| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 5/16 |
| 2008/5/22-23 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:50024 Activity:nil |
5/22 http://tinyurl.com/3h2zvh (market-ticker.denninger.net) Good post re current events in commodity, treasury, and stock markets. To summarize: - The Fed balance sheet is contaminated with CDOs - Money is going into commodities rather than Treasuries - Rates are going up Several more points: - Expect the commodity bubble to drive inflation in the near term. - The commodity and equity bubbles will sweep up excess credit from bad banking practices. The subsequent blow-up (occurring over 3-12 months for the undesired chaotic crash, or 1-10 years for a controlled descent) will efficiently sop up this cash. - Guess who loses their bux on: (1) The building up of the commodity bubble (2) The reduction of said bubble http://www.thislife.org/Radio_Episode.aspx?episode=355 Excellent radio segment (.mp3) which talks about "giant pool of money" and where it goes (guess where this money is going now) \_ What's the difference between a CDO and a mortgage backed security? \_ MBS = Pool of mortgages. One structure is rated (e.g., all shares from an MBS are given a single rating, i.e., AAA). CDO = Pool of MBSs. Structure is sliced into different levels, each of which may have a different price and rating. each of which has a different price and rating. The lower tranches will have the lowest rating and eat any losses first, but have the highest yield. losses first, but advertise the highest yield. MBS and CDOs are both asset-backed securities (ABS). Now go listen to the MP3 and find out how Joe Schmoe was raking in $1M/year. \_ Funny how this guy rants and rails about Congress and does not mention the word "President Bush" even once. Where is our nations leadership during this time of financial crises? Oh, and what you call a "commodities bubble" I call the market functioning normally to get supply and demand in balance. Do you have any evidence that excess oil is starting to pile up anywhere? Copper? Coal? If prices are "too high" shouldn't that be happening? \_ He's a Republican who is likely to vote Democrat in November. Here's his anti-Republican rant from four days ago: http://tinyurl.com/5dsp98 "Commodities bubble" = (a) Hedge on the stock and bond markets (b) Huge pool of money needs to go somewhere (c) Certainly there is a supply/demand factor to commodities prices (d) Hedge on strength of U.S. economy, financial system, dollar He rants and rails? Okay. Good thing I'm here to summarize! |
| 2008/4/16-23 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton] UID:49762 Activity:nil |
4/16 Funny (and yes, totally biased, I get it, mmmmmkay) guide to
conservative blogosphere
http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0816,a-confederacy-of-dunces,411897,1.html/full
\_ "I even got my own Tom Tomorrow cartoon! The jagged yellow spikes
must be caused by all of that evil."
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/29635_Village_Voice_Savages_Righty_Blogs
\_ Epic fail. |
| 2008/4/9-12 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:49708 Activity:nil |
4/9 Hypothesis: for any given topic, roughly 20% of Americans will have
an incredibly ill-informed or ridiculous opinion.
\_ Agreed.
\_ Yes.
\_ Exactly.
\_ Me, too.
\_ No, you're wrong!
\_ Which 20% of the above responses?
\_ Last I saw, something like 16% believe the US gov't was involved in
9/11.
\_ No it was the Jews and the Neocons, according to the UN Human
Rights Commission: http://www2.nysun.com/article/74465 |
| 2008/4/4-9 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/SIG] UID:49669 Activity:nil |
4/4 ACLU: Defending American's Enemies
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/32758.html
\_ Why not ask the ACLU about it?
http://aclu.org/safefree/detention/johnadams.html |
| 2008/3/14-17 [Politics/Domestic, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:49455 Activity:nil |
3/14 Creatures Clone Selves in Face of Danger - Yahoo! News:
http://www.csua.org/u/l18
How is this different from asexual reproduction? |
| 2008/3/12-13 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:49436 Activity:high 80%like:49431 |
3/12 Spitzer's Kristen, 5'5" 105lbs revealed. Don't drool!
http://www.pagesix.com/story/spitzer+s+hooker+revealed
\_ ANOREXIA!!!
\_ No way is that woman 105 pounds.
\_ How about this one:
http://img219.imageshack.us/my.php?image=sportbikebabe4cx4.jpg
I'm guessing 5'5" 100lbs.
\_ More like 115-120.
\_ Depends on how tall she is. 115-120 is not thin for a
woman who is 5'2". More like 95-100. Models are
usually about 5'9" 120.
\_ Well look at the MOTORCYCLE!!! The in-seam height
of a CBR600RR is about 32-32.5". Extrapolate, and
you'll get the actual height. I can't do it now
because I'm at work.
\_ http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/13/nyregion/12cnd-kristen.html
\_ Liberal new york times.
\_ You crack me up. So, when the NYT reports the biggest scandal
of the moment, and it happens to be to a hypocrite Dem, that
means they're not Liberal? Or what does your post mean?
\_ http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/0312084kristen1.html
\_ Wait he paid $5K a trip for her? WTF I wouldn't pay over
$285/session for this woman. I can get better looking
women for only $300-500/session.
\_ Why do you go to hookers?
\_ C? Looks more like a B to me.
\_ Some of us have seen real breasts. That's a nice full C in that
photo.
\_ My ex had D and my wife has A. I've seen and touched them
countless times. IMHO the ones in the pic look closer to A
than to D. So I guessed they're B. -- PP
\_ So in other words you have very little boob experience. |
| 2008/3/11-13 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President] UID:49416 Activity:high |
3/10 Motd poll! Spitzer should:
Resign and go away: .
Stay and fight: .
Legalize prostitution: ..
Stay and post a picture of Kristen, 5'5" 105lbs: ..
Encourage call-girls and clients to fly to LV: ..
\_ mmmm.. destroy families, legally ruin the lives of more
young girls, make a few more movies like pretty woman to
give them a positive role model.
\_ Large scale prositution exists now. But because it
is illegal and unregulated it is much nastier. Illegal
immagrent sex slaves and pimps are the sort of
thing that regulation would drive way down. (Not to
other risks involved with the occupation.) Yes it
might offended your delicate sensabilities, but making
consenual activities illegal never helps.
\_ Someone thinks prostitution is bad, call them a prude,
declare victory! *laugh* It is hard to argue with
your "logic".
\_ actually it looks like he made a number of
substantive points that you ignored.
\_ Uh huh... poster's "substantive points":
1: fighting crime is hard. ignoring it is easy.
2: making crimes illegal makes them worse.
3: making crimes legal makes bad people stop
doing those things.
4: you're a prude so nyah! send in the hookers!
Which of these is a substantive point?
And how many of my points did the person reply
to vs. ignore? 2 were serious, 1 was tongue in
cheek. *all* ignored. Carry on.
\_ Trust the INVISIBLE HAND!
Stay and post a picture of Kristen, 5'5" 105lbs: ..
RIDE BIKE: ...
Lie low until the furor settles down: .
\_ RIDE BIKE so he becomed impotent, thereby removing the problem?
\_ I can't be bothered to learn the details of this case. Can anyone
summarize the salient points? So this guy hired a prostitute,
anything else?
\_ Apparently he transported her across state lines, which makes it
a federal offense.
\_ Did he? I thought he just mailed some money across state
lines. That is also a federal offence though.
\_ He also prosecuted others for doing exactly what he just
got caught doing when he was AG.
\_ "planning to meet a prostitute in Washington after arranging
for her to travel from New York."
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aQB02sFNJ0Jg&refer=home
First link I got off google news.
\_ "planning to meet a prostitute in Washington after
arranging for her to travel from New York."
First link I got off google news. With
"spitzer prostitute across state line" |
| 2008/2/28-3/4 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:49289 Activity:nil |
2/28 Obama says, "if al qaeda is forming a base in Iraq" during the debate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYny5GJj6_Y
But here he says he knows al qaeda is in Iraq
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQK0LLbXApo
\_ dur, his answer was taken out of context. he said that in reponse
to what he would do about going back into Iraq. |
| 2008/2/27-3/4 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Israel] UID:49272 Activity:nil |
2/27 Tennessee GOP slimes Obama for being a Jew-hater, or supported by
Jew-haters, or....something. Expect to see a lot, lot more of this.
http://www.tngop.org/wordpress/?p=113
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/tennessee_gop_smears_obama_wit.php |
| 2008/2/22-26 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:49214 Activity:nil |
2/22 House GOP plaigarizes new season of 24:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cY9iXX1fT3A
\_ Dude this is awsome!
\_ Yeah, they've got the Jerry Bruckheimer vote in the bag.
\_ key word: usually |
| 2008/1/28-2/2 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic] UID:49020 Activity:nil |
1/28 Humans Force Earth into New Geologic Epoch - Yahoo! News:
http://www.csua.org/u/kld |
| 5/16 |
| 2008/1/11-16 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:48932 Activity:nil |
1/11 OSC horrified by ham-handed presidential candidates' responses to
Bhutto's assassination.
http://www.ornery.org/essays/warwatch/2007-12-30-1.html
\- i'll limit my reply to "benazir bhutto has 3 not 2 children."
ok one more thing: fatmia bhutto is not unattractive. |
| 2007/12/19-29 [Reference/BayArea, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:48840 Activity:kinda low |
12/19 An inconvenient truth for SF http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/12/18/BA24U044B.DTL \_ I thought this was going to be about the high murder rate. "Between March 2004 and August 2005, a relatively small group of people - just 362 individuals - accounted for 3,869 ambulance trips to the hospital." Jeebus! \_ Yes, when Regan threw the mentally ill out on the street they clogged up the medical system. Unfotunetly people refuse to actually treat the mentally insane and instead they tie up emergency services because crazy homeless people are generally a fucking mess and need assistance. Think of it as yet another reason we need a reasonable health care system. \_ I think we just need to eliminate the mentally ill like the Spartans used to. No need to have that in the gene pool. It's a tough stance, sure, but those people are never going to get well and they are probably miserable being alive anyway. \_ Why is this inconvenient? It sounds like a good place for some improved public policy, though. \_ He's trying to link people who love al gore and his global warming movie with homeless street bums in SF. a bit of a reach \_ At what point would you tell your emergency crews 'this person has had too many calls, leave them lying there in the street' ? \_ So I know doctors swear the Hippocratic Oath, do nurses or paramedics take a similar oath? If so, to tell emergency crews to leave someone would put them in a pretty unreasonable and untenable ethical position. -dans \_ I would probably never do that, but I think The City should start enforcing some of its "drunk in public" laws and get these guys locked up, sobered up and in rehab. -SF liberal \_ My point being, you can't be telling your emergency responders to ignore calls. ever. The best you can do is find a way to punish those abusing the system. \_ You can't rehab someone who doesn't want to be hab'd. (Or, doesn't care enough to put in the effort.) \_ No, but you can lock those people up. I say bring back the psych hospitals. -SF (maybe not so) liberal \_ Why not just make "chronic ambulance abuse" a crime and eventually jail them? I dunno, is there a solution? \_ Huh, this explains a lot of what happened to be about 6mo ago. I got woken up at about 3am by some dude moaning in the park across the street. When I finally figured out what it was, I thought about going back to sleep, but eventually called the non-emergency cop line instead. They came and said, "Is that you Jesse?" Then they radioed in an ambulance. I kinda figured they just called the ambulance because they didn't want to have to haul his fat butt into a patrol car, and didn't want him puking in there anyway. This was in Livermore. |
| 2007/11/26-30 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48691 Activity:high |
11/26 http://csua.org/u/k2n (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 Moonie.) \_ 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 that. \_ 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 seen. \_ 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 lot. \_ 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. \_ http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/hourlyupdate/213456.php "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 |
| 2007/11/5-8 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:48552 Activity:nil |
11/5 Here's more of that Hillary picture. I remember I saw it first on
somethingawful. I still don't know the context.
http://pinkdome.com/archives/2007/04/caption_this_pi_69.html |
| 2007/11/5-14 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:48535 Activity:moderate |
11/4 Yes, Virginia, waterboarding is torture:
http://www.csua.org/u/jwk (WashPo)
\_ This article makes me extremely angry. Why is Bush still
in office? Why haven't the criminals responsible for allowing,
and administering waterboarding been put on trial?
\_ What about the invasion of Iraq and misrepresentation of
"intelligence" about wmd? Waterboarding isn't high on my
list of shits to give about.
\_ I'm angry about that too, but this is a black/white
issue that cannot be spun and clearly indicts the
Administration and the criminals running it.
\_ Where's the impeachment?
\_ Regardless of definitions, I want waterboarding to be used on
suspected terrorists.
\_ I suspect you of being a terrorist, can I have you waterboarded
now?
\_ What sort of ratio of innocent suspects to actual terrorists
is acceptable to you? How many innocents are you willing
to have wake up screaming every night from having been
tortured on a waterboard to catch one terrorist? What if
there are effective alternatives to torture? What if
waterboarding elicits incorrect confessions & info 95% of
the time? What then? I happen to think that the US should
not be in the atrocity business even if defending ourselves.
\_ Presumably we're talking about people with a known history
of blowing up innocent people, not some geek pulled off
the street for having an 'impeach bush/cheney' bumper
sticker. If we lived in that sort of society you'd already
be in a re-education camp.
\_ "The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one
spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is
against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed,
and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is
to be stopped at all." -H. L. Mencken
\_ Yes scoundrels like mass murderers. We heavily
enforce those laws in this country. Seriously, I don't
see how your quote applies in this case. You want to
treat foreign terrorists like they're common criminals
when in fact they're been at war for decades, you just
didn't notice. I feel like making the obHitler UN
War Trials @The_Hague reference.
\_ The quote applies like this: you don't _know_ who
is a terrorist and who is not. Few people would
consider it unjust to torture murderers, but it's a
short step from there to torturing _suspected_
murderers to get confessions, and then we're all in
danger of getting arrested at four in the morning.
If you can prove to me (or even a panel of judges
with Top Secret clearance) that an individual is a
terrorist and that this individual has info that
will prevent another 9/11, then you might, *might*
have a case for using torture to get that
information. Until we're at that stage, the very
idea of torturing should be dismissed. Also, this
idea of yours that because they think they're at war
with us we should abandon the principles on which
our society is based is alarmist and baseless.
More efficient organization of the information that
we had already gathered could have prevented 9/11,
so it's not our principles or ethics that must
change, it's what we do with what we already have.
\_ I don't see random people getting dragged off
the street. You're being alarmist. As far as
our Founding Fathers goes, you'd be hard
pressed to find an angel among the lot. What
they wrote did not align with how they acted,
especially compared to today's standards. I
also dispute your contention that we already
had everything we needed to know to stop 9/11.
Are you going to say the lone FBI hero out in
podunk knew and if only we'd listened to her...?
They get a zillion threats and leads every day.
Hers was just one more with no particular reason
at the time to put resources into it.
\_ Presidential Daily Briefing:
"Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US"
August 6, 2001
\_ The 9/11 Commission disagrees with you.
Our civil society is based mightily on
the ideas of due process, regardless of
the characters of our FF. Some of the Gitmo
detainees were dragged off the street:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/34fteo (AP via
Salon).
\_ Someone with a "known history of blowing up innocent
people" is not a suspected terrorist, they are a terrorist.
Do you know who we have been waterboarding? Many of them
have been totally random schmucks who just got picked up
for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
\_ Who? Are you saying Jose Padilla is a totally random
schmuck and he got water boarded? Someone else?
\_ Maher Arar
\_ He's a Canadian citizen. Everything that befell
him was a result of Canada's RCMP's intel failure.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0919/dailyUpdate.html
Got any American citizens dragged off the street
and tortured by the Bush admin?
\_ What I do have is an administration that
refuses to agree that it WON'T EVER drag
American citizens off the street and, umm,
interrogate them using enhanced methods.
Frankly I think that Padilla was tortured,
and the Bush admin. fought taking that to
trial for as long as possible.
\_ Oh, I see. It is okay to toture innocent
Canadians.
\_ I like to waterboard sometimes, but I don't swim that well so
I only do it when the surf is calm. |
| 2007/10/31-11/2 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48498 Activity:nil |
10/31 Ex-CIA analyst Larry Johnson on one reason for intelligence failures
http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2007/oct/30/one_reason_for_intelligence_failures |
| 2007/10/20-24 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:48394 Activity:nil |
10/19 Freepers get all hot and bothered over.. oh who really cares
what they are hot and bothered over. They are going to be pulled
off the government teat and they are crying like babies.
http://www.csua.org/u/js0
\_ I don't think anyone here reads the freepers. Who cares about the
freepers? They're no different than the kosians.
\_ There are certainly more similarities than differences, but on
on the whole, KOSians don't make me want to drown humanity at
birth. Reading two pages of Freeper comments is enough to make
me want to endorse eugenics. |
| 2007/10/13-14 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:48303 Activity:nil 52%like:48298 |
10/13 George W Bush should get a Nobel Peace Prize for changing an
evil regime and pacifying Al Qaeda in Iraq. Clearly, the
NPP has a liberal bias. |
| 2007/10/8-11 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:48267 Activity:moderate |
10/8 Talking about fringe candidate... I always consider myself an ultra-
left liberal, but I find Ron Paul's message *VERY* appealing. That,
along with the remarkable consistency he has over almost all issues.
Have any of you guys even know this guy?
\_ I heard that if you watch his video, seven days later you DIE!
\_ I watched it 6.9998 days ago and I'
\_ His strict attention to the constitution is appealing, but he's a
bit of a dim bulb. For instance, he's repeated the line that we
trained bin Laden in Afghanistan in the 80s, because it supports his
isolationist policy.
\_ since when opposing having 135 military bases in foreign
countries an "isolationist policy?" Further, if anything, I
find his foreign policy analysis by far most honest and
intelligent. I've been saying the same thing for years.
Pretending establishment of Jewish State in the midst of
arab land won't have any long term consequences? pretending
overthrown of Iran's democratic government won't have any
consequences? pretending aiding muslim extremist won't have any
blow back? and I haven't start talking about Iraq yet...
\_ We kind of did, I'm sure we didn't directly train Bin Laden
but we shipped a fuckton of weapons and supplies to the
Afghan rebels, but completely abandond them after the Russians
finally pulled out. Now look what happened.
\_ No, we didn't. There were two groups fighting against the
Soviets. One was the Northern Alliance, who we funded and
trained. You may recall that they helped us when we invaded
to topple the Taliban. The others were the foreign
Mujahideen, which was bin Laden's group. Richard Miniter
verified this with the folks involved. Just google his name
and bin Laden. Here's an op-ed he wrote which addresses it
directly:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,98115,00.html
Of course you may discount this because it's foxnews, but feel
free to look for the details yourself.
\_ Zbigniew Brzezinski, author of the policy, disagrees with
you: http://csua.org/u/joq (SourceWatch)
\_ Your source doesn't say that. Remember, the Taliban
isn't bin Laden--they gave him haven.
\_ The two guys actually handing out the money disagree
with *you*.
In the course of researching my book on Bill Clinton and
bin Laden, I interviewed Bill Peikney, who was CIA
station chief in Islamabad from 1984 to 1986, and Milt
Bearden, who was CIA station chief from 1986 to 1989.
These two men oversaw the disbursement for all American
funds to the anti-Soviet resistance. Both flatly denied
that any CIA funds ever went to bin Laden. They felt so
strongly about this point that they agreed to go on the
record, an unusual move by normally reticent
intelligence officers. Mr. Peikney added in an e-mail to
me: .I don.t even recall UBL [bin Laden] coming across
my screen when I was there..
