ims to a 16 year old male page are published, and the entire minority leadership who have been covering for him for years give up their leadership positions under massive pressure. Oh, wait... \_ Bombing Iran within five days of the election, combined with large-scale vote fraud. It'll work. \_ I predict that Karl Rove will admit that everything's his fault, that he was acting alone, and will then resign via a shotgun to the mouth. In mourning yet righteously angry at being deceived, Bush will sweep the GOP to victory by pulling out the troops. Oh, and NewsMax will feature a column by Rush on how nobody liked Rove anyway. \_ Bombing Iran within five days of the election, combined with large-scale vote fraud. It'll work. \_ Err...Watch the news much? \_ replace Condi with Baker as sec state? \_ They're going to use Fuax news to transmit Karl Rove's mind warping hypnotize beam to convince the entire country Mark Foley is really democrat. Foley is really democrat. It already worked to link Saddam Hussein to 9/11. |
| 2006/10/2-4 [Uncategorized] UID:44625 Activity:nil |
10/2 Republicans: You guys are K-SCREWED! HAHA AHA HAH HAA PWNNN!!!!1one
\_ but Karl Rove says there will be an "October Surprise"
\_ Help Congressman Mark Foley PROTECT OUR CHILDREN:
http://www.votervoice.net/groups/foley |
| 2006/10/2-4 [Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:44626 Activity:nil |
10/2 I'm not a big fan of Ah-nold. However, Angelides hasn't wowed me at
all. Is this because the Governator's campaign is strong or because
there's really just nothing there to Angelides? Please, give me some
reason to want to vote for this guy other than "He's not Ah-nold."
\_ Ah-nold is a Socialist, Angelides is a Communist.
\_ Angelides has no chance, it is sad.
\_ What's wrong with Arnold? My impression is he actually got
a lot done, other than his occasional sexist/insensitive
comments.
\_ R == EVIL. Didn't you learn that on your first day of school
at Cal?
\_ consensus is that Ah-nold was screwing himself while under
GOP guidance (this is when he took on the teachers/nurses/police/
fire), but Maria showed him what makes libural Kaleefornians
happy
\_ If we had governor elections every year, I think Ah-nold
would be fine. I'm just not sure I want him as governor in a
non-election year.
\_ There is nothing wrong w/ Ah-nold. He is a moderate who
can work w/ a diverse range of people to reach balanced
results.
\_ I voted for most of his special-election initiatives. I guess
I would be an (R). I don't vote (R) nationally because of
their bastarditude and idiotica but I respect the California
(R)s. The (D)s here exhibit the worst stereotype liberal
pandering behavior: "voting themselves largess out of the
public treasury" and bowing to unions. As for Arnold, he may
be goofy but he seems to have good interests at heart. He
appears less likely to be corrupt.
\_ You resepect california republicans? Are you saying you
think Arnold would have won a republican primary in
california? It seems to me that the only way you ended up
with a republican governer who is a moderate as opposed
to a "kill di messikans and gays" neandrathal is that
Arnold got to avoid the california GOP primary.
\_ Which Cali Rs are neanderthals? I haven't seen that kind
of thing. But then I haven't paid that much attention.
I am Ind. but I voted in the R primary after looking
at both parties. There might be some "taking our jerbs"
types but they seem marginal.
types but they seem marginal. Actually that would as
likely be a Dem/Union line. Not too many religious
nut Rs here in Cali.
\_ I thought that in the recall election debates, the two
who made the most sense were Camejo and McClintock. Damn
it.
\_ I'm not a fan of his policies, which seem to be centrist around
election time, but then wander further off in (imo) the wrong
direction |
| 2006/10/2-4 [Uncategorized] UID:44627 Activity:nil |
10/2 Dennis Hastert on the Mark Foley scandal:
"No one could have anticipated a breach of the Levis"
\_ LOL where's that from?
