Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2007:November:26 Monday <Tuesday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
2007/11/26-29 [Academia/Berkeley/CSUA/Motd, Academia/Berkeley/CSUA/Troll] UID:48689 Activity:high
11/25   HYPOTHETICAL QUESTION:  Pretend I live in Berkeley and have
        several roommates.  One roommate, we'll call her Danielle,
        thinks another roommate, we'll call him Umberto, is smoking
        pot in his room.  She calls the Berkeley PD and asks for advice.
        The Berkeley PD says they'll stop by on Monday and search
        Umberto's room.  Danielle says, well gosh golly, I thought
        pot law enforcement was a low priority in Berkeley!  The
        Berkeley PD say no ma'am, we still enforce The Law, I am shocked
        you would think such a thing, we'll be over in the morning to
        search this miscreant Umberto's room.  Their long suffering
        other roommate, "George", I mean me, doesn't want the po-po
        anywhere near the house, because he remembers when a certain
        Sodan got raided by the Berkeley PD and they snatched all of
        his computers as evidence.  "George" also thinks the landlords would
        not appreciate the cops running around their house. So when the
        cops show up and Danielle says "Why come on in good sirs,
        Umberto resides upstairs!" and I I mean "George" says
        COME BACK WITH A WARRANT, who do the police obey?  thanks.
        \_ Who's Britney and what happened to Danielle?  Are you on something?
        \_ Danielle, or any legal resident who invites them in.
           \_ what if Umberto locks his bedroom door?  Do the "police"
              "break the door in"?
              \_ IANAL, and my friend is not a cop (anymore), but it is my
                 understanding that the officers would have PC to search the
                 "common areas" but not a room with a shut door, nor your
                 PC even if in plain view if the alleged crime was smoking
                 pot. Close the door to your room, just in case.
           \_ Hello. you may wish to read Georgia v. Randolph, 126 S.Ct.
              1515 (2006):
              Under Randolph, consent to a warrantless search given by one
              occupant is invalid if another physically present occupant
              refuses to give consent.
              So, if D says "come in" and G says "get a warrant," the BPD
              probably could not conduct a constitutionally valid search
              w/o obtaining a warrant because G, an occupant, was physically
              present and refused to give consent. [if you are really faced
              w/ this situation, do not rely on the above, please consult
              an actual attorney]
              \_ !!! Well-spotted! G, this is yet another great reason to
                 consult a lawyer if this becomes an issue.
              \_ That's interesting and new.  I know prior to that, if one
                 occupant gave consent, that was all that was required.
                 \_ This is not correct. Prior to Randolph, only some
                    states held consent of one occupant was sufficient.
                    \_ I live in CA.  The OP lives in CA.  Other states can
                       have whatever barbaric laws they like.
        \_ Seems like Umberto could just remove the pot!
           \_ He did.  I don't think I can call the "berkeley PD" and say
              oh so sorry, the pot is gone, no need for you to raid my
              home, ok tnx.
                \_ You said "ok tnx" but you are not psb.
        \_ Is "Danielle" hot?
           \_ shut up, motd boob guy
              \_ So she has nice boobs?
                 \_ who are you?  i'm gonna get you.
                    \_ Why? Is she your gf or something?
        \_ oh hey when the "berkeley PD" is here, can i ask them to search
           "Danielle"'s room?  - "George"
        \_ Berkeley police tend to be pretty good about civil liberties,
           especially if you are a student.  Close your door, be around when
           the police show up, and kick Danielle out as soon as possible.
           \_ I dunno, I'd kick the jerk out who's stinking up the house with
              with pot smoke.
              \_ And lose a connection? Do you know what pot is selling for
                 these days?
2007/11/26-30 [Computer/Companies/Google] UID:48690 Activity:kinda low
11/26   GOOG closes at exactly 666 points.
        \_ The stock of the beast?
           \_ The Metal Apocalypse has begun!
        \_ I thought the motd was full of atheists and computer scientists not
           bible codists and numerologists.
           \_ You missed the Kabbalists and Mormons.
              \_ We have Kabbalists here?  That's kinda cool.
        \_ Where's Short GOOG at 666 Guy?