\_ First, pp already conceded that no direct funds went
to bin Laden; he said that we funded the Mujahideen.
Your quote above concerns funds to bin Laden, not
the Taliban. Second, Robert Young Pelton, author of
Dangerous Places, records meeting bin Laden in the
80s; given bin Laden's influence and status, it
beggars belief that the CIA staff in Islamabad hadn't
even heard of him in the mid-80s.
\_ In the mid80s OBL wasn't that big a name, yet.
\_ His was a name that was getting bandied around.
It sickens me to think that we might have an
Intel organ that didn't pay attn to names like
that. It's more plausible to me that Peikney
is mistaken about OBL not coming across his
screen, esp. in conjunction with the Taliban.
\_ If that sickens you, perhaps you were primed
for being sickened. OBL isn't important,
Terrorism is a 'success tax,' levied against
the rich and powerful nations of the world.
a feeble figurehead more useful alive than
martired. Terrorism is a 'success tax,'
levied against the rich and powerful nations
of the world.
\_ *shrug* Gross incompetence in general
sickens me. It doesn't bother me that no
one was _doing_ anything about OBL, but
it's criminally irresponsible for an
Intel branch that's funding a secret war
not to be aware of all of the players.
\- YMWTR: Charlie Wilson's War, soon to be a movie.
\- as a liberal you want to get rid of the Dept of Education? |
| 2007/10/3-5 [Politics/Domestic/911, ERROR, uid:48230, category id '18005#4.545' has no name! , , Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:48230 Activity:high |
10/3 The Islamist Head-Fake
http://csua.org/u/jmy
\_ http://www.ibdeditorials.com/default.aspx?src=ICOMART
This site is really hilarious. It's almost as if there were a
machine in place to publish anti-liberal, pro-conservative rhetoric.
Oh, wait a minute....
\_ Bad troll! Down! Stay! Because DU and Kos and etc etc are
so different. I wonder what it is like to be so blindly certain
of how the world is but to be 50% right/wrong at all times....
Might as well flip a coin. The results are more interesting.
\_ Yay! The other side is not perfect, so batshit poisonous
behavior and hate/fear-mongering is allowed! Yay!
\_ BZZZT! Bad troll! Sit! Stay! The lesson, Young Troll, is
that stupid does not excuse stupid. And blindness of
one's own faults does not make you smart for pointing out
the faults of others. The lesson, YT, was anyone posting
obviously biased crap is wasting Precious Bits (tm) and
should stop.
\_ I agree with you that op either shouldn't have posted
or at the least should have labeled the URL, just as
anyone posting anything from any site should.
\_ I like how the President of Bolivia is called a "dictator" -- with
that logic Bush is much more of a dictator, I think their election
went smoother than ours.
\_ Oh really? Just because Carter declared it so?
\_ It is always easier when you have armed guys at every voting
booth who 'secure' the ballots after everyone has chosen the
correct candidate. Real voting is messy.
\_ I have worked the polls in San Francisco and a cop comes
by and picks up the ballot box at the end of the day. Do
you mean like that? |
| 2007/9/20-22 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48126 Activity:nil |
9/20 Independent journalist in Anbar, interesting
Part 1: http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/001514.html
Part 2: http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/001517.html
\_ Anyone who appears on the Wall Street Journal opinion page,
Front Page Mag AND the National Review I automatically
dismiss as a fucking idiot.
\_ I was hoping this was Michael J Totten porn but its
not: http://suicidegirls.com/interviews/Bushs+War
\_ Who is this person and why do we care?
\_ I tend to discount anyone who believes that Zaquarwi
wasn't a US MILITARY FAKE MEDIA construct. he was just
one dude, he did not control all terror in Iraq. |
| 2007/9/18-22 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:48093 Activity:moderate |
9/18 So why isn't Mr Oh So Dissapointed in the Dems because Jefferson
was corrupt so obviously all Democrats are corrupt spouting the
same line about Ted Stevens and the Republicans?
\_ There's a difference between finding $90K in the freezer and an
ongoing corruption investigation. By all means though, get rid of
Stevens. When will you call for Jefferson to be ousted?
\_ The guy admitted in open court to bribing Stevens. If that's
not as damning or more than Jefferson's cold cash, you're smoking
shit you shouldn't be.
\_ I called from him to be ousted from day one. Both of them
are not yet found guilty, but for both of them the evidence
is pretty fucking damning. Both should not be in the Senate.
\_ His "bridge to nowhere" was enough for me to want him out.
Glad we can agree on something. -pp
\_ And so why isn't Stevens not a stunning example of
why all Republicans are corrupt?
\_ And so why is Stevens not a stunning example of
how all Republicans are corrupt?
\_ Can you decide how many negatives you want there?
\_ Bad edit, fixed now.
\_ He's an example of *him* being corrupt. And I'm
dissapointed the R's aren't removing him from the
appropriation committee. Good thing I'm not an R.
\_ I agree with you 100%. I just want to point out
that the all dems are evil dude is a pathetic
hypocrite. -op
\_ If only such a person existed as more than straw.
\_ I guess I've not seen the "All Dems are Evil guy." I seen the "all
Rs are evil guy" a lot....
\_ You must be new around here.
\_ Are you sure it isn't just a case of only seeing what you
want? The motd is a huge lefty echo chamber of dittoness.
Anyway, op is a troll since there is no "All Dems are Evil
guy" here. There *is* "Dems are no better guy" and there
is "A pox on both your houses, you're all Evil guy", though.
\_ Yeah, I remember during the runup to the War, me and one
other guy were arguing against it and like 10 people were
arguing for it. Such a lefty echo chamber.
\_ Yeah I remember this one time 4 years ago when there
were like a few people in favor of something that most
of the country was also in favor of... yeah. Whatever.
\_ And now that almost everyone in the country is
against it, guess what opinion on the motd seems
to be? Whatever, indeed! But yeah, the most
vitrolic right-wingers seem to have abandoned
the field. Maybe they are out shooting photos
to put up on zombietime.
\_ Whats your point?
\_ That the motd is reflection of society, not
a "lefty echo chamber."
\_ You *really* believe that the motd which
is all college educated *berkeley* students
is a good reflection of society? Oookaaay.
\_ That would explain why the motd is
a seething mass of stupid. Of course the
lefty echo chamber theory would explain that
too. -- ilyas
\_ Out of curiousity am I considered a vitriolic
right-winger? -- ilyas
\_ No, just a libertarian kook. Not the same thing.
\_ more of a vitriolic nut case |
| 2007/9/11-13 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:48012 Activity:kinda low |
9/11 Weird, it's 911 and no one has started the "where were you 6
years ago thing." I'll start:
\_ My roommates yelled at me to turn the tv on. I called my friend
from NYC and told him to wake up and turn on the tv. He said
"I'm sleeping. Tape it for me."
\_ I arrived at work and was told that the WTC was gone.
\_ I logged onto Soda immediately to troll emarkp. Oh wait no I
didn't. But that would have been funny!
\_ I think trolling paolo was more in fashion then.
\_ We should only do this on 5 year anniversaries. (I was at home,
then I went to work... pretty much like any other day except
for all the excitement. National disasters are really entertaining.)
\_ I had stayed up all night working on a grant presentation for
Oakland City Council. I got a half-hour's sleep, hit the shower,
and then my wife came running in to tell me what happened. Needless
to say, the City Council hearing was cancelled. --erikred
\_ I was vacationing in Bali. I met another American girl on vacation
in a bar there. We ended up back at my hotel room at night. I
thought I was going to get laid. But we spent the whole night
watching 9/11 coverage on the Asian edition of CNBC instead. Damn
terrorists.
\_ Did you make a pass at her anyway, the next day or something?
\_ No. I thought it would be classeless. Plus, I wasn't really
in the mood.
\_ "If you don't have sex with me, it means the terrorists
have won."
\_ My wife and I were getting ready to go to work. Then my dad in Hong
Kong called me, yelling at me to turn on the TV as if I did
something wrong.
\_ You're such a screwup they put it on tv! Turn on the tv, quick! |
| 2007/8/13-15 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:47597 Activity:high |
8/13 ANDREW SULLIVAN: The man's legacy is a conservative movement
largely discredited and disunited, a president with lower consistent
approval ratings than any in modern history, a generational shift
to the Democrats, a resurgent al Qaeda, an endless catastrophe in
Iraq, a long hard struggle in Afghanistan, a fiscal legacy that means
bankrupting America within a decade, and the poisoning of American
religion with politics and vice-versa. For this, he got two terms
of power - which the GOP used mainly to enrich themselves, their
clients and to expand government's reach and and drain on the
productive sector. In the re-election, the president with a
relatively strong economy, and a war in progress, managed to
eke out 51 percent. Why? Because Rove preferred to divide the
country and get his 51 percent, than unite it and get America's 60.
\_ "My guys: Good. Your guys: Evil".
\_ Who was the one who claimed to have a "Permanent Republican
Majority"? Remove the plank from your own eye.
\_ 1) You "missed the point".
2) You also seem blind to the fact that a post like yours
is exactly the point you missed.
3) I'll try again for you, more slowly this time:
"My guys: Gooooood. Your guys: Eeeeeeevil".
\_ I think even people who like Karl Rove will
admit he's pretty evil.
\_ I don't particularly like or dislike Rove. I think
he's pretty much like all DC political 'advisor'
types, he's just better at it than most we've seen
in recent years. Maybe that makes him more evil
than the others?
\_ Did you know that Andrew Sullivan is a conservative?
Knowing that, what exactly is the point that you claim
that you are trying to make?
\_ AS hasn't written a conservative piece in many years.
Find me one and we'll discuss.
\_ gotta agree with you there. being gay and
conservative is like waking up in the morning
and shoving a scissors in your eye every day.
\_ Uh, his book?
\_ I see. I didn't realize that I was talking to the
guy who gets to decide who wears the label of
"Real" Conservtive and who doesn't. My apologies.
Real Conservative and who doesn't. My apologies.
\_ I think your entire "my guy" concept needs to go.
\_ It is much easier to just divide the world into two teams than
to bother to think. Especially for this guy, though we are
still working on him.
\_ Still missing the point. Maybe you'll get it one day.
\_ Still waiting for you to make one...
\_ I assume it was something to the effect that any
negative judgment of Rove is actually, despite any
pretenses to the contrary, mere partisan zeal.
All politicians are equal and they all do the
exact same stuff, or wish they had thought of it
first. In short, "nyah nyah i'm not listening!"
\_ In other words, complaints about partisanship
are in fact partisan themselves. Complaints about
complaints about partisanship, on the other hand
are really cool. And complaints about complaints
about complaints about partisanship are further
proof of partisanship. Do I have that about
right there?
\_ Will take under advisement for the next edition. Thanks.
\_ http://bbwchan.org/inflation/src/1186529046760.jpg |
| 2007/8/10-13 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:47577 Activity:nil |
8/9 "It is very likely that any future 'September 11th' type of terrorist
event in the United States may be facilitated, wittingly or
unwittingly, by drug traffickers operating on both sides of the United
States-Mexico border," the DEA report says.
http://csua.org/u/jau |
| 2007/8/3-22 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:47523 Activity:low |
8/3 http://zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1343 Survey shows just 3% of Americans approve of how Congress is handling the war in Iraq; 24% say the same for the President \_ The Republicans support the war and the Democrats do not. That is not really news. \_ "This lack of confidence in Congress cuts across all ideologies. Democrats--some of whom had hoped the now Democrat-led Congress would bring an end to the war in Iraq--expressed overwhelming displeasure with how Congress has handled the war, with 94% giving Congress a negative rating in its handling specifically of that issue." \_ So we agree. The Democrats are upset at Congress for not taking stronger action against the war and the Republicans are upset at Congress for taking action against the war. \_ How many are upset that the Democrats ran on a platform of cleaning up corruption in DC and not only did nothing to clean it up but went out of their way to make it worse? \_ Show me how it's worse. Then show me how the Dems made it so. \_ Because they're doing the exact same thing with earmarks but are also hypocritical liars about it. \_http://www.commonblog.com/story/2007/2/2/155119/1962 \_ What do you have against the Ethics Reform Bill? At least it is a step in the right direction. \_ Nothing except the fact they left so many holes in it they shouldn't have bothered. With control of Congress and a President who will sign it, they could have done a real reform bill but they're all so addicted to giving away other people's money to buy campaign funds they'll never do real reform. It is just a PR bill so in 2008 they can say they cleaned up DC like they promised, meanwhile having filled their pockets with your cash. \_ Bush would never sign real campaign finance reform. The GOP sucks at the teat of big money. \_ Of course he wouldn't. It was never sent to his desk, duh. Of course the GOP requires big money. Hint: so do the Dems. I find this whole "my guys are angels and your guys are devils" line of non-reasoning both amusing and somewhat sad at the same time. Try some critical reasoning skills before posting in the future. \_ Are you the same guy who said "did nothing to make it better but went out of the way to make it worse." If so, you are a hypocrite. If not, no one was talking to you. \_ There is absolutely nothing hypocritical about saying the Dems are hypocrites on the issue. I've always been very consistent on the motd: both parties suck equally. Party politics sucks. Your pet party is no better than the opposition party. Deal. \_ Nope. The GOP has been more corrupt this last six years than the Democrats have ever been. The two parties are not exactly the same and you are just a cynic with no idea or hope to improve things. It is very easy to sit on the sidelines and whine. Learn to make some positive change and maybe someone will pay attention to you. \_ You're either ignorant or blind. Both parties have been corrupt, robbing the tax payers, stealing elections, and serving themselves first and foremost for far longer than anyone here has been alive. I'm not here to 'make positive change' nor am I 'sitting on the sidelines'. I reject your ridiculous and damaging two party scam system. It is not a mindless "our guy" or "your guy" choice. So tell me oh great bringer of justice and wisdom, what have you done to make positive change? \_ For one thing, I was one of the people that circulated petitions and then got endorsements from the Democrats, Republicans and Greens for a campaign finance reform initiative on the SF city ballot, one that passed by 80%+ of the vote. http://www.csua.org/u/jak More recently, I have joined Common Cause. And if you are who I am pretty sure you are, it is kind of amusing your sudden conversion to independent. Weren't you posting pro-war Freeper links not that long ago? \_ I not only have never posted freeper links, I think the freepers are just as stupid as their counterparts at dailykos. So, no. \_ This Dem is angry at the Dems for not killing the Farm Bill. I'm angry with the vetoing President and the filibustering Republicans for everything else. \_ Bush has barely vetoed or even threatened to veto much of anything compared to most Presidents. Both parties have abused the Senate rules to make almost every vote require 60 votes to pass anything. This is all pot, kettle, black. \_ Bush's own party had controlled both houses for the majority of his time in office. I have no actual numbers, but I'd bet that his veto/threat pace this session outstrips many other presidents. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-08-05-vetoes_N.htm There's some numbers. Fuck off with your kettles. \_ "Fuck off"? Childish. Ok, so where in this article does it say Bush vetoed or even threatened to veto more bills than any other President or even any particular President? You've added absolutely nothing to this but you have shown you're immature and not too bright. I also see you entirely ignored my point about abuse of Senate rules by both parties which is what PKB was a reference to. Have a nice evening. |
| 2007/8/2-3 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:47512 Activity:nil |
8/2 Neal Krawetz at Black Hat makes the claim that image manipulation of
Al Queda tapes happened at the SAME TIME, suggesting that US agencies
are manipulating or manufacturing Al Queda tapes. Remember the bin
Laden tape that came out 3 days before the 2004 election?
http://urltea.com/14k4
http://urltea.com/14k5
\_ And his control is?
\_ Hey urltea nazi, your 2nd link isn't found
\_ They removed it |
| 2007/8/2-3 [Politics/Domestic/911, Reference/Tax, Politics/Domestic/SIG] UID:47511 Activity:nil |
8/2 these personal plates are totally awesome
http://www.tax.ok.gov/plates/GWOT_apr07.jpg Fight terrorism!
http://www.tax.ok.gov/plates/sp008.html Choose life
\_ http://www.tax.ok.gov/plates/sp079.html NRA
\_ http://www.tax.ok.gov/plates/sp138.html Square & Round Dancers
\_ http://www.tax.ok.gov/plates/sp004.html Adoption
\_ http://www.tax.ok.gov/plates/sp006.html Neuter your pets! |
| 2007/7/31-8/3 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:47480 Activity:nil |
7/31 After 911, the government gains surveilance power to eavesdrop.
What are some things they actively monitor on these days?
USPS mail? Email? Do they have complete access to YahooMail/Gmail?
What about my history of library checkouts? Are credit card
companies cooperating fully to expose our spending patterns?
\_ They can subpoena your email provider
What about my history of library checkouts?
\_ They may request these
Are credit card
companies cooperating fully to expose our spending patterns?
\_ It is all classified because in a Democracy, your government
has full authority to keep track of what you are doing and you
have no right to know what they are doing with your tax dollars.
\_ We're actually a democratic republic but ok.
\_ Hi, Mr. Pedantic? It's your country calling. They'd like
you to wake up now. Ok thx.
\_ It isn't pedantic. It is an important difference, but ok
if you want to keep thinking that. |
| 2007/7/24-28 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:47415 Activity:low |
7/24 TSA warns about "Terrorist Dry runs" involving suspicious cheese:
http://www.csua.org/u/j7o
\_ Uh oh, time to watch FoxNews and vote Republican for safety!
\_ "And in November, a passenger in Houston, Texas, checked luggage
that contained a plastic bag with a 9-volt battery, wires, a
block of brown clay-like minerals and pipes."
So are you saying this is made up?
\_ You are being cited for violation of the "MOTD! NO FACTS!"
policy. Next time the fine will go up dramatically and on
the third offence of bringing FACTS! to the motd you shall be
terminated with extreme efficiency.
\_ Are you saying the cheese incidents didn't happen? Are you
some kind of cheese-eating surrender monkey?
\_ I'm saying you better stop posting facts to the motd
before you get squished. |
| 2007/7/11-16 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:47264 Activity:low |
7/11 Al Qaida as powerful as it was in summer 2001
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2007/07/report_alqaida_has_regained_st.php
\_ Funny, why do we believe our intel now?
\_ You know what's wrong with our intel? It's government run
pork program! They should have privatized CIA and NSA
long time ago. -Republican
\_ They do call the CIA "The Company".
\_ No, troll, they should have not relied solely on satellites
and not let the human side of the intelligence program
whither away to nothing. This is the fault of many
administrations going back. |
| 2007/7/5 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:47181 Activity:high |
7/5 Lack of civil liberties, not poverty, causes terrorism:
http://www.csua.org/u/j39 (The Economist's View)
\_ Civil liberties are a relatively new concept. Global terrorism
is also a relatively new concept. Therefore GT is caused by CL.
\_ By relatively new, do you mean since the French and
American Revolutions? Or do you mean 1215, when the
Magna Carta was signed?
\_ I meant the late 1700s but I'll accept the MC as relatively
new, yes, compared to the span of human history. |
| 2007/6/11-13 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:46908 Activity:low |
6/10 "To sanction such presidential authority to order the military to
seize and indefinitely detain civilians, even if the President
calls them 'enemy combatants,' would have disastrous consequences for
the constitution and the country," the court panel said.
http://www.csua.org/u/iwc (URL updated with more recent version)
\_ No worries, the USSC will give the POTUS peace of mind.