\_ Dennis Hastert, can't you read? Um, actually someone's comment
on dailykos. |
| 2006/10/2 [Uncategorized] UID:44628 Activity:nil |
10/2 Sigh. Censorship is so petty. |
| 2006/10/2-4 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44629 Activity:low |
10/2 http://movies.crooksandliars.com/Meet-the-Press-Condi-Iraq-war-9-11.wmv http://movies.crooksandliars.com/Meet-the-Press-Condi-Iraq-war-9-11.mov http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9684807 Re-post from last year: "But the fact of the matter is that when we were attacked on September 11, we had a choice to make. We could decide that the proximate cause was al-Qaeda and the people who flew those planes into buildings and, therefore, we would go after al-Qaeda and perhaps after the Taliban and then our work would be done ... Or we could take a bolder approach, ... go after the root causes of the kind of terrorism that was produced there, and that meant a different kind of Middle East. And there is no one who could have imagined a different kind of Middle East with Saddam Hussein still in power." Condi Rice is a fucking moron. \_ Just because you disagree with her she's a moron? You're a egomaniac. \_ well, let's put it this way: in your honest opinion, is her position moronic or !moronic? \_ I don't think it's moronic. And if you disagree I'd like to see why. -pp \_ idea = non-moronic (I agree with you to this extent). status of the idea after being evaluated for feasibility = should have been dead. eventual plan & execution = teh suck. long-term damage to American interests and lives affected = odious. Saying, "It was a good idea!" after piss-poor planning and execution and going with a non-feasible idea to begin with = moronic. IMO. I can see why people might disagree. \_ I agree with that analysis more or less. I think the idea is still good, but the current implementation sucks. -pp \_ The war on terror, war on drugs, war on poverty. What these have in common is that the steps needed to "win" are either non-existant ,undesirable, or the cure is worse than the disease. War on drugs: If we started executing all drug users and dealers the problem would eventually go away. poverty: European welfare state would remove almost all poverty. terror: I don't see any realistic way of getting there, but Bush has certainly done a good job to try and "lose" this war. |
| 2006/10/2 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:44630 Activity:nil 66%like:44631 |
10/2 http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,217119,00.html "And when he asked me to be secretary of state, I said, 'I think maybe - maybe you need new people.'" -Sec State Rice, after Dubya's 2004 re-election, on her offer to leave the administration |
| 2006/10/2-4 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:44631 Activity:nil 66%like:44630 |
10/2 http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,217119,00.html "And when he asked me to be secretary of state, I said, 'I think maybe - maybe you need new people.'" -Sec State Rice, on her offer to leave the administration \_ I really, really find this hard to believe given the eagerness with which she accepted the SecState position. I think she'd always wanted to be SecState. \_ she was eager to accept the sec state position? |
| 2006/10/2-5 [Recreation/Dating] UID:44632 Activity:kinda low |
`10/1 So what exactly happened between that perverted 53-year old guy and
the school girls in Colorado? Did he simply fondle their breasts?
Were the girls fully undressed? Did they have oral sex? Did they
have intercourse, and did they use lubricants or any other forms
of protection?
\_ Sorry, but what sort of twisted curiosity is impelling these
questions?
\_ trolling perchance?
\_ How about you send a SASE to the local PD there in CO and ask
them to send you the full report and your interest in it?
"CA Man Questioned By FBI In CO Shooting Case".
\_ One of the hostages, Lynna Long, told the Rocky Mountain News that
she was groped above the waist but believes Emily "got it worse."
Lynna said that she was afraid to look, "but you could hear Emily
saying, `No. Please don't."'
Lynna said all the girls had been told to stand facing a wall, and
she could not see what Morrison was doing, but she knew the other
girls were being molested because "you could hear the rustling of
clothes and elastic being snapped and zippers being opened and
closed."
\_ Hm, isn't it kind of hard to rape when you're standing?
\_ Ok thanks a lot. That is exactly what I didn't need to read
right after lunch. Or any other time.