        \_ The stars are aligned and oil price is peaking. ALL the
           signs are here. The oil-based economy is coming to a
           halt and GLOBAL RECESSION IS COMING.         -recession swami
           \_ Let's assume oil peaked 2 years ago.  There's still a shit load
              of oil left in the ground.  A lot of the current over-pricing is
              just gouging and lack of refinery capacity.  To say the global
              recession is coming is true but only because of business cycles,
              not because of anything your has 'revealed' to you.
              Motd nutters, I love you guys but really, the world is not ending
              on the Mayan calendar date.
              \_ Nostradamus, Mayans, and Edgard predicted the end of the
                 world at year 2012
                 \_ Nostradamus predicts 3797.
                 \_ Actually the Mayans only said it was the end of that age
                    and the start of the next.  Like December 31st is not
                    the end of time on our calendar, just $year++.
                    \_ I DID NOT KNOW THAT from watching History Channel
                       special END OF DAYS.  damn liberal media.  oh hey
                       still haven't gotten laid.
           \_ i thought it was going to be a consumer-led recession with
              foreclosure, no-home-equity effects, ARM adjustment, capital
              ratios, and deleveraging dominating
2007/11/26-30 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48691 Activity:high
11/26  (Washington Times)
        Islamic terrorists target Army base -- in Arizona
        "Fort officials changed security measures after sources warned that
        possibly 60 Afghan and Iraqi terrorists were to be smuggled into the
        U.S. through underground tunnels with high-powered weapons to attack
        the Arizona Army base, according to multiple confidential law
        enforcement documents obtained by The Washington Times."
        \_ It's also possible an army of elephant commandos has been training
           in the amazon for generations to wipe humanity off the face of
           the earth and get back at us for those damn pianos.  (Hint, the
           Washington Times is one step removed from The Star but with More
           \_ I've been reading Sara Carter's stuff since before she was with
              the times.  She's a good reporter.  And while I might accuse a
              major paper of spin (I'm looking at you NYTimes), I wouldn't
              reject it as a basic record of fact.  I'm sorry you reject news
              sources that don't fit your agenda. -op
              \_ You just accused the New York Times of spin.  It's had some
                 pretty blatant failures of editorial control, e.g. Jason
                 Blair, Judith Miller, and it is not without bias, but to
                 claim that it spins stories is stretching it a bit, don't you
                 think? -dans
                 \_ No.  Not at all.  PP was kind to the NYT.  --someone else
                    \_ How so?  Care to cite an example of egregious spin in a
                       news story on the part of the NYT? -dans
                       \_ Pick up a copy.  They used to have the news pages
                          read reasonably straight and kept the editorials to
                          the op/ed page.  No more and not for many years.
                          IMO it changed sometime in the mid 90s.  Now the
                          NYT is unreadable.  I used to read it cover to cover
                          every day.
                          \_ If it's so bad, it should be easy to provide one
                             example.  Please cite one. -dans
                             \_ It is, and if it was anyone else asking, I'd
                                provide examples.
                                \_ The Plaintiff rests. -dans
                          \_ Are you the same guy asking for proof that the
                             Washington Times is biased?
                             \_ No.  All newspapers are biased.  I don't need
                                proof of that.
                                \_ Everything is biased.  An interesting
                                   question to ponder is what would lack of
                                   bias even look like. -- ilyas
              \_ Do you read Front Page Mag and NewsMax and consider them
                 "sources of fact" as well?
                 \_ I get all my truth from Kos and DU.
           \_ UPI picked it up--do you distrust them too?
              \_ UPI and Washington Times have the same owner, dumbfuck.
                 \_ Didn't know that, pottymouth.
                    \_ Then we can safely ignore your opinion on media sources.
                       \_ Do you have any evidence at all that the owner has
                          had a negative influence on the truthfulness of the
                          stories they publish?  Or you just hate the owner
                          and assume?
                          \_ "Fifteen years ago, when the world was
                             adrift on the stormy waves of the Cold
                             War, I established The Washington Times
                             to fulfill God's desperate desire to save
                             this world."  --Rev Sun Yung Moon
                             \_ That's nice.  Do you have any evidence that
                                the owner has had a negative influence at all
                                or you just hate the owner?