\_ I guess we could arrest Tony Blair and call him 'enemy combatant'
and lock him up forever. Since the first thing we do will be
strip him of any personal belongings, there is no way he can prove
he is Tony Blair. We can then use all sort of "techniques" to
make him confess that he is a terrorist... hmm... |
| 2007/6/4-10 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:46846 Activity:moderate |
6/3 Dirty Congressman Jefferson finally indicted.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8PI5SRO1
\_ Good --scotsman
\_ Seconded. --erikred
\_ About time. Let's see some real jail time and a felony conviction
from this one.
\_ He's innocent I tell ya, just like DeLay and Libby! Selfless public
servants.
\_ Libby is going to jail for *not* leaking any secrets. He got
totally fucked over on some BS trumped up garbage charge and
sent to the wolves so *someone* could take the fall.
\_ Somehow I don't see "Free Scooter!" t-shirts being big
sellers.
\_ You fail to understand how delusional the Bushies have
become.
\_ You fail to have the facts at hand when posting. See
below for what Libby was convicted of and while you're
at it, compare what happened to Libby vs. Sandy "Stuffed
Shorts" who got probation and a trivial fine for
stealing and destroying national security documents
related to the Clinton administration's policies re:
Al Qaeda in the 90s. If Libby deserves jail then SB
deserves a treason charge with life or hanging on those
scales of justice.
\_ Thanks for making my case for me (btw, I think
SB got off too light as well, but that is tangential
to the Libby case).
\_ Your case was what exactly? A vague slam against
all "Bushies"? Whatever. DailyKOS awaits your
wisdom.
\_ Libby is really going to jail for obstructing justice. He
still doesn't understand that what he did was wrong, and
apparently neither do a number of his supporters.
\_ Libby obstructed justice how exactly? Specifically what he
got nailed for was this: the prosecution asked ~8 reporters
for their version of events and asked Libby as well. The
reporters gave varying versions, different time lines, etc
that didn't match each other. Libby didn't and in fact
could not have matched what the reporters said so he got
nailed for what exactly? Not matching all 8 reporters who
didn't match themselves? Give it a rest, the man is a
victim.
\_ "It's important that we expect and demand a lot from
people who put themselves in those positions," Walton
"Mr. Libby failed to meet that bar. For whatever
reason, he got off course." From the sentencing judge.
They outed a spy and then obstructed the investigation
into it. You are right that more than just Libby
should have paid, but he was the only case that
Fitzgerald felt was going to stick in a court of law.
\_ Yes, and? He's still going to prison for not having
the same story as 8 reporters who also had different
stories from each other. And let's not forget the
$250k fine on top of 30 months in prison. This is
not justice.
\- i am pretty sure he'll be "made whole"/taken care
for for his loyalty. obstruction of justice by
the powerful is a serious problem and deserves
serious penalties. the plea bargaining system
has some strage pathologies ... e.g. the guy
facing a serious charge with a lame public
defender vs. the guy who can pay his legal bills
though ill gotten gains or directors/officers
insurance or otherwise has deep resources or
something truly bizzare like the fbi/cia mole
cases where the death penalty was taken off
the table in return for cooperation or the
OLYMPIC BOMBER case where death penalty was
taken off the table because he hid a bunch
of explosives in the hills and would not
disclose where unless non-death ... those
are good candidates for waterboarding.
since we've decided to torture people, i think
there is an argument to be made that they are
"consenting" to torture ... i dont think these
people are "entitled" to this arrow in their
legal quiver. anyway, libby got the best of the
legal process. good lawyer, credible judge,
jury, prosecutor. if you want to claim he
was railroaded, the very very heavy burden is
on you to make the case.
\_ Again I ask: *exactly* what did he do that was
illegal, in plain English, please?
\- can you list you name so we can laugh
at you?
\_ The reason he was given such a harsh sentence
is because he used his power and authority in
an effort to pervert justice and he continues
to show no remorse for it (much like his
supporters). No one is above the law, not you,
and not even the White House. A harsh lesson
to have to learn, but one that I wish more
WH crooks would get the opportunity to have.
\_ With Bush's Pardon in his pocket, Scooter
will be above the law. Sucks, don't it?
\_ He isn't going to get a pardon.
\_ Well there is that. I guess he really
is above the law.
\_ Again I ask: *exactly* what did he do that was
illegal, in plain English, please?
\_ Obstruction of justice isn't clear enough
to you? He deliberately lied to the FBI and
\_ no. that's the legal charge. it
doesn't say what he *did*.
the Grand Jury in an attempt to derail the
investigation. According to Fitzgerald,
this actually had the intended effect of
making the Grand Jury unable to make the
case against the true perpetrators of the
crime of revealing a CIA agents identity.
According to the judge the evidence was
"overwhelming" and according to all 12
jurors, it was "beyond a reasonable doubt."
\_ I'll give you an example of "plain
English": Sandy Burglar went into the
national archives, stuffed a bunch of
Clinton era NSA documents related to
Al Qaeda in his socks and underwear,
hid them a few blocks away then returned
later, took them elsewhere and destroyed
them. Libby did what exactly?
\- i think sandy burger is a lamer and a
fool and you have to wonder "what was
he thinking" but i'll be happy to
see him burned at the stake IF the
CIA or NSA or somebody other than
a partisan player says he damaged
national security, which has they
took the trouble to say in the Plame
case. In fact I would be kinda
happy to see that. However, I'm open
to the possibility that what he
took out had no national security
importance [as you may not know,
the govt has often classifies a
lot of things en masse and will only
"lazily evaluate" if they should
not declassified. for example there
are documents that are essentualy
just strings of number from sensitive
simulations which are classified
[possible in the relating-to-nuke
classification, which is differnt
from the Secret, Top Secret etc one],
so just the fact that they were
classified isnt quite enough for a
air assessment. If Plame was say
a IT Manager or Food Services manager
at the CIA, even if it was strictly
by the letter not legal to disclose
her identity, I'd be more willing to
think this might have been something
unreasonable at the food of the tree,
but again, the issue is you dont get
to decide when to cooperate with the
FBI and when you cant.
\_ Sandy Burglar: it doesn't matter
what value the documents had. If
you or I had done it our lives
would have been destroyed over it.
And since he destroyed them we
*can't* know, since that is the
point of destroying them. We are
forced to assume they did have
value or he wouldn't have bothered.
As far as Libby goes since no one
here seems to actually know what
he is accused of, I'll tell you.
In plain English: Libby voluntarily
talked to the grand jury investi-
gating Plame's ID revealing. His
story didn't match ~8 reporters'
stories. Those 8 reporters'
versions of events and timelines
not only did not match Libby, they
did not match each other, and did
not match their own written notes
and did not match their previous
testimony when brought back and
questioned again on the same
topics. Libby's only crime was
trying to do the right thing. Now
here are two kickers for you on top
of everything else: Richard Arma-
tage was *known to the prosecutor*
on *day 1* to be the Plame leaker.
Before he ever talked to Libby,
the prosecutor *knew* who the
leaker was. His entire investiga-
tion was supposed to be about
finding the leaker, but slamming
Armatage wasn't politically useful.
He wanted Cheney, Rove and others
who we now know had *nothing* to
do with it. He couldn't get them
but he was able to get Libby on a
complete crap charge. And the
second kicker: Libby's lawyers
tried hard to get Plame's actual
official status clarified in court
but the judge agreed with the
prosecution that whether or not
she was in fact a "secret agent"
or not was not relevent to the
case! Wow. And then in the
sentencing phase, the judge then
allows the same prosecutor to
argue that Libby should get super
smashed for revealing a "secret
agent's identity" but never allowed
the defendant to examine that in
court or answer those charges. A
giant "fuck you" to Libby and any
sense of real Justice. *THAT* is
the 'plain English' version of
what happened to Scooter libby.
And now we've already started to
see other people refusing to
testify in front of various
congressional committees because
they're afraid they're get Libby'd.
Having one branch of government
literally afraid to *talk* to
another branch of government out of
fear of malicious prosecution is no
way to run a government.
\_ Malicious prosecution, huh...
Sigh. Aren't you guys the
"if they haven't done anything
wrong, they have nothing to
fear" crowd? Or is that just
for us laypeople?
\_ To actually believe all that BS
you have to believe that a
guy who indicted Democrats,
Al Qaeda and Republicans
suddently went nuts. Libby
lied and got caught. His lies
totally screwed up a federal
case (remember various
reporters went to jail to help
keep Libby's lies secret) and
damaged national security and
he paid the price. Get over it.
\_ What the above guy said: but let me dumb it
down a bit more: he lied under oath about
matters relevant to national security.
\_ Yes, nice. See my above example of
"plain English". Thanks.
\_ Rep. Henry Hyde (R-IL) "So for my friends who think that
perjury, lying and deceit are in some circumstances acceptable
and undeserving of punishment I respectfully disagree." [House
Judiciary Committee, 12/1/98].
Rep. John Mica (R-FL) "If you commit perjury or obstruct justice,
you will be held accountable. If you are a member of Congress or
president . . . you will be held accountable. Even if you . . .
do a thousand good deeds, you will be held accountable." [Orlando
Sentinel, 12/20/98]
Former House Majority Leader Rep. Dick Armey (R-TX) "But Mr.
Speaker, perjury before a grand jury is not personal and it is
not private. Obstruction of justice is not personal and it is
not private. Abuse of the power of the greatest office in the
world is not personal and it is not private." [ABC Special
Report, 12/19/98]
Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA) "Perjury and obstruction of justice
are serious offenses which must not be tolerated by anyone in
our society." [Washington Post, 2/12/99]
Senator Sam Brownback (R- KS) "Perjury and obstruction of justice
are crimes against the state. Perjury goes directly against the
truth-finding function of the judicial branch of government."
[Congressional Record, 2/12/99]
Oh yeah, that was lying about a BJ, obviously a much more serious
crime than outing a CIA agent. |
| 2007/5/24-28 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:46745 Activity:kinda low |
5/24 "Why is he at large? 'Cause we haven't got him, yet, Jim. That's why.
And he's hiding. And we're looking. And we will continue to look until
we bring him to justice. We've brought a lot of his buddies to justice,
but not him. That's why he's still at large."
--Bush answering a question today about why we haven't caught OBL.
\_ http://www.sitiofan.com/images/guia/beforeafter/caseyhoy2.jpeg
\_ Maybe they should put OJ on the job.
\_ Stupid questions deserve stupid answers. At least the press and
the President are on the same page now.
\_ What about the question is stupid?
\_ Perhaps he should have rephrased. "Hey dumbshit! Where is
that jackass Osama you promised to capture six years ago?"
or "Hey dumbshit! What the fuck are you doing being
president? You're looking in the wrong fucking country."
See, GWB is too stupid to recognize a rhetorical question.
\_ GWB is not stupid. He blew off a question he didn't want
to answer. He's a politician. That is what all successful
politicians do. How is that stupid?
\_ Q: Why is he at large? A: Because we haven't caught him yet.
Stupid question. Stupid answer. Especially from a press core
member who should know better than to leave a politician with
an open question like that. What about the question is not
stupid?
\_ Asking a president why he has failed to capture a person
he has promised to catch isn't stupid. I'm sure he knows
the real answer: "because we have a significant chunk
of our armed forces looking in the wrong country."
\_ It was a stupid question. If he wanted a real answer to
that question he should have known better than to make
it possible to directly answer the question without
answering the implied question. Why is this so hard
to figure out? Show me the politician who answers
implied questions that will make him look bad and I'll
show you the politician who won't make it above city
dog catcher in an election. |
| 2007/5/24-28 [Computer/SW/WWW/Browsers, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:46743 Activity:nil |
5/24 this looks like some internet shock site
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,275341,00.html |
| 2007/5/23 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton] UID:46733 Activity:nil 50%like:46725 |
5/22 Lurita Doan is BLOWJOBS BLOWJOBS BLOWJOBS
http://www.federaltimes.com/index.php?S=2777859 |
| 2007/5/22-24 [Politics/Domestic/Abortion, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:46727 Activity:high 77%like:46720 |
5/22 We're in trouble:
http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=329
The full report shows how many registered Republicans think Al Qaeda
is just fine.
\_ Go Bush Go!
\_ ???
\_ Is that a cheer or a command?
\_ http://www.csua.org/u/ir1
ONWARD CHRISTIAN SOLDIERS!
\_ I find both of these responses bizarre, as well as the altering
of the text of the op. A poll that shows that 5% of American
muslims think Al Qaeda is A-OK, and 27% decline to answer isn't
troubling? Or is worth belittling? And this was a PEW research
poll, not Fox News. -emarkp
\_ 5% is essentially zero in a poll like that.
\_ Did you miss the 27% decline to state? That suggests it's
higher than 5%. Furthermore, native-born muslims are more
likely to support AQ, with black native-born muslims the
most likely. -emarkp
\_ On what data are you basing the assumption that
"decline to state" == support?
\_ Why would you decline to state that you're opposed to
Al Qaeda? Part of it may be the "never criticise a
muslim" but what would Mohammad Atta have said?
-emarkp
\_ I dunno, if I was part of a feared and hated
minority and some pollster called me up in the
middle of the night to interrogate me about
Al Qaido, I might not answer either. Just
a guess, but I don't think "decline to state"
can be assumed to be support.
\_ How often do pollsters call you in the middle
of the night?
\_ The overwhelming majority of terrorist attacks in the
United States in the last thirty years have been by
Christian terrorist groups. You are worried about the
wrong group of extremists. But you probably think that
abortion bombings, like running over cylists, is appropriate.
\_ Hi anonymous troll! You're wrong about me (I've never
thought abortion bombings or killing abortion doctors was
appropriate, and I have only thought "running over cyclists"
is appropriate when they're surrounding and/or assaulting
\_ So wait, you'd run over an otherwise peaceful
group of bikers for simply surrounding your car?
I'm not so sure I'd even run over bikers for
assaulting my car! There's a large asymmetry
in power if I'm in a car and they're on bikes!
Do you think it's appropriate to kick babies who
are trying to bite your ankles? Bikers who
assault your car are assaulting your car.
Assaulting a biker *with* your car is to risk
causing bodily injury to the biker. Is
a possible increase in your car insurance and
$500 in deductable a justifiable cause for
injuring someone? I would NOT want that on
my conscience. Further, I'm an athiest--
I'm surprised your Mormon conscience allows you
to calculate the moral problem the way you do!
^ see below, he
doesn't just mean
"surrounding" alone.
your vehicle). And I think you're insane to think we face
the same risk today from "Christian terrorist groups" as we
do from Al Qaeda. -emarkp
\_ I recently was at a planned parenthood clinic.
Considering the amount of security they had there I
suspect that the people who work there take Christian
terrorist groups very seriously indeed.
Considering the amount of security they had I suspect
that the people who work there take Christian terrorist
groups very seriously indeed.
\_ So wait, you'd run over an otherwise peaceful
group of bikers for simply surrounding your car?
\_ No. -emarkp
\_ But if you happen to be behind a group of them
that isn't doing anything at all do you other
than making you go slower than you want to,
it's OK to run into them intentionally. Or
so emarkp says. -tom
\_ Nope. If they're agressively stopping traffic,
and a driver is in fear of assault, then they
should expect to be hit. Babble your nonsense
if you must tom, but don't put words in my
mouth. -emarkp
\_ you endorsed the videotaped actions of a
driver who was not in any danger of assault.
Or at least, wasn't in any danger until
he intentionally ran into a bicyclist. -tom
\_ That was your read of the video. I
disagreed with your interpretation.
-emarkp
\_ LA LA LA LA LA! THEY WELCOMED US AS
LIBERATORS! THEY GAVE US THE UNIVERSAL
SIGN OF APPROVAL, THE THUMBS-UP!
THE GOLDEN TABLETS DISAPPEARED! LA
LA LA LA LA LA!
\_ Okay, you think I am insane, I can live with that. If
you take out the WTC 9/11 fatalities, which was a one
time lucky strike, imo, more people have been actually
killed in this country by Christian terrorists than
by Al Qaeda. And the number killed by both is so
small as to be insignificant. We should focus our
time, money and attention on real threats, not bogeymen
invented by politicians to scare us into giving them
our hard earned tax dollars.
\_ If you saw a poll with the same numbers of Christians
approving of terrorist groups, would you be concerned?
Oh, and speaking of 9/11 did you note the low numbers
of muslims believing that 9/11 was committed by
muslims? -emarkp
\_ What percent of Christians approve of abortion
clinic bombings? I am sure it is more than 5%.
Yes, I did see the 9/11 numbers and that was
more disturbing to me than the ones that concern
you.
\_ You have a poll to back that up or are you just
pulling those numbers out of the air?
Considering the juvenile understanding of
religion on motd, I'm not surprised at your
belief. -emarkp
_/
Googling finds me:
""All of the 1985 surveys show condemnation of
abortion clinic bombings. In the Harris poll,
81 percent think that such bombings amount
to terrorism; 83 percent say that such violence
"is not the American way"; and 71 percent
say the attacks "are probably being conducted
by fanatics"; 56 percent do not believe
that the damage to abortion clinics "is
minor compared with the fetuses whose lives
are taken in abortion clinics."
Eighty-two percent in the CBS News-
thing as terrorism." Only 14 percent believe
that "there are a lot of other crimes that are
just as serious," and just five percent think
that the bombings "should be treated as a
forceful kind of political protest" if no one is
killed or injured.
Eighty-eight percent in the ABC News
poll think the clinic attacks are "criminal
acts"; only 12 percent classlfy them as "civil
disobedience."
In the Gallup survey, 95 percent feel that
bombing clinics hurts the antiabortion cause;
91 percent believe the same about "destroying
files and causing other nonviolent disruptions
at abortion clinics"; but only 54percent
feel the same way about "personally confronting
and lecturing pregnant women entering
abortion clinics" (19 percent, however, have no opinion)."
(Source: Family Planning Perspectives, Vol. 17, No. 2.
""All of the 1985 surveys show condemnation of abortion clinic
bombings. In the Harris poll, 81 percent think that such bombings
amount to terrorism; 83 percent say that such violence "is not the
American way"; and 71 percent say the attacks "are probably being
conducted by fanatics"; 56 percent do not believe that the damage to
abortion clinics "is minor compared with the fetuses whose lives are
taken in abortion clinics." Eighty-two percent in the CBS News- thing
as terrorism." Only 14 percent believe that "there are a lot of other
crimes that are just as serious," and just five percent think that the
bombings "should be treated as a forceful kind of political protest" if
no one is killed or injured.
Eighty-eight percent in the ABC News poll think the clinic attacks are
"criminal acts"; only 12 percent classlfy them as "civil disobedience."
In the Gallup survey, 95 percent feel that bombing clinics hurts the
antiabortion cause; 91 percent believe the same about "destroying files
and causing other nonviolent disruptions at abortion clinics"; but only
54percent feel the same way about "personally confronting and lecturing
pregnant women entering abortion clinics" (19 percent, however, have no
opinion)." (Source: Family Planning Perspectives, Vol. 17, No. 2.
(Mar. - Apr., 1985), pp. 76-78.)"
So it actually looks like 12-15 percent support abortion clinic
So it actually looks like 5-15 percent support abortion clinic
bombings, or at least do not consider them "terrorism" and another
19 percent have no opinion. You are worried about the wrong extremists
if you are really concerned about making America safer and not just
pushing a misguided GWoT agenda.
\_ Oh, a poll from 20 years ago. Well, that settles it. -emarkp
\_ Do you have more recent information? The ball is in your
court here to prove that American opinions have significantly
changed since then. And that was more than one poll, it
was at least three.