\_ then he shot all 10 girls at close range, at least five of
them in the head. Five are still alive - all but one are in
critical condition.
\_ There's no way he could have had cum more than one time in that
short a time period, so I'm guessing he only had sex with one
of them and just fingerbanged the others.
\_ You must be the same guy who wanted the Girls Gone Wild date rape
video. |
| 2006/10/2-4 [Uncategorized] UID:44633 Activity:nil |
10/2 Bugzilla, Mantis, or SugarCRM?
\_ Trac
\_ AthenaRMS
\_ Ooh, not the same thing, and $500 + $35 per seat isn't desirable. |
| 2006/10/2-4 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton] UID:44634 Activity:kinda low |
10/2 Michael Scheuer (former head of the bin Laden unit) calls Clinton a
flat-out liar.
http://newsbusters.org/node/8034 (transcript and video clip)
Last week, he also criticized Clinton's interview with Wallace (which
Harry Smith of CBS was a bit flustered about):
http://newsbusters.org/node/7871 (transcript and video clip)
\_ i guess scheuer's views of the truth were insufficient to be
included in the 9/11 report. anyway, the report said Clinton had
a "capture or kill" policy, and left it up to CIA (Tenet) to
determine whether "capture" was feasible, and if not, the memo
gave permission to kill.
also note that the first opportunity to kill bin Ladin that Scheuer
cites is one in which well over 200 innocent bystanders were
estimated to have been killed, and that later intelligence appeared
to show that bin Ladin left before the strike would have occurred.
\_ The report was a political product. I'm sure there's a fair
amount of truth in it but you'll never get the whole truth from
a public report like that. Which is not to say that this guy
is in any way honest or truthful. I know nothing about him.
But being included or excluded from the 9/11 commission report
is insufficient to question his credibility. --DA
\_ Maybe he's been hanging out with Orson Scott Card,
Mr. "When Clinton Attempted to Kill Bin Laden, it was
Tryanny, but when Bush attempted it, it was awesome!!!!"
\_ actually, he is in the report, as "Mike". Search for
"wikipedia" in the first newsbusters link. |
| 2006/10/2-4 [Uncategorized] UID:44635 Activity:nil |
10/2 What language is this (it was in a spam (I think) I received):
"Andreia deixou um recado para voce"
\_ Portuguese, says http://languid.cantbedone.org
\_ Yes, this is Portuguese.
\_ cool website. |
| 2006/10/2-4 [Computer/Networking] UID:44636 Activity:nil |
10/2 My brother who lives in the city wants to get DSL. What are some
good yet inexpensive DSL providers in SF? Thanks.
\_ http://Sonic.net or Cyberonic.
\_ Cyberonic support has pretty much disappeared since they
moved from worldcom dsl lines. I've had number of cases when
I was down for several days at a time, and no personal contact
can be made. I'm now a happy http://sonic.net customer. But if your
brother's not a geek and don't need static IP, he can go with
pretty much any SBC/AT&T reseller(and sonic's one of them.)
\_ I agree re Cyberonic's customer support. It is almost
non-existent. If your Cyberonic line works right the
first time, then you will not have problems. If it
doesn't work, then you are better off canceling the
line and going w/ someone else b/c Cyberonic will
not help you debug the problem.
I was a long time Sonic customer and I really liked
them. The ONLY reason I switched was b/c Sonic was
not offering a 6Mbps line at an affordable price.
I'm not sure if that has changed. If it has I would
would probably switch back. |
| 2006/10/2-4 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:44637 Activity:nil |
10/2 I knew somehow the Scientologists were involved
in this Foley business:
http://forums.dailyrotten.com/920/00022854/_index.html#287052 |
| 2006/10/2-4 [Computer/SW/OS/OsX] UID:44638 Activity:nil |
10/2 Anyone play online poker for money? Which site provides safest/stable
gameplay on OSX?
\_ You've got a week or two before online gambling is made illegal in
the US. Enjoy it. |
| 7/12 |