                                \_ That quote is evidence.  Do you have any
                                   counterevidence.  Don't be disingenuous, it
                                   defeats the purpose of discussion.  Hint:
                                   the goal is not to win the argument, the
                                   goal is to maybe learn something. -dans, !pp
                                   \_ A quote is not evidence that the owner
                                      has had any effect.  Hint: the goal is
                                      not to win the argument, the goal is to
                                      maybe learn something.  I'm still
                                      waiting for any evidence, not innuendo,
                                      that their news is negatively influenced
                                      by their owner no matter how nutty he
                                      may be.
                                      \_ Evidence: They're reporting complete
                                         nonsense about immigrant terrorists.
                                         And they report complete nonsense
                                         all the time.  And their owner
                                         says so.  Why would the Moonies
                                         be dumping billions of dollars
                                         into this paper if not to push
                                         their own agenda?  The prima
                                         facie evidence is that it's a paper
                                         run by nutjobs with an agenda.  -tom
                                         \_ Several papers have been busted
                                            in recent years publishing flat
                                            out incorrect stories or even lies.
                                            This is the only one moonie owned.
                                            Correlation != causation and all
                                      \_ I'm not sure how you parse intent as
                                         innuendo.  Intent is not rock-solid,
                                         slam-dunk evidence, but it is,
                                         nonetheless, evidence.  Seriously,
                                         quit being a douche. -dans
                                         \_ Thank you for bringing this
                                            discussion to a new low.  It is
                                            responses like this that turn me
                                            off from bothering to try to give
                                            you researched respones to your
                                            queries such as the NYT one above
                                            because you're just not mature
                                            enough to have this sort of
                                            discussion.  You called me a
                                            douche, because you got frustrated
                                            that I wouldn't just back down
                                            because you're pushy and unwilling
                                            to support your claims in any real
                                            way.  This isn't HS or a freshman
                                            dorm chat.  "Douche", indeed.
                                            \_ Blah blah blah, wah, wah.  Let
                                               me translate pp's post for the
                                               audience at home: "I can't argue
                                               my point on merit so I'll
                                               politely dodge the issue,
                                               refuse to provide evidence for
                                               my points, and say my
                                               opponent's evidence 'doesn't
                                               count', all while pretending to
                                               participate in the discussion
                                               in good faith.  But if the
                                               opposition bluntly calls me on
                                               my shit, and points out that I
                                               am being a disingenuous
                                               fuckhead, then the opposition
                                               is being juvenile." -dans
                          \_ "The Washington Times will become the
                             instrument in spreading the truth about
                             God to the world." --ibid
                             \_ As above, same question.
                          \_ Other than that they have about 50 people total
                             staff, no original reporting, and mainly put out
                             short summaries of stories from other "sources"
                             that are nearly always, dunh da dunh, the
                             Washington Times?  Nope.  You suck at this game.
                             \_ No original reporting?  Sara Carter has done
                                some of the best investigative reporting I've
                                \_ I was clearly speaking specifically about
                                   UPI.  You really really suck at this game.
                                   \_ Clear to who? It wasn't clear to me. -!pp
                                      \_ Then you're an idiot too, but I doubt
                                         you're !pp.
                                         \_ Oh, you're crazy, that explains a
                                   \_ Crystal clear to me.  Do you read?  Can
                                      you read?  Do you have thumbs?  SHOW ME
                                      YOUR THUMBS!!! -dans
                                \_ Can you give me some specific examples? Now
                                   I am curious, what a motd-rightwinger thinks
                                   is an example of good reporting. -!pp
                                   I am curious to see what a motd-rightwinger
                                   thinks is an example of good reporting. -!pp
            \_ Let's just say that if the Washington Times is the originating
               source they have a pretty high burden of proof.  That article
               had absolutly nothing to back itself up.  I'll wait till I see
               something real before giving it any cred whatsoever.
               \_ What media sources do you give 'cred' to when they publish
                  poorly sourced stories?
                  \_ The Economist, the IHT, maybe WashPo, WSJ news pages before
                     it became a Murdoch tool. -!pp
                  \_ The Economist, the IHT, maybe WashPo, WSJ news pages
                     before it became a Murdoch tool. -!pp
                     before it became a Murdoch tool. How about you? -!pp
                     \_ You give 'cred' to the WaPo?  Wow....