\_ No, sorry. We discussed this back in the 80's, and hashed it
out. It's your job to show the danger in the here and now.
Go back to your cage. -emarkp |
| 2007/5/15 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President] UID:46632 Activity:nil |
5/14 Sometimes the good guys win one (Gonzalez resigns):
http://www.csua.org/u/ip4
\_ That looks like Paul McNulty resigned, not Gonzales.
\_ Bummer.
\_ I misread this as Paul McCartney, and was really confused.
\_ Paul McCartney resigned about 30 years ago. |
| 2007/5/14-16 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:46631 Activity:high |
5/14 I hear there are soldiers captured in Iraq by Al Qaeda. But Barbara
Boxer and Nancy Pelosi tell me that Al Qaeda isn't in Iraq, and that
the war in Iraq has nothing to do with the war on terroism. How can
that be?
\_ Al Qaeda out-sourced the jobs to Iraq amid rising health-care costs
and growing influences from labor unions in Afghanistan.
\_ Few jobs are harder than being a strike breaker in Afghanistan.
The last I heard the strike breakers went on strike due to low
wages and poor health care plans.
\_ What else do the voices in your head tell you?
\_ Which part do you think are voices in my head?
\_ You have a URL where Barbara Boxer and Nancy Pelosi tell you
this right?
\_ Here's Pelosi:
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Pelosi_Its_sad_Bush_blaming_Iraqi_1128.html
http://urltea.com/k25 (rawstory.com)
\_ But wait, you said Pelosi told you that there were
no Al Qaeda in Iraq, but she says that they are there.
Are you hallucinating again?
\_ House Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) told
reporters on Wednesday that she feels it is "sad"
that President Bush continues to blame Iraqi
insurgent violence on al Qaeda.
"My thoughts on the president's representations are
well-known," Pelosi said. "The 9/11 Commission
dismissed that notion a long time ago and I feel sad
that the president is resorting to it again."
\_ "What proportion of the Sunni resistance do you
think al Qaeda in Iraq is responsible for? It's
a handy tag, but in reality is it 10 percent,
50 percent of what we would loosely call Sunni
resistance or insurgency?" -Pelosi
You really have a reading comprehension problem.
\_ No, that was the question a reporter asked the
spokesman. I think you have the problem.
\_ Fair enough, but you still haven't given
me a quote where Pelosi denies the
existence of Al Qaeda in Iraq.
\_ Try reading.
\_ I read the article, it says we
shouldn't blame the violence on
Al Queda because most of it is
sectarian. How is it possible to
interpret Pelosi's statement
and come out with "there is no Al
Queda" in Iraq? Show us your balloon
animal twisting skills ...
And Boxer:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/21/lkl.01.html
\_ Where exactly does she say that there are no Al Qaeda
in Iraq?
\_ "I think the reason so many of us feel strongly that
we need to change what's going on in Iraq is, we need to
free up some resources to get back to getting al Qaeda.
You know, the other side keeps saying the war on terror
is the war in Iraq. Not true."
we need to change what's going on in Iraq is, we need
to free up some resources to get back to getting al
Qaeda. You know, the other side keeps saying the war
on terror is the war in Iraq. Not true."
\_ that doesn't say there are no al qaeda in Iraq.
\_ I think fuckers have kidnapped our soldiers. Do I think it's
"al-queda"?
\_ I think fuckers have kidnapped our soldiers. Do I think it's "al-queda"?
Doubt it. Al-Queda would have thought a less stupid name than
"Al-queda in Iraq". It's probably Shiites or Sunnis who ALREADY
LIVED IN IRAQ WHO HATED EACH OTHER FOR DECADES BUT SADDAM KEPT
THEM QUIET. fuck.
THEM QUIET. fuck. I wish the Mormon Necro-Bot would lay waste
to the Sunni Triangle.
\_ Saddam didn't 'keep them quiet'. He butchered them but you knew
that, trollboy.
\_ If the difference between Al Qaeda and Al Qaeda in Iraq confuses
you, you probably missed the variable declarations. Research harder. |
| 2007/5/9-14 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Israel] UID:46572 Activity:kinda low |
5/9 Pheonomenal interview with NBC Terrorist Analyst (Steve Emerson) about
the recent terror arrest. Includes commentary about how serious it
was, and how it was covered by the press. -emarkp
(Warning: 18MB mp3)
link:csua.org/u/ino
\_ Steven Emerson: crank:
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1443
\_ Quite likely a Mossad agent spreading disinformation.
\_ That's it! It's the Joooooos!
\_ Surely you understand the difference between the
"Joooooos!" and the Nation of Isreal. On second thought,
perhaps you do not.
\_ Always the way Jew haters claim to be PC yet justify
hating Israel. I'll bet you even have a Jewish friend!
\_ A Jewish wife, even. But if it makes you feel better
to believe that I am anti-Semetic and out to get you,
be my guest.
\_ You think that makes it ok sort of like how so
many African-American comedians and rappers use
the N-word? It's never ok.
\_ It's never okay to critisize Isreal's foreign
policy, because some crank might call you
anti-semtic for doing so? Gotcha.
\_ FAIR: a bunch of cranks.
\_ He's a crank, they're cranks, you're a crank. You know what
the odds of The Press actually covering something up are?
Nil.
\_ Oh, you mean like how everyone was slow to mention that the
guys were Muslims and three were illegals?
\_ I heard both almost immediately from NPR and Australian
Broadcast Corporation. Who do you listen to?
\_ Typical American isn't listening to either or even
aware it is possible or there's even a reason to.
American news certainly didn't report it.
\_ It certainly never happens in France.
http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/story/0,14173,1639538,00.html
\_ The Press don't cover stuff up? Wow, naive. The Press is
just a bunch of people like anyone else. Sometimes they
get busted big time like Dan "False but Accurate" Rather,
or the faked pictures coming out of the Israel/Gaza area.
But since they're the only source of information for most
people, they can and do cover all sorts of things and get
away with most of it. How would you know otherwise? Some
blog? pft.
\_ If you have one source of information, sure, faking
things is easy, and covering it up is done all the time.
In a case like this where all of the details are
available to the public, where's the cover up? I missed
it.
\_ Most news today comes from AP or Reuters so no they
really don't have more than one source and in a case
like this if you were reading the newspapers or
watching cable or nightly news you didn't know. Glad
you were tuned in to Australia's news. Americans
didn't know for a while and even then were only told
because of information leak from places like AU.
Fortunately the days of Dan Rather and his followers
are numbered but many many many of the dinosaurs
from his era are still in power running the news.
\_ So what you're really decrying is that most
American news outlets get their news from two
sources, not that these news outlets are actively
covering up the news. I can get behind that;
the Americans and Brit intel services got bit in
the ass by the one-source problem when it came to
the Niger memo. Also, none of this rescues
Steven Emerson from being a self-appointed
terrorism expert with a penchant for overstating
the danger and attempting to rile up anti-Islamic
sentiment.
\_ Reuters = AP for the most part so one source.
And when all the news comes from one source
like in any industry you get the monopoly
effect: crap product due to lack of
competition. So the question becomes, is it
crap product because of monopolistic
incompetence or is it crap because some people
are pushing an agenda? I'd say a fair amount
of each. Why else would anyone have to read
news from another country to find out what is
going on in their own? As far as Steven
Emerson goes, I have no idea who he is, have
not seen him on TV or read his article(s) and
don't really care so I'll happily accept your
description of him as a self appointed expert.
Given that he's a self appointed expert, how
or why is he on TV or any other media getting
any attention? Because the news is crap in
this country. Self appointed experts being
just one sign of that.
\_ Agreed on the crap product; I tend to lay
blame for such on laziness rather than mal-
intent. The thing is, it takes an effort to
put out good news, and simply reaching for
the loudest name on a list is not enough.
There was a scene in Control Room that
illustrated this, where an editor just
grabbed a talking head with an opposing
view rather than taking the time to find
a person with an actual thought-out and
informative viewpoint.
\_ I've read enough insider info and seen
enough on-air or in the papers to have
an honest belief that agenda driven ill
will is responsible for a fair amount of
the broken media system today. My
favorite in recent years was the 2004
election with Dan Rather on air (I love
Dan, he's so blatant) trying desperately
to claim that Bush could still lose even
though it was mathematically done and his
co-anchor (forget his name) trying to
correct him, leading to Dan to tell the
other guy he can't do math, the other guy
responding he was a math teacher for 20
years before broadcasting. Dan looked
positively ill. Most of it is more
subtle than Rather because they are acts
of omission such as the identity of these
guys. You can't know what you can't
know, eh?
\_ Dan Rather is one guy. One guy on one
network does not a cover-up make.
Hell, even Murdoch's Faux News Channel
isn't a cover-up. It's a farce, but
it's not a cover-up.
\_ "Dan Rather" is used as an example
because it's so easy and obvious.
I could have used other names and
events but I wasn't looking for an
"Oh yeah, URL?!" response. As far
as Fox is concerned, they lean
right. CBS, ABC, CNN, NBC all lean
left about the same distance. Big
deal. It is still wrong and stupid
that an American has to read Aussie
news to learn about an event in the
U.S.
\_ Fox doesn't _lean_ right. The
Tower of Pisa _leans_ right,
from a certain perspective. Fox
actively promotes attacks on
people and views not
sufficiently conservative.
That's not _leaning_, that's
actively promoting. Also, lack
of coverage is bad reporting,
not cover-up. Agreed that it's
not acceptable. |
| 2007/5/8-12 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:46562 Activity:high |
5/8 Fairly incompetent terrorist plot to attack Fort Dix foiled.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070508/ap_on_re_us/fort_dix_plot
\_ Thank goodness torturing suspects in gitmo, warrantless spying on
terrorists, and the Patriot act yielded valuable intel which
allowed the government to catch these guys!
\_ There's a point to be made but "warrantless spying on terrorists"
is probably not the message you were looking for.
\_ Isn't this an ideal time to raise the terror alert to orange?
What? You mean the sheeple see through it now? What about
the scary Canadian spy coins???
http://www.csua.org/u/ink
\_ Terror alerts only happen right before elections.
\_ To op: Nice editorial. People would have thought Cho was
incompetent before he killed 32 students. Oh, and 3 of the guys
were in the country illegally.
\_ Oh, I wasn't trying to say it wasn't a good thing to stop them.
I'm very happy they caught these bozos, as they probably would
have succeeded in killing a few people. Nevertheless, the plan
was pretty incompetent. For one thing, Cho didn't attack an
army base. -op
\_ Bringing their videos to a store wasn't the smartest move but
beyond that, they were training, they had weapons, they had
jihadi propaganda videos, they had scouted out the base and
if some video clerk hadn't reported them this would have been
headlines about an attack that killed X many American soldiers
on an American military base on American soil. You don't
think that would have had the impact they were looking for?
\_ I can't speak for the impact, but they can't have had
many weapons. "The six were arrested Monday night trying to
buy AK-47 assault weapons, M-16s and other weapons from an
FBI informant." And they had unrealistic expectations
'"You hit four, five or six Humvees and light the whole
place (up) and retreat completely without any losses."'
Incompentents can still kill people, it's not hard.
\_ Missing the point. They don't have to kill hundreds or
even a dozen. Or any. Just launching the attack would
get them what they're looking for. They are terrorists,
not a formal army looking to seize territory.
\_ What do you think they are "looking for"? Another
irrational over-response by the American people?
\_ Yes. And a propaganda victory. What else do
terrorists want? They can't win any sort of
conventional fight so what else can they do?
\_ Well, they are "winning" in Iraq and
Afghanistan, aren't they? If they can convince
the US to start enough silly pointless wars,
they can win for real.
\_ No one is winning in Iraq or Afghanistan,
so no they aren't. And no, they can never
win for real. It is just an endless
stream of nicks and cuts that wear down
society. Unless you're one of the people
who thinks that an internal movement of
Muslims are going to rise up in this country
and take over or something like that. If so
then we're done because I don't have time
right now to talk with crazy people. If not
then I'm still here.
\_ Even Bin Laden does not have "overthrow
the American government and replace it
with a Muslim theocracy" as one of his
\_ You're kidding? Go read some of
the English versions of the various
terrorist web sites. The long term
goal is stated quite clearly as
nothing more than world domination.
stated goals. The general goals of Al
Qaeda have been to drive the infidel
from the Holy Land (check), drive the
infidel from Iraq (checking), and drive
the infidel from Isreal. They also want
\_ You forgot that whole bit about once
a land is Muslim land it is always
Muslim land. You might want to talk
to Spain about how they're looking
forward to being 'rescued' from the
evil West after they rejoin The
Grand Caliphate.
to replace the secular governments of
various Muslim states with theocracies.
The idea that they even want to occupy
America is just a fantasy cooked up by
Coulterites to scare the sheeple.
\_ I don't read Coulter. I read and
listen to what the various bin laden
types are actually saying and they
say what their goals are quite
loudly and clearly. It's about
taking over the world and nothing
less. Now then, given that, I still
don't believe there is some sort of
large scale conspiracy among
American Muslims you'll find in
Coulterite style op/eds, but the
foreign extremist types absolutely
have world domination as their long
term goal.
\_ Sure, a few very isolated and
very weak extremists have as
their goal "world domination."
So do a lot of extremist, kooky,
powerless groups. The only way
you give them power is by paying
too much attention to them. Show
me the Bin Laden statement where
he claims "world domination" as
a goal. You cannot because he
does not.
\_ I bet to differ. Plenty of people are
'winning' in Iraq. In fact it looks like
the political aims of just about fucking
everyone in the world EXCEPT THE UNITED
STATES is winning in Iraq. Remember when
people were interviewed that Bin Laden
told them it would be really funny
if he could taunt the United States into
getting into an unwinnable war that would
overextend its resources? REALLY FUCKING
FUNNY.
\_ Mission Accomplished!
\_ Please elaborate on who is winning and
in what way. The Suni who once ruled
the country are reduced to pathetic
road side bombings. The Shia now sort
of rule the country but in a very weak
way and various Shia leaders get blown
up every day. The Iranians are looking
desperately for an 'in' but the best
they could pull off was capturing and
humiliating some British navy people.
The Saudis had the Americans move a
bunch of military bases to other nearby
countries or further out in the sand
which is sum-zero. The Syrians get a
minor perverse pleasure in driving thugs
to the Iraqi border but aren't getting
any real benefit. The Turks now have a
semi-autonomous Kurdish state on their
border which is the last thing they
wanted. Ah yes, we have found a winner.
The Kurds now have a semi-autonomous
state. Ok, you're right, someone is
winning in Iraq. It's the Kurds who
finally have peace and freedom after
decades of abusive near-genocidal policy
from both Hussein and the Turks.
\_ The Iranians are clearly the regional
winners, because one of their enemies,
one that had fought two wars with them
and had blocked their expansiion, is
now eliminated. The Iraq War has
clearly shifted regional power to
the Iranian/Shi'ite block, which
is agreed upon by most foreign
analysts. Many of predicted that
analysts. Many of us predicted that
this would be the outcome of the US
lead invasion of Iraq, so it's not
led invasion of Iraq, so it's not
like we didn't try to warn you...
\_ Unsealed complaint against Mohammed Ibrahim Shnewer containing
details of the arrest:
http://www.csua.berkeley.edu/~erikred/01_07_mj_02045_JS.pdf |
| 2007/5/3-5 [Recreation/Computer/Games, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:46517 Activity:nil |
5/2 Make and FPS map of your HS go to jail as a terrorist:
http://urltea.com/hbk (fortbendnow.com) |
| 2007/5/2-5 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:46515 Activity:moderate |
5/2 Add "tampering with witnesses" and violating Federal law to
Gonzales' crimes. Do you really want to keep standing up for this guy?
http://www.csua.org/u/ilo
\_ "I pledge of allegiance, to the flag, of the United States of America,
one nation, under the Christian God, with liberty and justice for
Republicans. Everyone else gets the shaft."
\_ "I pledge of allegiance, to the flag, of the United States of
America, one nation, under the Christian God, with liberty and
justice for Republicans. Everyone else gets the shaft."
\_ Who are you talking to?
\_ This has been an ongoing conversation on the motd. See:
http://csua.com/2007/03/12/#45944
http://csua.com/2007/03/23/#46065
Et al
\_ Yes, I know, but I haven't seen anyone on motd defending
Gonzales.
\_ "It happens all the time." "...standard enough politics
to not be worth looking into.. The Dems are playing
lame-o gotcha games with Bush..." "I guess I don't
understand why this is a story. Almost every
president fires all the attorneys and replaces them with
their own. W decides to just replace a few. Therefore W
is bad? huh?"
\_ No no no. Those are people saying that the firing of
US attorneys was okay, not people saying Gonzales
should stay. Once he came out saying "duh, I wasn't
involved" he became indefensible.
\_ He should have said, "their hiring was a political
decision, they serve at the whim of the President,
their firing was a political decision, tough". But
he was stupid and should get replaced now not
because he broke any laws or is unethical, etc, but
because he is stupid. |
| 2007/4/5-7 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:46211 Activity:low |
4/5 http://www.cnn.com The headline is: "U.S. military protects group on State's terror list" Why can't they say: "U.S. military protects terrorists" I don't get it. \_ one is a fact, the other is a judgement. \_ like this, right? http://static.crooksandliars.com/2007/04/cnn-pelosi-syria.jpg \_ you don't get it because you are ignorant. US has always support whatever group that advances is own interest, terrorist or not. IRA, PKK, PLO, you name them all. Remember, US was the largest aids providers to muslim extremist in the 1980s, 10 billions in Afganistan alone. Ohh, by the way, if you can precisely define why PLO is not a terrorist group but Hamas is, please let me know because they look pretty much the same to me, but one receive US aid, one doesn't. |
| 2007/4/1-3 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:46171 Activity:kinda low |
4/1 David Hicks gets 9-month sentence in Australia through blatant
political deal to save John Howard's electoral bacon:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/31/AR2007033100976.html?nav=rss_print/asection
\_ Australia? Who? What? Not living there or being a citizen I
don't see why their internal politics matters to outsiders. If
they were having a coup or changed from a capitalist system to
a socialist one or something, sure, but whatever.
\_ You might want to read the article before you come off sounding
like an idiot. Oops, too late.
\_ It's the motd, it doesn't matter. It's Australia, it doesn't
matter. If it was important you would've told us why we
should take the time to read the article. Apparently no one
else read it or thought it was worth replying to so idiot I
may be but at least I didn't waste my time on your article.
\_ it's not my article, but you're an idiot.
\_ Echoing the previous poster, you are definitely an idiot.
The whole subtext of the article is a Cheney-crony
manipulating the Gitmo "courts" to produce a favorable
political outcome for the leader of Australia. If you
don't see how this relevant to the US, I really can't
help you.
\_ See? Now that was helpful and if the OP had posted
that I might have bothered reading it. Since the motd
just isn't that important, I don't take the time to
read every random link that no one else has bothered
to reply to. It is clear to me now that if I was not
an idiot I'd read every motd link and that would make
me smart! Thank you very much for pointing me in the
direction of smartness. Every trash link to a big boob
pic, lame youtube video, and random blog diatribe now
tops my get-smart-like-you reading list.
\_ you're an idiot not because you didn't read the
link, but because you commented on a link you
didn't read. idiot. |
| 2007/3/29-31 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:46138 Activity:moderate |
3/28 Good thing the GOP has leaders like Tom DeLay:
http://www.slate.com/id/2162672
\_ I assume this is a "Tom DeLay is evul!" article. Seriously, get
over the whole "our guys are angels, your guys are the devil" thing.
You've got land scammers, bribe takers, nation security document
destroyers and various other assorted and sundry felons walking
around free and in power in the majority party. Few things are
uglier than hypocrites.
\_ Pot, kettle, black. Your "defence" for Tom DeLay's hatred and
\_ Pot, Bongwater, Hash. Your "defence" for Tom DeLay's hatred and
corruption is that Democrats do it too? I am actually an
independent and despise (and actually do something about,
which is probably more than you can say) corruption in
both parties. You "assume"? You can't even be bothered to
read the article, but you feel qualified to offer up your
opinion on it? On second thought, this is actually pretty
funny and emblematic of why the GOP is in such bad shape.
\_ can we please stop the use of "Pot, kettle, black"? It's
\_ I don't defend Delay at all. I point out hypocrisy. If
DeLay is evuul, so be it, but to turn a blind eye to (D)
corruption or write it all off as 'not as bad' or to say
'charges haven't been filed so no problemo!' is painfully
and ridiculously intellectually dishonest. And no, I can't
be bothered to read the article. Tell me, was I wrong about
what was in it?
\_ You "pointed out hypocrisy" because I didn't condemn
both Democrats and Republicans in the same motd entry?
You are the hypocrite, padawan.
\_ can we please stop the use of "Pot, Bongwater, Hash"? It's
hackneyed, awkward, and stupid. -tom
\_ Pot, kettle, black.
\_ Pot, Bongwater, Hash.
\_ Pot, Bongwater, Hash.
\_ Pot, Bongwater, Hash.
\_ See, you're misunderstanding the post. The pp didn't say he
was defending DeLay. He said "stop attacking everyone on the
right while ignoring the corruption on the left". Expose the
problems on the left as well. -emarkp
\_ Name a corruption problem on the left. "Voter fraud"
will lose you -2 troll points.
\_ First of all, I have to ask, do you really thing there's
no corruption on the left. Secondly, look up "William
Jefferson"--the guy caught with $90K in his fridge.
-emarkp
\_ 1. That guy was not a major leader of his party.
\_ so what?
2. There is always corruption, but there are levels.
\_ *cough* No! There are no levels! Your
office holders are corrupt or they're not. If
they are corrupt they are undeserving of your
support and should get kicked out and
prosecuted. No level of corruption is ok.
\_ You obviously have not thought about this
too hard. Is Halliburton getting no bid
contracts an example of corruption or not?
How about companies giving big contributions
to office holders and then lobbying them
after they win office. Both of these are
legal, but borderline cases of corruption.
And not everyone is going to agree with
your black and white definition of what
corruption is, so you should stop trying
to force your vision of it on the world,
to force your vision of it on the motd,
and accept that there are going to be
grey areas in the real world.
The modern republican leadership has raised
the level of corruption to where something
like $90K is pocket change. William Jefferson
is more like Cunningham, not like Delay.
\_ Stuffing raw hard cash in your fridge is the
most base form of corruption possible. Even
if your 'relativist corruption' view point was
valid, it doesn't seem to bother you at all.
\_ So you're limiting corruption t leadership? Okay,
then refer beck to the pp about Harry Reid and his
shady land deals. Oh, and I agree that William
Jefferson is more like Cunningham. So why is
Cunningham in jail and Jefferson isn't? -emarkp
\_ Um, time? AFAIK, Jefferson has not been
charged with anything yet. He maintains his
innocence and was recently reelected. Now, I
personally would love to see him resign both
for the horrible appearance of impropriety, and
for the fact that his still being in the House
serves as a football for people like you who
want to say "Democrats do it too!" as cover for
the corrupt party you support. But for now,
he is a duly elected representative of the
people of his district. --scotsman
\_ The fact that months have gone by with no
prosecution or charges while some shmuck
like Libby is facing prison time for nothing
is insane and the root of the problem. His
own party has not only not disowned him but
put him on the DHS committee. Sure makes me
feel so much safer knowing he's only a few
bucks away from screwing over the entire
nations security to the best of his ability.
\_ He asked to be on the DHS committee. He
has not been seated yet. He may never
be. So just chill yourself.
\_ Someone had evidence on Cunningham, presented
such in court, and had him arrested; Jefferson
has been accused, and evidence has been alleged
but neither evidence nor charges have been
forthcoming. This is why C is in jail and J is
not. I agree that "cold hard cash" in his
fridge is fishy, but if he committed a crime,
charge him. --erikred
\_ Fishy? It's only fishy? If it was a (R)
you'd be calling for his political death
along with the rest of the left. *shakes
head* at thought of $90 in the fridge being
merely 'fishy'.
\_ Forgot to mention, why the silence about
Harry Reid's shady land deals? -emarkp
\_ Is there an indictment? Is there
anything beyond allegations? Are you
going to bring up the boxing thing
again? How 'bout Vince Foster again?
\- i shot vince foster, just to watch
him die. --wjc@organ.org
\_ Caught with hand in cookie jar. If
he was a (R) you'd be calling him
the worst sort of criminal. Getting
lawerly is the last sign of a lost
cause.
\_ Cookie Jar? Where? Would you
like to cite evidence, an
investigation, anything?
\_ So why is congress in uproar about AG when
they haven't said word one or done anything
to investigate WJ? They can police their
own members. -emarkp
\_ Politics and priorities, duh.
\_ As noted by above response, for the same
reason that RDC wasn't censured and
ejected when the GOP ran Congress. I will
certainly grant you that. But remember
that uproar over the AG need not preclude
investigation of WJ; these things are not
mutually exclusive as though there were
limited resources to investigate ethical
violations. A lack of political will to
pursue WJ until the charges are leveled
has nothing to do with the investigation
of whether the AG fired US Atys in order
to punish them for not embarassing the
opposition party. --erikred
\_ The USAGs can be fired for any reason
at all. They are politically
appointed positions. How you can say
their firing is worse than stuffing
your fridge with hot cash is beyond
my ability to understand. $90k in
your fridge is just fishy, though.
WJ is not defensible yet you defend
it. The USAG firing were handled
poorly but are in no way illegal, yet
you find this outrageous.
\_ Actually, what I find outrageous is
the idea that the Admin was so
blatant about firing these people
for not launching fruitless and
embarassing investigations of its
political rivals. I find partisan
use of the US Atys as your own
Gestapo utterly outrageous, but
I find the lack of circumspection
and careful planning insulting.
What they're saying is, we'll do
what we like, and you'll shut up
and take it. At least the Reagan
White House went through the
motions; these guys are strictly
amateurs. As for WJ, unlike you,
my capacity for outrage is not
limited to the opp. party; if he's
done wrong here, he's a scumbag,
and he should be censured. I've
got no problem with that. But at
least show me some proof. Also,
am I still talking to emarkp or
just to some AC? --erikred
\_ That swath of entries reeks of
reiffin. --scotsman
\_ Since the Democrats have been out of power in Washington
for so long, there is probably not a lot at the national
level to expose. I have (literally) campaigned for more
oversight at the local level, where the politicians are
all Democrats. Believe me, there is plenty of Democratic
machine corruption in San Francisco, but at least
Newsome is doing someting about it finally.
Newsom is doing someting about it finally.
\_ Newsom is the benefactor of the SF political machine.
He was Willie Brown's boy. I don't live in SF though so
I'm curious what he is doing to cut his own support?
\_ No, he is not really Willie's boy. Willie endorsed
him, but Gavin's "base" is in the Marina/Pac Heights
crowd, where Willie's was in Hunter's Point and
the Projects and the City's municipal unions. Newsom
fired the old corrupt Police Chief and Fire Chief
fired the old corrupt Police of Chief and Fire Chief
and replaced them with reasonably competent
technocrats, has upended the planning dept and
indicted a number of corrupt building inspectors,
and cleaned out the whole rat's nest of corruption
that surrounded placement in public housing.
I am sure there is more that I am unware of. |
| 2007/3/26-29 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:46102 Activity:nil |
3/26 This weekend I saw a man collapse right in front of me, and I was
unable to help him in any way. I could not recognize whether he
had a heart attack, seizure, stroke, or whatever. The only thing
I could do was to call 911 and wait 10 min. I feel very very
helpless and I wish that there was something I could do. Are
there classes out there that can teach me how to recognize what
problems people have and how to help them?
\_ There are numerous first aid, cpr, etc. courses available. Check
with your local adult school, community center, community college.
Maybe local Red Cross chapter? Good on you for calling EMS quickly.
\- to OP: ostenisbly a class will cover some of the legal issues,
but given america is the way it is, you may want to at least
glance at "good samaritan laws" if you are not at all familar
with the concept. if the dood is unconscious, in some ways
that is good ... my parent once had to whack a guy who refused
to leave his car which was on fire, and i once had to drag
somebody who was collpased in the middle of a busy street
away but the person started screaming to be left alone/let go...
if they decide to go after you for assualt since they havent
given concent, it can lead to headaches. [althought my episode
was in france...on the Rue de Rivoli].
\_ PP is correct, CPR class does cover legal aspect of
\_ ^PP^PSB?
helping someone. IIRC, in CA, you do need consent
before administering CPR. If the dude is unconsicous
then the person give implicit consent. Also, you
have the option to NOT help him. However, if you do
start CPR, you can not legally stop. If your CPR
cert. is current, then they normally could not sue
you. You may want to check to see if this has changed.
Also, in other states, some law require you to admin
CPR if you have been trained. It varies.
\_ So 10 minutes later when help arrived, what happened? |
| 2007/3/14 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:45963 Activity:kinda low |
3/14 torture: eh
extraordinary rendition: whatever
illegal wiretapping: yawn
crazy executive signing statements saying 'i dont have to
follow your laws, Congress, piss off': no one cares
HR problems in the Justice Department: THIS WILL NOT STAND
\_ There is one huge differance. There is a democratic congress
and senate willing to actually investigate the issue. That
makes it a lot harder for the administration to wave their arms
about and say "there is nothing to see here".
\- i suspect the OP isnt mystified about the outcome
but is making a comment about priorities. we understand
why monica lewinsky looms larger than say the rwandan
genocide, but it's worth reflecting on that.
\- i actually had a pretty similar reaction to what the OP is
saying. over dinner maybe a week and a half ago when somebody
was gleeful about this being another "front" for BUSHCO to
deal with, I was wondering "well this might also crowd out
the actual really horrible stuff with wide, wide impact ...
like say the iraqi contracting scandals and shutting down any
auditing ... which has cost billions." now i guess i'm glad
i didnt say that. although another way to look at it might be
anything to keep the heat on to make bombing iran less likely.
btw, let's add to the list above: hurricane katerina, osama got
away, taliban is back, and above anything else, there may be
500,000 iraqis who are "dead men walking". re: comment below ...
nobody is trivializing it, but it is smaller than "the loss of
american credibility for a generation". i'd love it if it caused
ALBERTO to get canned, and then we can start scrutinizing
cheney again ... in a sense we've taken our eye off the bald-
headed satan.
\_ Your attempt to trivialize political corruption has been found
wanting. |
| 2007/3/10-12 [Reference/Celebration, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:45923 Activity:nil |
3/10 Happy Birthday Osama! Allahu Akbar!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070310/ts_nm/binladen_birthday_dc_1 |
| 2007/3/5-7 [Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:45875 Activity:moderate |
3/5 "Look, Al Qaeda, they could bring a nuke into this country and kill
a hundred thousand people with a well-placed nuke somewhere, OK? We
would recover from that. It would be a terrible tragedy but the
teachers unions in this country can destroy a generation...Well,
they are destroying a generation. They are MUCH more dangerous. You
know, we worry about Al Qaeda, and we should, but at the same
time, let's not let the teachers unions escape."
--FOX NEWS Quote of the week
\_ Quoting who?
\_ Fox News: still fighting the godless commies even after the USSR
collapsed.
\_ It's a totally useless quote without knowing who was quoted and
the context.
\_ It's Neil Boortz, which you could have found with a google.
http://www.newshounds.us/2007/02/20/the_fox_news_war_on_america_teachers_unions_more_dangerous_than_al_qaeda.php
http://preview.tinyurl.com/yojzaw (newshounds.us)
\_ It's the motd. If the OP wasn't trolling they would have
simply said so since they obviously had it in front of
them. |
| 2007/3/2-3 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:45859 Activity:moderate |
3/2 Returning Honor and Dignity to The White House:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070302/pl_nm/bush_veterans_dc_5
\_ but.. but... privatization fixes everything! invisible hand!
invisible hand!
http://preview.tinyurl.com/2gan3z (cnn.com)
http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/blogs/politicalticker/2007/03/months-before-media-reports-memo.html
\_ Goddamn unions...
http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=33462&ref=rellink
\_ I will not be mocked. --The Invisible Hand |
| 2006/12/18-19 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:45464 Activity:nil |
11/16 Holy Crap!
http://www.fmft.net/archives/BBC_NEWS.htm
42 midgets ring fight a lion, and lose.
\_ http://www.snopes.com/humor/iftrue/lionmidget.asp |
| 2006/11/9-11 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:45309 Activity:high |
11/9 http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/09/election.main/index.html Pelosi said she'll push for implementing all 9/11 Commission recommendations on national security, raising the minimum wage to $7.25, eliminating corporate subsidies for oil companies, allowing the government to negotiate Medicare drug prices, imposing new restrictions on lobbyists, cutting interest rates on college loans and supporting embryonic stem-cell research. EVIL LIBERAL AGENDAS! -Republican \_ I think she also said cutting budgets and not raising taxes, like she's a Republican. \_ Raising the minimum wage is not a tax increaese? \_ Its raising the cost of business... which is not a tax. \_ budget increase, you mean \_ Letting the current tax cut expire is a tax increase. \_ http://www.rightwasright.com \_ I'm down with 6 and 18. And before you think I'm joking about 6, think about how that would work out (note, I didn't say we'd _support_ Hussein, just _reinstate_ him) \_ You realize that would mean immediate full-scale civil war, right? \_ I doubt he cares. \_ Remember, no matter what the gov't says, the minimum wage is always zero. \_ Huh? \_ If you lay someone off, they're earning 0 -!pp \_ So raising minimum wage leads to layoffs... uh huh... do some research young grasshopper. \_ I didn't say i agreed with "Remember..." guy, I was just explaining what "zero" meant. \_ Uh, if you lay them off, they're not working for you, so you're not giving them a wage of zero. You either don't give them a wage, or give them wage > minimum. Unless it's one of those special cases or you're being illegal. \_ no, then we all give them a wage in state funds and services in exchange for nothing while they look for another job. \_ ok but then the wage ain't zero? \_ It's not zero. Wage is the amount of money they get in return when they work. In this case they are not working, so the wage quantity doesn't exist. \_ What about the abortion squads to gather new stem cells and control overpopulation? This is a golden opportunity. \_ Raising the minimum wage is a pretty blunt instrument, and I think it rarely has the result it's implementers intend. \_ Raising the minimum is inflationary. The real reason for doing so has nothing to do with working poor. It has to do with the fact that most union worker rates are based on a multiple of the minimum wage so by increasing the minimum by some percent she just gave an automatic wage increase to most union workers by that amount. It's just a pay off to the unions in exchange for supporting the party that the rest of us all pay for. <s> I'm glad to see we're still doing business as usual. I was somewhat concerned something might change. </sarcasm>. \_ what are other alternatives you are proposing? Here is something I don't understand. If people so dispise minimum wage, why there is no talk about "ABOLISHING* it? Why don't we at the same time abolish the minimum *AGE* too? Let the free market decide what is the minimum wage and minimum AGE. \- because "people" dont despise the minimum wage. in fact it's not even close. it's quite popular in nationalwide polling. google for the obvious like "poll, support minimum wage" etc. we can reasonably argue about various parts of the regulatory state but only nutjobs want to go back to laissez faire red in tooth and claw [disallow regulation of hours, health and safety etc, see lochner etc.]. |
| 2006/11/5-6 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:45171 Activity:high |
11/4 Prediction for the next few days: Saddam found guilty
on Monday, patriots rejoice, and Republicans remain in control.
\_ Watching the Dems go against Rove for control of the electorate
is like watching people fight Royce Gracie in the first couple
UFC's. People would get their ass kicked in the octogon, and
they didn't even know what was happening because BJJ was based
on a fundamentally different approach to the one they were
taking. Likewise, there is no one in America today who even
understands the rules of the game well enough to compete
with Rove in any serious way. Even if the dems get a razor thin
majority in the House, that'll just let Rove keep his base in a
hate-filled frenzy for the next two years to pave the way for an
easy GOP victory in 08. One party rule will be here until someone
kills Rove, learns how to fight back, or fixes our broken
democracy.
\_ The answer is voter education and a greater understanding of
civics across the board. Good luck getting civics put back
in the curriculum. It was pulled out for a reason.
\_ Monkey Chief to Make Statement on Saddam Sentence at 2:20 P.M
EST. Democrats are FUCKED.
\_ Way to go. Calling someone a monkey is an excellent way to
make your point and raise the level of discourse.
\_ If the banana skin fits....
\_ Way to reinforce my point. Thanks.
\_ Seriously, does anyone really believe Bush is an
effective leader or President? Or do they just think
he's useful?
\_ It's already predicted that way:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15547023
Liburals are incompetent.
\_ that's weird, washingtonpost in today's update says 5 seats
are leaning dem, with 4 toss-up
\_ Swami?
\_ err... right now, any news short of another terrorist attack
on US soil *OR* massive casualties on US troops would ulter
the election landscape.
\_ hopefully not. i'd prefer to see the republicans kicked out and
conservatives elected in 2008.
\_ hopefully not. i'd prefer to see the republicans kicked out
and conservatives elected in 2008.
\_ do you mean "fiscal" conservatives?
\_ He must want the ones who legislate what you can do in your
own bedroom. -!op
\_ Why "must" I be a social conservative? You're not only
merely wrong, you're completely 100% wrong. Your knee-jerk
response is too 'smart' and dailykos quality boring.
\_ The Patriots will not be rejoicing. They just got beaten by
the Colts tonight. |
| 2006/11/1-2 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:45069 Activity:nil |
11/01 Maine lawyer arrested for dressing as Bin Laden and waving gun.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061031/od_uk_nm/oukoe_uk_maine_binladen |
| 2006/11/1-2 [Transportation/Car, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:45066 Activity:low 6504%like:45049 |
11/01 So apparently the "Federal Protective Service" is tasked with
guarding federal buildings and as such a legitimate police force,
according to a cop I talked to last night. I still found it a bit
odd to see cars with an ominously undescriptive security force name
and a federal government (DHS) logo on the side pulling over and
questioning/fining people on Market St. last night. -John
\_ They can kill on sight at a hint of gay marraige or flag burning.
I certainly feel safer.
\_ so that was what those shootings in the Castro district were abt
\_ These guys are a bunch of assholes who ignore the law and
harass anyone they can. I work at a federal lab where there is
no classified research and where we are hundreds of miles from
anything that could realistically be considered a target, and
these guys all think they're the thin blubbery line between us
and the TERRORISTS. Presumably if people only come to a rolling
stop at stop signs in the parking lot or walk their dogs on the
property after dark, the terrorists have won. One of our federal
police pulled a gun on a visiting scientist right after 911.