                        \_ What do you give 'cred' to? WashPo is the largest
                           source of unsourced articles, because of the way
                           Washington DC works. Often you cannot get good
                           inside the beltway news any other way. WashPo is
                           also politically moderate, more or less. I am not
                           saying it is perfect, but it is a much better than
                           average newspaper. Not in the same league as the
                           others I listed though.
                           \_ I don't give free 'cred' to any media source.
                              If you're not sourced you're no better than
                              Drudge.  I read Drudge.  I find him amusing.
                              He sometimes even gets a story right.  That
                              doesn't mean he has any credibility.
                              \_ All of those sources have a better track
                              \_ All of those papers have a better track
                                 record then Drudge.
                     \_ I'm not a regular WSJ reader, but I generally respect
                        the news pages.  I'm not ready to write it off just
                        because Murdoch purchased it, but am definitely
                        waiting to see what happens.  My list also includes
                        the New York Times, The Economist, and the Christian
                        Science Monitor. -dans
         \- if you are going to bother to infiltrate the US, isnt it kind of
            odd to go after a "hard target" like an AZ army base.
            \_ Not if it has intel info you want.  Sounds like a better
               target than Walmart, dont you think?  And better PR value, too.
           "FBI: Widely reported terrorist threat to Fort Huachuca unfounded"
           As noted, the Washington Times has zero credibility.  -tom
           \_ Oh, so you trust the FBI more than the Times?  Okay then.
              \_ Yeah, the FBI has real incentive to downplay terrorist
                 threats, because, uh, well, no they don't.  -tom
2007/11/26-29 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48692 Activity:nil
11/25   Is Waterboarding torture? (The Week)
        \_ Apparently, Tasers are.  At that point, anything is torture.
           \_ The USSC said tasers are torture? When did they say that?
              \_ No, SCOTUS didn't say that. Google the news for tasers and
           \_ Tasers can be torture.  When police use tasers one a restrained
              subject, as punishment, they are using tasers as torture
                \_ In this same vein, so are car batteries, hammers,
                   \_ Umm, those are regularly used as torture devices.
                      Or would you be happy if police regularly smashed
                      people in the hand with a hammer for not doing what
                      they say?
              \_ So when a prisoner is escorted to court with a taser belt, and
                 it's used to zap him if he gets out of line, you'd say it's a
                 torture device?
                 \_ If it is used to zap him if he attacks someone, probably
                    not.  If it is used to make someone do something that
                    could be done without the use of pain, yes, it is
                    torture.  And that's what tasers have become to some
                    law enforcement, ways of getting people to kowtow
                    instantly.  That's torture.
                    \_ I thought torture was inflicting pain to get
                       information, not to get them to comply.  What about
                       beating someone with batons if they won't fall in line?
                       \_ That's pretty obvious torture.  It's part of ruling
                          by fear.  And it is what our police departments are
                          rapidly becoming, forces of fear.
                          \_ It is not torture the way the Geneva Convention
                             defines torture. There has to be a lot more to
                             it than that, like permanent damage.
                             \_ This is not a testable distinction if you
                                include psychological damage. -- ilyas
2007/11/26-30 [Politics/Domestic/Gay] UID:48693 Activity:low
11/26   What is the real reason Trent Lott resigned? Is he actually gay? (rumor site)
        \_ I'm really sorry that the shit didn't hit the fan if he
           actually quit because he's gay.  I want the conservatives
           demoralized as they find each of their champions to be shown
           to be lying hypocrites.
        \_ Because he was in office for 34 years which is about 28 years
           too many for any Senator, IMO?
           \_ You mean about 34 year too long?
              \_ No.  I mean 28.  I'm not an anarchist.  I think one or two
                 terms is enough for any politician.  I know that's a naive
                 concept these days but there it is.
2007/11/26-30 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48694 Activity:nil
11/26   Dang, that bride is fugly (Iraq: terror suspects caught in wedding)
        \_ I think she's a man.
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2007:November:26 Monday <Tuesday>