They also used to like to come into the labs late at night when there
were two white guys and an asian guy working together and demand
to see the asian guy's ID but not the white guys. The asian guy
in question was born in the US and has been a federal employee
here for 10 years. A good rule of thumb is that if you think
these guys are ignoring the law and being neandrathal cowboys,
you're probably right. They recently arrested someone here for
refusing to give them their SSN, after they'd already shown their
drivers license and federal employee ID, and then had to let them
go when the local police basically told them to fuck off (because
they called the local PD to ask them to take the guy to jail.)
\_ Just curious, which lab do you work at? -jrleek
\_ NIST, Boulder, which is part of the Dept. of Commerce
\_ You went to Cal. Are you aware the UCPD has jurisdiction anywhere
within (IIRC) 5 miles of *any* UC Regent property? That's not just
Berkeley. *Any* Regent property which is most of the populated
areas of the state.
\_ So UCPD can make arrests anywhere in Downtown Oakland because
there is a UC building is in Chinatown?
\_ Yes. Exactly.
\_ Of course, same with BART police, no? I just found it odd to
see a police force that wasn't either local or state take an
active role. The SFPD cops I asked about it seemed a bit put
off by them. -John
\_ Yes, I believe the same with BART police but BART isn't
state wide. :-)
\_ I was told today that BART cops actually have statewide
jurisdiction, due to some sort of administrative
impossibility limiting it to just the BA. No clue if it's
true or not. -John
\_ Welcome to the New World Order. I can see you have been out of
the country for a while. If you think it is bad here, spend
some time in DC. -ausman |
| 2006/10/30 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:45040 Activity:nil 93%like:45034 |
10/30 http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/10/zawahiri_was_ta.html Surprise! - Pakistani major general says Pakistani attack helos fired 4-5 missiles into terrorist training school, killing ~80, and that no women or children were at the school during the attack. - U.S. major says assault was "completely done by the Pakistani military". Attack comes on day that peace deal between region's tribal leaders in region and Pakistan govt was to be signed. - ABC News reports U.S. Predator UAV(s) actually conducted attack, and that Zawahiri, 2nd in command to Osama, was primary target. - Opposition political leader says 30 children were killed, school was not terrorist training center, and U.S. planes were used. |
| 2006/10/30 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:45039 Activity:nil |
10/30 http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/10/zawahiri_was_ta.html Surprise! In attack initially attributed to Pakistani attack helos on religious school which reportedly kill 80, U.S. Predator UAV(s) actually conducted attack. Zawahiri, 2nd in command to Osama, primary target. |
| 2006/10/30-31 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:45034 Activity:high 93%like:45040 |
10/30 http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/10/zawahiri_was_ta.html (perhaps not a) Surprise! - Pakistani major general says Pakistani attack helos fired 4-5 missiles into terrorist training school, killing ~80, and that no women or children were at the school during the attack. - U.S. major says assault was "completely done by the Pakistani military". Attack comes on day that peace deal between region's tribal leaders and Pakistan govt was to be signed. - ABC News reports U.S. Predator UAV(s) actually conducted attack, and that Zawahiri, 2nd in command to Osama, was primary target. - Opposition political leader says 30 children were killed, school was not terrorist training center, and U.S. planes were used. (I kind of don't believe the children part, because kids' bodies are easily shown to the camera, and these haven't appeared. Young adults, okay; a few kids, certainly possible) \_ Which part is the "Surprise!"? \_ yeah, the ABC News report is suspect. The standard Hellfire 1-2 missiles that Predators carry isn't enough to kill 50-80 people normally. -op \_ I wondered about this too. A couple of Predator drones "completely destroyed a compound" and "killed 50-80 people?" Yeah right. \_ it also doesn't make sense that 4-5 rockets/missiles from from attack helos did it either. Weird. -op \_ Attack helos carry more than 1 rocket each. It depends on if they meant that 4-5 rockets were fired or some unknown number of helos each fired 4-5 rockets. But, no, I agree with you that 4-5 rockets total would be unlikely to directly kill 80 people. Perhaps the building was multi-story and collapsed and burned and that killed ~80 people? \_ the Pakistani major general was pretty clear: 4-5 rockets/missiles total. Maybe it was an anti-personnel Hellfire variant (just add Al powder), first tested in Iraq in '03. -op http://csua.org/u/hbq (globalsecurity.org) |
| 2006/10/22-23 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:44911 Activity:nil |
10/22 US bans evil dangerous terrorist vegemite:
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,20623973-2,00.html -John
\_ POE!
\_ I was thinking more along the lines of Soylent Green. -John |
| 2006/10/20-23 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:44896 Activity:nil |
10/20 Johnson's successful campaign ad for the 1964 presidential election
link:www-tc.pbs.org/30secondcandidate/movies/spots/20_johnson_64.mov
New GOP commercial
http://www.gop.com (under "Top Story")
\- the '64 tv comercial is super famous ... enough to have its own
wikipedia entry.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daisy_(television_commercial
hmm, i never noticed the WHAUDEN line.
\_ Response.
http://democrats.org/a/2006/10/rnc_ad_shows_de.php
You know the trouble with this GOP administration is that
the things I hate about them have little to nothing to do with
traditional left vs. right political issues. That's why I don't
even think that matters anymore at the federal level. |
| 2006/10/20-24 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:44889 Activity:nil |
10/20 http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/001845.php House Appropriations chair, himself under investigation, fires all 60 contract employees who had been tasked with investigating government waste/fraud, leaving 16 perm staff \_ Ah the new Republican "don't ask, don't tell" policy re: corruption. |
| 2006/10/15-17 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:44825 Activity:nil |
10/15 Tell me the difference in power and ability and
importance of the Israeli Prime Minister and the
Israeli President. thanks
\_ The Israeli President is mostly a figure head position. The real
power belongs to their Prime Minister. Why do you ask?
\_ THE JOOOOOS!!!!!111one have ALL the power, what are you talking
about?!
\_ news says he's about to be charged wtith multiple rape counts
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6054138.stm |
| 2006/10/14-17 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:44821 Activity:nil |
10/14 Harry Reid seems to have quite the history of shady land deals
http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/2685
\_ you know it really seems like Harry Reid's land scandal
is pretty boring stuff. I try but I just can't get that
excited about it.
\_ yeah corruption and graft is pretty boring. if only he'd nailed
an intern or page then we'd get excited about it. but abuse of
office for personal gain? pfah!
\_ From this website: "We know the Dems want to surrender Iraq to Al
Qaeda, tear down our most successful defensive monitoring efforts,
and supply lawyers to terrorists now in jail."
Yawn. If you're going to troll, couldn't you at least get creative?
\_ So because you don't like some of the opinion, you reject the
stated facts?
\_ The Internet: A hundred million sources, a few thousand
citations. In the face of overwhelming noise, guilt by
association sticks. |
| 2006/10/12-14 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:44792 Activity:nil |
10/12 http://csua.org/u/h6f (tradesports.com) Futures trading on Mark Warner as Dem '08 Pres candidate. Can you guess what happened? You're right. |
| 2006/10/12-14 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:44791 Activity:nil |
10/12 US Election Assistance Commission finds little evidence of fraud
at voting polls. Most voting fraud apparently occurs through
absentee ballots:
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20061011/1a_lede11.art.htm
\_ So they didn't find stuffed ballot boxes... who said they would?
Now, where does it say they didn't find evidence of or the potential
for manipulation of Diebold voting machines?
\_ Just in time for a story about recently found fraudulent voting
registration applications by a Democrat group:
http://www.forbes.com/home/feeds/ap/2006/10/11/ap3084684.html |
| 2006/10/11-12 [Politics/Domestic/911, Reference/RealEstate] UID:44772 Activity:moderate |
10/11 Holy shit, Bin-Ladin decided to strike a month later!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061011/ts_nm/crash_plane_dc_1
\_ New York Yankee pitcher Cory Lidle was apparently piloting the
airplane and died in the crash. Wow. Who knew that Al-Qaeda had
infiltrated the Yankees and Major League Baseball!?!
\_ See? Yet another failure of the Bush administration to indentify
the spread of terrorism into our turfs before they strike. The
CIA should have taken action when Lidle met with bin Laden at the
Afghan cave last year.
\_ Osama Bin Laden flys a small single engine plane into a luxury
condo because... he thinks Bush resides there? October Surprise!
\_ Isn't Bill Clinton's place up that way? Maybe Osama was trying
to get back at him. -tom
\_ Get back at him for what?
\_ fyi, comparing overhead images with photos of the scene, I would say
it was intentional (revenge, suicide, terrorism, whatever). It's a
straight shot into the center mass of the north face of one of the
taller condo complexes, with other directions blocked by other tall
bldgs, and the river nearby if they really wanted to ditch.
I also understand it was very foggy, so it's possible pilot was a
numbnut.
\_ i bet it's a domestic thing. i bet the guy was seeking revenge
for a BITCH that used him to do her b-school cs9x projects and
then tossed him away
\_ Rent/own a piece of fine Manhattan real estate!
http://www.olshan.com/property.php?id=137940
http://www.olshan.com/property.php?id=149028
\_ I need to boost my salary five-fold to be able to afford these.
numbnut. I also think "524 e 72nd st" is the wrong address.
\_ Which? If you could boost your salary five-fold and afford
the second, I'd still be impressed with your current salary.
\_ Apparently the plane was flown by The Yankees pitcher Lidle:
http://tinyurl.com/gssov (newsday.com)
\_ Why do the Yankees hate America?
\_ Hey, the man couldn't pitch them into the playoffs, so he
did the honorable thing. Odds are that was a Mets fan's
apartment.
\_ http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2621860
Murphy's law. You tell the NY Times a month before about only 1% of
pilots ever experiencing an engine failure, and those that do safely
landing the plane most of the time, and a parachute that can be
deployed for the whole plane, and then you crash into a condo.
\_ If ARod had been piloting, they would've missed the building. |
| 2006/10/8-10 [Politics/Domestic/911, Reference/Military] UID:44723 Activity:nil |
10/7 Navy lawyer whose defense of Osama bin Laden's driver led to the
Hamdan decision is forced into retirement by the Navy:
http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/news/nation/15704593.htm |
| 2006/10/7-10 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44717 Activity:nil |
10/7 I've been watching HBO's Rome series (about 80% historically accurate,
20% gratuitous), so this Robert Harris NYT OpEd piece struck home:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/30/opinion/30harris.html |
| 2006/10/5-7 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:44702 Activity:high |
10/5 Ok, found the Michelle Malkin video youtube banned.
http://hotair.cachefly.net/media.michellemalkin.com/firsttheycame0545.wmv
Someone tell me why this got banned.
\_ You realize her video "first they came" is available on youtube,
right? Uploaded Feb. 2006. Not by her, granted, but still, it's
not like this isn't on youtube or is in any way non-trivial to find.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=wEgoUJqnzxo
\_ Because she is ugly.
\_ No she's not.
\_ Ok, thanks. So there's no reason to have banned the Malkin video.
That's what I thought.
\_ Actually, that's not true. Here's YouTube's Terms of Use on
what submitters agree they will not do:
"(ii) publish falsehoods or misrepresentations that could
damage YouTube or any third party;
(iii) submit material that is unlawful, obscene, defamatory,
libelous, threatening, pornographic, harassing, hateful,
racially or ethnically offensive, or encourages conduct that
would be considered a criminal offense, give rise to civil
liability, violate any law, or is otherwise inappropriate;
(iv) post advertisements or solicitations of business"
Ignoring the first two, the video is clearly an advertisement
for Michelle Malkin's website. Now, if the submitter had left
off the last bit of the video, the other two sections might
have come into play, but submitter didn't, so they don't.
\_ So all the OTHER videos that show a website should be
removed as well?
\_ If it was just that then why didn't they tell her that
instead of sending her a generic note and ignoring her
attempts to find out which policy she violated? It seems
very simple to tell someone they violated the advertising
clause so they can fix it and continue being a user in good
standing. Banning someone without telling them which of
many policies they violated is, at best, unfair and
unprofessional. And as the above says are they removing
all videos that violate the advertising clause? I think
not. Sorry, not buying it.
\_ I salute your idealism but goddamn Michelle Malkin
is an evil troll with an amazing command of rhetoric
who needs to be destroyed.
\_ It's likely that not all videos that violate the ad
clause are being flagged as inappropriate by users.
MM is a high profile nutjob^H^H^H^Hperson, and as such
is more likely to get scrutinized (and ratted out).
As for professionalism and such, sure, I'll grant that
the organization should answer her requests for more
info. And (now watch carefully, this is where the magic
happens) as for professionalism, MM should stop being a
hatemongering harpy and should try to construct useful
and logical arguments that don't begin and end with
omigodThey'reAllEvil!
\_ Did you see the video that got banned? What is
wrong with it? Where is the evil? And if Malkin
or anyone else wants to use their free service she
should be able to. If not then they should add
something to the terms of service that would exclude
her kind of videos without targetting her personally
and then enforce that policy across the board. Policy
exists to enforce rules equally so people's personal
opinion doesn't factor in to enforcement. I'm sure
you can agree that would be a good thing.
\_ A good thing? Yes. But I think it's pretty clear
that terms of use like those on youtube are written
in part to cover the asses of the owners when they
choose to selectively censor. It's the private
sector equivalent of laws that everyone is
in violation of that give cops the legal cover
to harass whoever they want. I've personally
dealt with this with Cafe Press. Fucking assholes.
\_ Man, I couldn't agree more. Fucking Rupert
Murdock!
\_ According to the person who posted the Terms of
Use, she did. Either way, there are hundreds of
people who post their crap on ebay, myspace, or
youtube who gets their stuff banned and all they
youtube who get their stuff banned and all they
get is nothing more than a form
letter^H^H^H^H^H^Hemail. I'm sure some of them
are quite egregious while others are just
straddling the line. But it doesn't matter. These
companies cater to thousands of free -loaders and
they don't have time to put with the childish
whining of Malkin orto whipe her ass. She should
whining of Malkin or to wipe her ass. She should
be thankful that she was allowed to host her
other videos at no cost.
\_ It isn't costing them anything. She and all
the rest of the users are the youtube product.
She is providing content, not getting a free
ride. If she got banned she has the right to
question it. It isn't childing whining. If
youtube has an editorial policy I'm totally
ok with that *if* they are honest about it,
which they're not. And no, it isn't ok because
they do it to other people, too. And no I
don't think putting your URL for 3 seconds at
the end of a 3 minute video is advertising,
especially in the case of a public figure like
Malkin. Let's be honest and stop ignoring the
elephant: she got banned because she's a
conservative.
\_ It does cost youtube something. Youtube has
a telecom bill to pay. They also need to pay
\_ A core cost their core business
model. Pft.
\_ And if you have a bandwidth
quota, you want to make sure
that your link is being used
by things that conform to
your business model.
for lawyers and insurance in case some ass
fucker goes crazy on them for something
offensive that was posted on youtube. Being
\_ All corporations have lawyers on
retainer. Pft.
\_ And attracting hate mail from
crazy terrorists is probably
something their lawyers told
them not to do. The moment
you have another incident like
the Danish cartoon one, you're
going to be paying huge legal
fees.
a private entity, youtube also has the right
to decide which "products", as you call them,
to put out or reject for whatever reasons
they want. Yes, she has the right to question
\_ Her content and that of many others
is not the direct product. It is
what attracts people to the site so
they can sell ads or do whatever
with their customer database. Of
course they have the right to reject
whatever they want. No one has ever
said otherwise. Red herring.
\_ And the yanking of her video
seems to be generating even
more traffic than her video
did by herself. You're asking
why MM's video got yanked and
I'm saying they based it on
their terms of use. You think
otherwise and I'm saying it
doesn't matter because they
can decide however they want
what's appropriate or not and
they don't have to explain in
Moby Dick form to every reject
why X got yanked.
what youtube did but youtube also has the
right to send her a form letter and tell
her to screw off. Personally, if I was
\_ They do, yes. No dispute there.
Their reason for doing so in this
case is her politics, not any
bogus violation of policy. That is
the issue. Their unprofessionalism
and cowardice is a distinct issue.
\_ Unprofessionalism? Okay, think
about it this way. How many
videos do you think has to be
rejected every day? How many
people do you think youtube
has to approve or reject videos?
How much time do you think it
would take for one of these
guys to wipe someone's ass
everytime their video gets
rejected? You do the math. And
if you're going to be talking
about unprofessionalism, why
not take a look at Malkin
herself. What is her profession?
Last time I checked, nutjob
wasn't a profession.
running a site like youtube, I would find
MM's "products" devaluing to my site. I also
\_ You'd be wrong. She attracts
visitors which is your core product.
\_ Already made my point before.
Yanking an MM video == more
traffic.
wouldn't have my staff put up with MM's
whining because if they had to wipe every
reject's ass the way you and MM are
suggesting, they wouldn't have time for more
productive things like wiping their own ass.
\_ If your company can't afford a form
letter for each of the half dozen
possible policy violations and send
the correct one then your company
is dead anyway. There's this silly
thing called "customer service" that
actually matters in the real world.
\_ which is of course why every
company is outsourcing it to
people in Bangalore who don't
speak English. -tom
\_ And getting crushed in the CS
satisfaction ratings. Which
is why the smart places are
bringing CS back to the US. |
| 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? |
| 2006/9/29 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:44600 Activity:moderate |
9/29 So, you lesbians, you still think penis is an ineffective pleasure?
The stupid detainee (lack of rights) bill was passed.
No Habeas Corpus; no examine of secret evidence against the
accused. the accused can not sue the government for violation
of their rights. Democrats end up follow Bush's lead? Jesus.
for a moment I thought the judicial system in China was bad,
it looks like there is a big trend of convergence!
\_ At least we don't charge for the cartridgess used in executions
\_ He's a Republican President with a Republican Congress going into
election season to try to hang onto their majority. In order for
them to abandon him, they'd have to have the kind of moral
fortitude that gets you shunned in the Capitol. Seriously, short
of raping a schoolbus full of nuns and retarded children on
national TV, there's not much he could do to lose the support of
the hangers-on.
\_ Or maybe *not* have sex with that woman! (rim shot!)
\_ I was really depressed about all of this until I realized that
there's almost no chance it will stand up in court - in fact,
apparently a lot of of the Congresscritters that voted FOR the
law don't think it is Constitutional either.
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/001637.php
\_ Right, but since traiters like Bill Frist have made it clear
that they do not support the judiciary branch as a check on
the other two branches of government, one has to ask how long
such a check will last? When a solid majority of the people in
a democratic nation fail to hold democratic values, democracy
dies. I think op may have the right idea that as China increases
the rule of law and the U.S. erodes it that we'll meet in the
middle. |
| 2006/9/26-27 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:44555 Activity:moderate 71%like:44566 |
9/26 Left wing socialist wants to limit and simplify college choices:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/EDUCATION/09/26/higher.education.ap/index.html
\_ Motd nutcase likes to post misleading headlines:
Right here.
\_ isn't she a Republican?
\_ Bush is actually a closet liberal.
\_ Bush is actually a social conservative and economic liberal. |
| 2006/9/26-27 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:44549 Activity:high |
9/26 Liberals are screwed:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/26/nie.iraq/index.html
\_ Wow, the headline really doesn't agree much w/ the bulk of the
article.
\_ I like: "Bush said he agreed with the report's conclusions that al
Qaeda is becoming more diffuse and decentralized but rejected the
interpretation that the Iraq war had made the U.S. less safe."
It's like "ooh, i like that part. i don't like that other part,
it makes me feel poopy" What is he, a 4-year-old?
\_ He asked for Dick Cheney to be with him when he was interviewed
by the 9/11 Commission. What does that tell you?
\_ It tells me that a golden opportunity was missed.
\_ Don't you mean America is screwed? |
| 2006/9/25-27 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:44527 Activity:kinda low |
9/25 Starting tomorrow, you can now bring terrorist liquids and gels (<= 3oz
each) in a single, 1-quart-size zip-lock bag, to be deposited in X-ray
bin along with your terrorist notebook. Doublegoodplus.
http://csua.org/u/h00 (tsa.gov)
\_ Brought to you by Johnson, a Family Company -- Ziploc, the ONLY
way to be sure.
\_ What if I just bring a match and order a lot of liquor and
light them up during the flight?
\_ Can you light alcohol lower than, say, 20% alcohol? Can
you get stronger alcohol than that on a plane?
\_ "100 proof" was originally defined as a solution of water
and alcohol that, when poured on a pinch of gunpower, would
still be flammable. Turns out to be 57% alcohol. -tom
\_ This is so freaking stupid. Can they even demonstrate how bringing
liquids on a plane is actually a threat, or is this just more "make
the public feel safer because we don't let grandmothers on with
their knitting needles" bullshit?
\_ I thought knitting needles were allowed again..
\_ Just drawing parallels with the silly not-really-secure
reactionary measures post-9/11
\_ According to this: http://tinyurl.com/h8xht
Making explosives like this would require "equipment", 12-36
hours and produce "vile fumes", not would be impossible to
hours and produce "vile fumes" --- impossible to
whip up in a little while in an airplane lavatory.
\_ What if you're carrying more than 3oz of urine in your bladder?
\_ Hey, there's a terrorism idea. Take bleach on airplane.
Combine with urine in bathroom. Instant chlorine gas!
\_ Or breed terrorists with liquid explosive blood and built
in detonators.
\_ Dude, this should totally be the next Vin Diesel movie.
\_ That was a cool Philip K. Dick short story, about
a person who is replaced with a perfect android
copy fitted with a very powerful bomb. The
android has been programmed not to know he is an
android, and the bomb is triggered to go off when
the android utters a sentence that shows he has
realized he's not the original person and has a
bomb inside of him.
\_ Impostor, starring Gary Sinise
\_ Just eat lots of beans right before boarding, and launch an in-fight
H2S gas attack to poison everyone on board. No banned substance
involved.
\_ Myth: Busted! |
| 2006/9/24-26 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:44514 Activity:nil |
9/23 Liberal CIA undermining American resolve in the Global War On Terror:
http://www.csua.org/u/gzo |
| 2006/9/22-25 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:44495 Activity:nil |
9/22 "The national Democratic Party is no longer worth the cement needed to
sink it to the bottom of the sea."
http://www.prospect.org/weblog/2006/09/post_1477.html#010031
\_ The guy is right that Dems have not said a thing while
McCain/Graham/Warner and Cheney "compromised". However, the
criticism is premature. I believe this bill is dead for this
Congressional session; there are too many controversial elements
with too little time to bring GOP senators on board. There is
insufficient time for GOPers to gain sufficient confidence in the
talking points to force the Dems to filibuster, which they will
but they won't need to. -- Also note that the "compromise" stories
that headlined last night have failed to get front-page on the
web sites of major newspapers, which indicates the incompleteness
of the deal.
\_ The Democratic Party is now the Jew Party, has been for some time.
\_ Where's ilya when we need him? |
| 2006/9/22-25 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:44492 Activity:low |
9/22 Chavez clamps down on free press... some more. (Old, from March)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A5755-2005Mar27.html
I guess I really just don't get American Chavez supporters.
\_ I'm going to google this further, but I'd like to point out that
this is a piece by a columnist. If Herb Caen had written something
like this, I don't think you'd really have paid attention.
\_ Too bad he wasn't born in the U.S.--he missed his calling as a
talk radio show host. "I can still smell the sulfur!"
\_ [Removed by poster after re-reading the article. Goddamn socialist
strongarm dictators.] On the other hand, I don't really get
Sumate; I don't know if their intentions are that pure, and I am
quite worried about an installed democracy by way of GWB's oil-
peddling pals. Cf. The Carmona Decree.
\_ Am I the only one who sees Chavez/Thaksin parallels? Elected
democratically, opportunistically squelches dissent but nominally
by use of "legal" means, with support of a mainly poor and other-
wise disenfranchised constituency, or is this a stretch? -Joh
wise disenfranchised constituency, or is this a stretch? -John
\_ The populism is there, but Chavez has been smart/cunning enough
to preserve his ranking among the people who elected him. Also,
Venezuelan elections have been remarkably clean and transparent,
while the most recent Thai elections have been questionable.
Chavez appears to be winning because more of his supporters are
showing up at the polls than are his detractors. --erikred
\_ I'd dispute that the elections seemed entirely clean (he
controls the electoral commission and packed the supreme
court.) The major difference is that in Venezuela there
is neither a higher instance (e.g. the king) nor a shadow
power keeping an eye on things, such as the army (which
is similar to Turkey's in that regard.) -John |
| 2006/9/21-25 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:44490 Activity:nil |
9/21 "I'm pleased to say this agreement preserves the most single, the most
potent tool we have in protecting America and foiling terrorist
attacks. The agreement clears the way to do what the American people
expect us to do - to capture terrorists, to detain terrorists, to
question terrorists, and then to try them."
-Dubya on detainee bill compromise
It depends on what the meaning of the word "question" is.
\_ It looks like the senators basically caved.
\_ it looks like those Republican Senators who has been through
torture themselves has forgotten what is like.
\_ Obviously you've never served.
\_ Obviously Bush never served.
\_ The compromise explicity assigns to the President "the authority
for the United States to interpret the meaning and application of
the Geneva Conventions"
the Geneva Conventions", and also gives immunity to anyone who
violated Geneva Conventions in the past up until now.
No Supreme Court or Congress getting involved in this one!
\_ So, fellow motd-ans...how does it feel to have the first
"torturer in chief?" |
| 2006/9/21-24 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44481 Activity:low |
9/21 In other torture news, ABC reporter Brian Ross reports that torture
works. Video clip: http://csua.org/u/gyd
\- i think claiming torture doesnt work is as crazy as claiming
smoking isnt bad for you. i mean just like all you need to do is
blow smoke from one cigarette though a white sheet and look at
the fucking residue ... then multiply by 100000. similarly ask yourself
"would i or most of the fucking people o know break if soembody popped out
the residue ... then multiply by 100000. similarly ask yourself
"would i or most of the people o know break if soembody popped out
my eyeball and sqeezed it or started chopping off fingers or crushed
my knee in a vise" ...
i sure as hell would. now what might be different is to be able
to hold out for 12hrs while you cell gets away ... but that is a
more limited case ... like maybe how second hand smoke is a more
linited case. now whether stuff like sleep deprivation or
waterboarding are more or less effecting than these medival
methods i dont know, but the fucking medival stuff scares the shit out of
methods i dont know, but the medival stuff scares the shit out of
me. also my understanding is electric wire between te teeth is
good way of causing mongo pain ... although that isnt as scary as
the fucking medival stuff.
\_ You're a fucking idiot. Fucker.
the medival stuff.
\_ the big criticism (aside from the ethical issues) is that,
assuming they did one bad thing and tell you they did it, how
do you know everything else they tell you isn't bullshit just
to get you to stop torturing them? And let's say they're
innocent: How do you know if they're just making shit up so you
won't torture them further?
\_ Well in general they want to know a specific thing. So if the
guy tells them something and they verify it as true, then
the guy stops getting tortured (hopefully for him). If he's
innocent or feeding bogus info, they keep going until he's
dead or whatever they feel like. Sucks to be him. But IF he
knew something, it still does work in many cases.
\_ How do you know he doesn't know more?
\_ If I rape your daughter, I might conceive a really awesome kid.
Chances are a low, but it might happen. Why shouldn't I rape
your daughter?
\_ No reason, according to the scriptures the Christian GOP
claims as the basis of their morality.
\_ go ask Colin Powel. Some of the "evidence" against Iraq in his
address to United Nation was extracted from confession under
torture. The subject later said he said that just to stop the
torture. So, we invaded Iraq under some false confession under
torture. should we learn something from it?
\_ Yes. We learned that ideologically impure people like Powell
need to be purged from the Party and discredited earlier rather
than later so that they cannot intervene in our agenda. -GOP
\_ Like the Lieberman scum. I'm so glad we got rid of *that*
traitor! And those dumb GOPpers keeping Chafee on board
instead of purging him. Bahaha! --Dem
\_ like how you got "torture" to show up like that. |
| 2006/9/20-22 [Politics/Domestic/911, Science/GlobalWarming] UID:44476 Activity:kinda low |
9/20 After 911, did the fucking sales of Aladdin merchandize and related
products go down?
\_ ob http://www.lovedungeon.net/humor/misc/aladdin.html
\_ Why? Persia rocks. It's the modern Islamic world that sucks.
\_ Why? Persia rocks. It's the fucking modern Islamic world that sucks.
\_ Because Al Laden (Aladin) is related to Bin Laden.
\_ Just how long were you sitting on your couch smoking dope
before this occurred to you?
\_ I think it was a joke. --- !PP
\_ fwiw, wikipedia says it comes from "Ala ad-Din".
Like Salah ad-Din.
\_ So are the descendants of Salah ad-Din living in
modern Iran now? And why do Iranians like to
say they're Persian instead of Iranian? Is it
similar to the reason why some people like to say
they're Ayrans instead of Caucasians?
\_ http://www.aladdin.com -- smart card sales still strong. -John |
| 2006/9/20-22 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:44467 Activity:nil |
9/20 Special rights for Christian terrorists in Indonesia.
http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/09/well-beyond-satire.html
\_ this is cool. thanks. |
| 2006/9/19-22 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:44449 Activity:nil |
9/19 http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/19/world/americas/19canada.html USA is great! |
| 2006/9/12-15 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:44362 Activity:nil |
9/12 http://blog.washingtonpost.com/postglobal Wash Post staff ask intl panel what they think about Dubya's military tribunals that strip Geneva rights: The German dude is hilarious. Also, the only panelist who comes out for torture sets up strawmen, saying he doesn't support "unlimited torture" nor "withholding all forms of physical and psychological pressure". Dude, no normal person in the whole damn world supports unlimited torture OR withholding all forms of physical and psych pressure. What a moron. \_ You framed this in such a way that there is no response other than questioning your framing which gets into boring rhetorical noise. |
| 2006/9/11-14 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:44345 Activity:nil |
9/11 http://time.blogs.com/daily_dish/2006/09/the_rove_campai.html The "hail-mary" play that Dubya intends to spring this month and next: Those who insist on rights for terrorist killers are preventing justice from being served for 9/11 widows, and will lead to mushroom clouds over major American cities. \_ I'm glad we are so cynical now. Nationalist Socialist Party would be alive and well. \_ "If you need proof that this administration's first priority is not a humane and effective counter-terror strategy, but a brutal, exploitative path to retaining power at any price, you just got it." What we got was Andrew Sullivan going off on a conspiratorial rant based on, "I'm informed via troubled White House sources". What is the point of posting this? "I'm informed by deeply troubled and unnamed motd sources that ...". Just as good. \_ A cow would understand the difference. \_ I'm offended that your cow is offended. --offended |
| 2006/9/11-12 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:44342 Activity:nil |
9/10 Any review on ABC's 911 TV series?
\_ Only part 1 has aired.
\_ http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/08/arts/television/08path.html |
| 2006/9/8-12 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44324 Activity:nil |
9/8 http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/08/washington/09intelcnd.html NY Times reports that there is no evidence that Hussein had ties to al Qaeda - but liberals fail to understand that not finding the evidence may result in mushroom clouds over one or more major American cities \_ Honestly, do you really believe the Administration line? Or is this just something you believe because it stirs people up? \_ NYT? Could you cite a source that doesn't have a long history of both obvious bias and flat out incompetent screwups? The Daily Cal has a better record than the NYT. \_ http://intelligence.senate.gov/phaseiiaccuracy.pdf But I guess even a bipartisan senate committee report has probably been tampered with by Bill Clinton's chinese army black helicopters controlled by the liberal media in canada in league with the New World Order. In fact the GOP senators who signed off on the above official document only did so to trick you into letting the UN take away your guns and burning your country western albums. \_ I love this "the new york times is all propaganda" campaign you have going on. \_ You can practically see the little gears working in his brain when he reads this. MUST ATTACK SOURCE! \_ If the source sucks there's no reason to post from it. The NYT sucks. Their track record in recent years is undefendable. I used to read it 7 days a week because they actually made some effort to report news and kept the editorials to the op/ed page but now the whole thing is a giant op/ed. I'm not the only subscriber they've lost recently. When they stop sucking they'll sell more papers. In the mean time, thanks for posting the senate.gov document and if you can't get a quality first hand source like that the DC is still a better source than the NYT. \_ The senate.gov link was from the top of the nytimes article, moron. \_ So what? Why not just post the real info instead of forcing people to visit a crap site? And why do you feel the need to personally insult someone? Do you have a vested personal interest in the NYT? \_ FOX NEWS! FAIR AND BALANCED! \_ http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,212897,00.html |
| 2006/9/8-12 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton] UID:44322 Activity:nil |
9/8 Where's the ACLU when you need 'em?
http://reid.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm?id=262624&&year=2006&
\_ I see no traces of censorship. Maybe you need to take off your
blinders.
\_ Agreed.
\_ You don't think it's a bit odd that the senate leadership should
recommend what a TV show should air or not air?
\_ You don't think it's a bit odd that the democrat senate
leadership should recommend what a TV show should air or not air?
\_ You mean like when the republicans urged CBS not to air the
Reagan film? Calling something "Based on the 9/11 Commission
Report" and then putting in crap that directly contradicts
their findings is utter crap, and they're right to call them
out on it. This is walking the line of propoganda (which is
illegal, by the way).
\_ Ever heard of Tipper Gore?
\_ There is a huge difference between saying "I don't think this
is the right thing to do" and saying "You can't do this".
The former happens all the time in politics. The latter is
censorship. If you can't tell the difference, well you've
been living in a cave for what, 200 years?
\_ Oh, I can tell the difference. But I think if Rebpublican
leadership did the same thing, the ACLU would be releasing
out the hounds.
\_ And I think I'm the Emperor of Mars, that doesn't make
me right.
\_ Not unless the GOP leadership actually had the show
banned. There hasn't been any actionable action taken
on this.
\_ Hee hee. http://www.tv.com/story/story.html&story_id=6213
"ABC/Disney acknowledges this show is fiction and in direct
contradiction of the 9/11 commission report and the facts,"
Clinton Foundation spokesman Jay Carson said in a statement.
"No reputable organization should dramatize 9/11 for a profit
at the expense of the truth."
So I guess Michael Moore sitting next to Jimmy Carter at the
DNC was....
\_ I didn't see F9/11. Did it somehow involve dramatizations
of 9/11?
\_ You know, I've heard that the second night hammers the Bush
administration pretty bad. And yet I've heard of no objections from
the right side of the aisle.
\_ Is it accurate? Is it false enough that it could be easily
repudiated without exposing them to further, possibly unwanted,
scrutiny? |
| 2006/9/7-10 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:44316 Activity:nil |
9/7 So, if a terrorist stuck a stick of dynamite up his ass, how
would airports catch that? Or had explosive constituent liquids
in there in a bag. Or just strapped the liquids next to their
body. They don't x-ray people yet right?
\_ If you have a good explosives sniffer, it'll probably pick it
up. There was something in the news recently about a DHS fuckup
with funding for some really kickass Japanese machine. Plus
the guy would be walking funny. -John |
| 2006/9/5-7 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/Asia/India] UID:44278 Activity:low |
9/5 http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1696014/posts http://www.paktribune.com/news/index.shtml?153297 Pakistan signs peace agreement with pro-Taliban tribes in N Waziristan, with prisoner release and abandonment of some Pakistani security posts; Osama bin Laden not to be taken into custody as long as he does not disturb the local peace. \_ err... this is not news. It is well known that Pakistan authorities had a truce with pro-taliban tribes. \_ well known? the freepers sure seem surprised, and I haven't seen it on Page 1's, especially the part about Osama. \_ Also, did anyone tell George? 'Cos he just put Osama at the top of the list again.... \_ someone told the Pakistani army spokesman who first mentioned letting Osama go to completely disavow his earlier statement earlier statement. Actually, I take that back, Brian Ross misreported, see below: \_ http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/09/pakistan_denies.html The ABC News Brian Ross blog yesterday distorted what the Pakistani general had said. To its lame credit, the blog today posts the exact quote: "One has to stay like a peaceful citizen and not allowed to participate in any kind of terrorist activity." Also, it is true that the same spokesman today said that HVTs like Osama will be pursued regardless of their current behavior. -op |
| 2006/9/2-5 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:44250 Activity:nil |
9/2 Protest over Pluto's demotion ... The "Size doesn't matter" sign I
think captures all the theonion glory of the story (note, it's
NOT a theonion story, or at least CNN doesn't think it is):
http://tinyurl.com/epvlx |
| 2006/8/29-9/1 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:44196 Activity:nil |
8/29 Homeland Security (Coast Guard) whistleblower on youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qd3VV8Za04g
\_ Interesting. I don't doubt the veracity of his technical
details, but I think he blows them a bit out of proportion.
(For example, using unshielded cables for transmissions probably
doesn't create enough leakage to be a security problem in the
common case). Still, he does get at some of the core issues
of the military-industrial complex, and how it has little
incentive to produce taxpayer value. -tom
\_ Government has no incentive to produce tax payer value. Period.
Not at the Federal level, the State, the County, or City. How
much tax payer value does the typical employee provide if they
are sitting on the wall and motd all day?
\_ gee, most of the people on the wall and motd are not
government employees, and neither is the guy in the video.
-tom
\_ transparent strawman. non-responsive. F.
\_ motd has answered technical questions that have saved this
govt. employee money and time on numerous occasions. I think
this outweighs the detriments of the occasional flamewar with
ChiCom troll. --erikred
\_ No doubt at all that some make better use of their time
here than others.
\- I have personally improved the efficiency of a
$100million dollar machine by 1.71%, so I have done
my part. BTW, if you want to rain against perverse
incentives, you should talk about Management Buyouts. |
| 2006/8/28-30 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44176 Activity:nil |
8/28 http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/755793.html Olmert appoints two investigative comittees with limited power "We do not have the luxury to sink into investigations of the past, we need to focus on the future and the Iranian threat" "it's absolutely clear that Hezbollah has been whipped" \_ Wow, Bush-style governing is spreading 'round the world \_ gee, I thought "Spreading of American-style Democracy" only limit to democracy based upon one superior race over another. \_ No, you didn't. |
| 2006/8/22-24 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:44102 Activity:nil |
8/22 Osama wanted to marry Whitney Houston:
http://entertainment.iafrica.com/news/944967.htm
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/860.gif |
| 2006/8/21-22 [Reference/Military, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:44087 Activity:nil |
8/21 http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/753032.html Open letter from terrorist lovers to Israeli defense minister |
| 2006/8/17-23 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia] UID:44051 Activity:kinda low |
8/17 District Judge strikes down NSA eavesdropping program:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/17/domesticspying.lawsuit
Order (and subsequent Notice of Appeal) can be found as:
/csua/tmp/NSA_Order.pdf
/csua/tmp/NSA_Appeal.pdf
\_ Ok, the clock's ticking...how long will it be until a prominent
Republican advocates killing judges again?
\_ Ok, it's been more than 24 hours. Who has said that?
\_ http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A26236-2005Apr4.html
As with Falwell's statements supporting the 9/11 terrorists,
there is weasel room, but it's clear where these people stand
if you take off you really listen to them. I'm guessing the
same tool who ends up responding to this post saying that
he's "not really justifying the murder of judges" will be one
of the tools who claimed that Falwell was not siding with
the terrorists after 9/11. People like you will end up
destroying this country if you are not stopped or don't
change.
\_ Ann Coulter, who else?
http://tinyurl.com/k3uwu
\_ She is an entertainer, not a prominent Republican.
Try naming a prominent Republican. It's been several
days now and the total is zero, of course.
\_ She is prominent in the sense that she stands out
because she is blonde, thin, and female, which is much
different than your typical fat, bald, ugly middle-aged
guys who make up the majority of the Republican
gene pool. -Michael Moore
\_ Michael Moore is a Republican? Go figure... I never
knew that.
\_ Mihael Moore isn't bald. But Rush Limbaugh is.
\_ Rush Limbaugh is an entertainer, too. I'm
still waiting to see a prominent Republican
who called for death for this judge. it's
been several days now.
\_ you're mincing words. Ann Coulter is
both prominent and Republican. Which of
those words do you disagree with? -tom
\_ This is a sophomoric argument unworthy
of a Berkeley graduate. Any freshman
English major could tell you that words
formed into a phrase mean more than the
individual words apart. I'm not
mincing words, but you are trolling.
Go turn your degree back in at Sproul
or University Hall immediately.
\_ You are dismissing the fact that
the placement of aggressive
talking heads like Coulter and
Limbaugh on national media (billed
as commentators, not entertainers)
is part of a very intentional
conservative/Republican strategy.
-tom
\_ Who says they are commentators and
who placed them? Someone planted
RL at a small radio station almost
20 years ago planning for his take
over of conservative talk radio
today? I don't know how AC
describes herself but if you had
ever listened to the RL show you'd
know his byline is "here to educate
and entertain you", not "comment on
political stuff".
\_ Placing? No one "placed" either
of them. Now you're just being
ridiculous and conspiratorial.
\_ Read "Don't Think of an
Elephant." -tom
\_ He shoots! He misses!
You're a troll and a
conspiracy theory lunatic.
\_ tom's a lot of things, but
he's not a troll. big tip:
trolls don't sign their
names. better hunting
next time.
\_ signing doesn't save
one from being a troll
but ill just go with
conspiracy theory
lunatic since you're
ok with that.
\_ You know, it really
doesn't lend any
credibility to your
claims when you're
the one coming
off as a ranting
irrational lunatic.
irrational poster.
\_ If facts are
irrational then
so be it.
\_ Darn Al Qaeda activist judges who hate America?
\_ No judge (or judges) can stand in the way of the NSA defending
this country.
\_ Cuz that whole constitution thing is "quaint"
\_ What happened to the left's "living document" theory of the
Constitution? Or does that only apply when inventing new
rights or limiting others that the left likes?
\_ Welcome to a non-binary world, where we can have a
"living document" that changes to accommodate progress
while continuing to protect the citizenry from its rulers.
\_ All things in this world are limited, even the constitution.
\_ why do you hate america?
\_ America! FUCK YEAH!!! -T.E.A.M. America World Police
\_ what about executive privilege?
\_ Nah, that shit is unlimited. -George Fucking Bush
\_ Who will defend us from the defenders?
\_ Second Amendment, Defender of the Rest (seriously).
\_ You have to trust someone in order to live in society.
\_ Certainly, but that can still be a trust based on
supervision and accountability.
\_ I find your lack of faith ... disturbing -- Darth
Cheney
\_ Wrong Darth: link:csua.org/u/gpc
\_ Why does this Judge hate freedom?
\_ Because some things are worth fighting for. -William Wallace
\_ You mean LIKE FREEDOM?!?! -Mel Gibson #1 fan
\_ You mean like FREEDOM?!? -Mel Gibson #1 fan
\_ It doesn't matter. They're going to keep doing it no matter what
any court says. All hail King George! |
| 2006/8/11-15 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:43979 Activity:low |
8/11 Bush staff tried to divert funds for explosive detection technology
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060811/ap_on_go_ot/terror_explosives_detection_4
\_ The timing is exquisite.
\_ We don't need to protect our borders, airports and terminals because
the Iraq war is making us all way too safe.
\_ I loved the guy who was saying "if this British thing had happened
a week earlier, Lieberman would have been picked" Because, you
know, support for a resource-draining war == dedication to
domestic security.
\_ I'm sick of all this national press portraying this as simply
a reffurendum on the war. I'm from Connecticut, I'm a Jew,
a Yalie, and I lived in the same town as Liebermann. And you
a reffurendum on the war. I'm from Connecticut,
\_ Why'd you delete the part about your being a Jew?
\_ someone edited my post, and i didn't want to
get into an assanine flame war over it.
\_ The part that was edited was about your being
a Yalie aka Poofter. The part about being
a Jew seems relelvant.
and I lived in the same town as Liebermann. And you
know what? Most of my friends from Ct, who range from moderate
to liberal democrat, and include the occasional republican
have disliked Lieberman for many many years. Why? Because
he puts the needs of Connecticut's two most powerful industries
ahead of those of the citizens of Ct or of the country. Given
that these industries are constructing military hardware and
the insurance business, this makes him particularly evil.
In the 2004 primary debate, when asked about their healthcare
plan, after all the other candidates spouted off some typical
politician plan or another, Liebermann just looked into the
camera and said that healthcare is not a problem, and he
doesn't think the american people want to hear about it.
Even Bush doesn't ever say shit like that. And when it comes
to defense, it's clear his top priority is that everything
be made in Connecticut, not that it actually be the best
hardware the government can buy. This man does not deserve
to represent Connecticut in the U.S. senate, and that's been
true wwwaaaaayyyy before the Iraq war.
\_ I like Jews, they are the best and the brightest of all
races and they should rule the earth. -Jew Worshipper
\_ It sounds like he was doing what he was supposed to do for
his state. He brought in money and kept it coming. What
is the better mythical place for all the defense money
than where its been going for years into a mature defense
industry in CT? Are they going to build subs in Arizona?
\_ How about in Mississippi, like the pentagon wants, a
couple miles from Trent Lott's house.
\_ Huh huh. He said "bush." -beavis
\_ Heh heh. He said "staff." -butthead
\_ Ok how about it? How much pre existing industry is
there to support that? And for the record I don't
care any more about a sub base near Lott's house than
I do about windmills ruining Ted Kennedy's view in
Mass. They're both assholes so don't go there. |
| 2006/8/10-14 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Others] UID:43959 Activity:nil |
8/10 \_ I'm not Hezbollah supporter. I think Israel has the right to
defend itself. I think Israel fucked up majorly by not
making a fuss when Iran/Hezbollah moved all those rockets
into Lebanon. I think they fucked up again when they
wildly overreacted to the kidnapping of the 2 soldiers,
and showing the world that their amazing military is not
quite as unbeatable as they have led the world to believe.
\_ Um, you mean when Hizbullah invaded their country, killed 8
soldiers and kidnapped 2? And the fact that Hizbullah has been
shooting rockets at Israel for years? For your convenience, I've
created a new thread for your unrelated rant.
\_ Also, the Israeli military is operating with restraint.
They really aren't 'at war' with Lebanon. It's like
saying that the US military is weak because we cannot
defeat insurgents in Iraq. Of course we could, if we
didn't care about the consequences.
\_ Amusing letter to the editor in the cron today, mentioning
how israel uses bomb shelters to protect their civilians,
while hezbolla uses its civilians to protect their rocket
launchers. I find it disturbing that they ("hezbollah")
consider this a 'reasonable' tactic to use,
and more so that it is proving effective at all. This
only speaks for even more pain to the 'civilians' in
future wars.
\_ I find it amusing that "defend yourself" now includes invading
other countries, bombing their civilians, capturing their heads
of state, and holding captives without trial or charges for
years. AMERICA, FUCK YEAH!!! -T.E.A.M. America World Police
\_ This is so fucked up beyond comprehension. The Japanese
excuse for invading China to look for 2 missing soldiers
pales in comparison. I am just utterly appalled by the "one
Israeli is more important than 100 Lebanon" attitude.
Basically, "We will kill ten thousand Lebanons if necessary
to get our 2 soldiers back!" All while using weapons we
supply that are coming out of my tax dollar! And you people
wonder why 911 happens. With the way the Bush Regime is
solving "problems" around the world, you can be sure that
an attack like 911 is GUARANTEED to happen again. More
people in the world hate the US now than ever before. I
hope this is the "safety" you Bush supports wanted. You can
quote me, on this day, in the Berkeley MOTD, that an attack
like 911 will likely happen within 5 years, and almost 100%
certain will happen within 10 years.
\_ Haha. The point is the Lebanese gov't isn't providing
security. It's not really about the 2 soldiers themselves.
By the way , residents of Lebanon aren't called "Lebanons".
Hahah!
\_ So what was the reason for all the other terrorist acts going
back before Bush? What did Clinton to that forced them to
attack the WTC the first time? What did Israel do that forced
the cross-border killing of 6? soldiers and the capture of 2
others? Israel has been at peace with Lebanon for 6 years.
Anyway, you're missing the big picture. These people aren't
pissed off about some land or historical event. They want all
the land from the west bank of the Jordan River to the sea
(hint: that's where Israel is) and they want all the land that
was ever Muslim controlled, such as most of Spain. And then
they want the rest of the planet as well. They make no bones
about the fact that their ultimate goal is sharia law across
the entire globe. You can't compromise with people who want you
dead and use their own civilians as PR shields. Israel's real
mistake was using air power trying to take out missiles in some
sort of limited war instead of using the army and cleaning out
the whole country in a dirtier but more complete war. Cease
fire just means Hezbollah will have time to rearm and do it
again in 3-5 years with better weapons. At what point is it
morally acceptable to drain the swamp and kill Hezbollah? For
you, I suspect never. Tell me I'm wrong.
\_ "These people" used to number in the single digit thousands.
Due to your stupidity, you have made millions of them.
Tell me I'm wrong.
\_ If you actually responded to anything I said I'd reply. |
| 2006/8/10-14 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:43956 Activity:nil |
8/10 http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/08/10/uk.terror/index.html How to take advantage of a terrorist plot to stay in power for one more year. \_ Triggered by an ipod? How would that work? I didn't think ipods had any wireless capability. \_ Although most cell phone triggers in Iraq are activated by calling the phone, you can also rig something up such that the trigger will activate when the cell phone alarm goes up. trigger will activate when the cell phone alarm goes off. Similarly, you can rig anything with an alarm to act as your trigger to a real detonator, which is probably attached to a 9V battery. \_ Right. And Israel was really behind 9/11 and the moon landing really happened on a Hollywood soundstage. \_ Red stater fascist. \_ I'm not saying it was orchestrated by those who want to stay in power. I'm saying is that it's being taken advantage of politically by those in power. \_ You mean they weren't?!?! -proud American \_ I am in power. AND I KICK ASS!!! --The Man |
| 2006/8/2-6 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:43875 Activity:nil |
8/3 The conservatives are fighting back! All this, plus the WTC
Movie + 911 Movie + secret Rove programs point to the complete
Republican victory in November -motd political guru
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/02/haditha.suit
\_ Is he gonna sue the Pentagon and the AP as well?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060802/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/haditha_investigation_6
\_ We cannot be stopped. Seig heil! -proud American |
| 2006/7/15-18 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:43676 Activity:nil |
7/14 http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/07/14/911.misuse.ap/index.html I guess the cop didn't find her attractive! |
| 2006/7/11-13 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:43632 Activity:moderate |
7/11 Dubya flip-flops. All DoD personnel are to comply with Geneva
Conventions for all detainees, including GTMO detainees.
No mention of CIA policies.
\_ It's all David Addington's fault.
\_ Even the Pentagon agrees that the Geneva Convention applies
to Gitmo detainees:
http://www.csua.org/u/ge0
\_ Yes, they "agreed" after the SCOTUS decision
Please note that "the Pentagon" == Rummy
(yes, I do know that probably the majority of professional
military lawyers in the govt thought Dubya's policies were
illegal)
\_ Why are you upset that Bush would adhere to a treaty? You were
happier when he didn't?
\_ In order: 1) Happy that he will adhere to a treaty. 2) No.
3) Dubya's a flip-flopper. Cf. pot, kettle, election 2004.
\_ 1&2: ok. 3: The policy change seems to be nothing more than
PR. I don't see that the everyday life of the average Gitmo
terrorist is going to change at all. As far as 2004 goes,
the USSC already said they can't do tribunals like they want
so there's no reason to not say we're now following Geneva.
That's a far cry from voting for it before voting against it.
\_ there is nothing flip-flopping about voting against a
bill after a vote for amendment you sponsored fails. -tom
\_ missing the point. it wasn't his action that was under
assault but his self presentation. he came off like a
dithering clown with that line. if he was a (R) you
wouldn't be all over him for it calling him an idiot?
\_ It's impossible to have every sentence you say
scrutinized in public without coming off badly
sometimes. Certainly Kerry didn't come off badly
based on his statements as often as Bush does.
The main thing is that Rove and the dittohead machine
seized on that line as a political lever, a way
to portray Kerry's subtlety as indecision and
Bush's bull-headedness as strength. And you fell
for it. -tom
\_ Comparing to GWB is off topic. I never said GWB
was brilliant. I said Kerry looked like an idiot.
Yes, he was tired, yes he had been long on the
campaign trail, yes, what he said was technically
correct, and yes he looked like a buffoon. If he
was a (R) would you be here defending him or
telling us how often he comes off looking bad
compared to some other (D)? Kerry can look like
an idiot all on his own. Comparing an idiot to a
chimp doesn't make the idiot any less an idiot.
\_ To answer your spittle-flecked question, no,
I do not spend my time pointing out the verbal
miscues of Republicans. There are plenty of
substantive issues with what Republicans do;
there is no need for gamesmanship. You seem
to be inordinately focused on a single verbal
miscue (which you brought up, no one else)
with no substantive error behind it. -tom
\_ wouldn't it be nice if the 'terrorists' were as nice with the
US troops they captured, instead of killing, mutilating them and
leaving the bodies booby-trapped.
\_ We should not descend to the level of the enemy and still expect
to hold the moral high ground. The arguments for why we should
have nukes and no one else, for example, basically involve
"because we're better people" If we stop being better people
in real, measurable ways...
\_ PP wasn't suggesting we descend. Where did you see that?
They were suggesting that it would be nice if the terrorists
weren't, well, terrorists and didn't mutilate captured US
troops and leave their booby trapped corpses to be found.
What is so wrong with that? -!PP
\_ You're being obtuse. -5 points.
\_ No, you're being cynical and reading things that
aren't there. I don't need or want your "points".
\_ He was implying we should measure ourselves by their
actions. -John
\_ I didn't see that at all but I'm a glass half-full
person. I don't look for the bad in others.
\_ Then what the fuck are you doing on motd?
\_ Flip-flops? You mean obeys order from SCOTUS, right? A ridiculous
order BTW, since AFAIK Al Qaeda isn't a signatory to the GC.
\_ Common Article 3 applies regardless of whether al-Qaeda signed
or not, and regardless of citizenship or lack thereof
\_ Not entirely obvious since "terrorists" as we know them
today didn't exist at the time the GC was written/signed so
they aren't well defined by it. If it was written today, they
would much more likely fall under the spy/saboteur bit where
the GC has no issue torturing and executing them. Granting
humane POW style treatment to members of amorphous shadowy
organisations who fight by directly targetting civilians does
not appear to be the intent of the GC given the way spies and
other non-uniformed combatants are treated.
\_ I'm trying to not make a strawman of your argument, but
as far as I can tell, you are trying to defend torturing
people. Why? What do we gain by treating people
inhumanely regardless of whether they are in a shadowy
amorphous organization or not? I just don't get it.
\_ I'm saying what I said. Don't read between the lines.
There is nothing between the lines. The GC was written
before the current concept of "terrorist" existed, thus
the best the GC can do is apply the spies/saboteurs
line which allows tribunals, death, etc.
\_ No, the GC does not allow anyone to be tortured. Are you
the same person you claimed that the US is not a signatory
to the GC? You are a very seriously misinformed person.
The 4th Convention of the GC very clearly states that
everyone is covered by it, just some have more rights than
others. We could certainly execute them, but only after a
trial by a competent tribunal. Please read it for yourself
so that you can make informed statements about what it says.
\_ Key point: some have more rights than others. Also, I
didn't say they weren't covered by it. I said quite
clearly that the closest thing that covers them is
spies/saboteurs. Please don't put words in my mouth.
And no, I'm not that other person who said we didn't
sign.
\_ "..the GC has no issue torturing ... them"
This is wrong. Common Article 3 sets minimum standards
for everyone caught up in armed conflict, including
civilians and irregular forces. It prohibits
torture and humiliating or degrading treatment.
\_ do we have a definition of what "terrorist" is? It seems that
we call anyone we don't like "terrorist."
\_ "If you are not with us, then you are with the terrorists." -GWB
Does that mean that the military can summarily execute anyone
who votes Democratic?
\_ No. It means that the military can summarily execute anyone
who doesn't vote Republican.
\_ Definition = someone who looks like psb |
| 2006/7/10-11 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43623 Activity:kinda low |
7/10 Ahem.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060711/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_rape_case
\_ well, that just makes me think (yeah, I know the author is leaning
that way too) that the killers didn't know the people they killed
were in the same platoon as the child rapists.
\_ "... as the child rapists". Have these guys had a trial yet?
\_ yes, and OJ didn't kill the white girl
\_ ok so they didn't have a trial. this isn't stalinist
russia. yet.
\_ re: the "child" part. Have they actually figured out how old
she was? I've heard numbers from 14 - 26
\_ yes, she is 14
\_ yes, she was 14
http://csua.org/u/ge2 (reuters.com)
\_ Did they rape her seven year old little sister, too?
\_ Well, yeah. Because these terrorists are always so coy with their
motivations and anti-US propoganda. They just forgot to mention
till now why they did it. |
| 2006/7/8-10 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:43600 Activity:nil |
7/8 So there is another secret spying program that even the
Republicans are annoyed about. I wonder what it could be:
http://www.csua.org/u/gd4 |
| 2006/7/7-10 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:43589 Activity:nil |
7/7 FBI disrupts New York transportation plot:
http://www.csua.org/u/gcj (Yahoo! News)
"Lebanese authorities, working with U.S. law enforcement agencies,
arrested an al-Qaida operative who admitted to plotting a terror
attack in New York City ......"
\_ Thank goodness they're monitoring international and domestic calls.
Oh wait, what's that? They caught this one w/ publically available
resources and the Sears Tower one b/c their neighbors ratted them
out? No, no, that can't be right.
\_ Yes because sometimes other methods work in some cases no one
should use some other method you don't like. You got into Cal?
\_ Time to stock up on Freedom Fries, plastic sheeting and duct tape!
Time to raise the terror alert and scare the sheeple! Let me guess,
it must be campaign season...
\_ Why are liberals so wacky?! Don't forget the tin foil!
\_ Can one even still buy tin foil(as opposed to aluminum foil)?
That could be useful.
\_ Of course you can't. They made sure of it.
\_ Freedom Fries were a liberal invention? Telling America
to stock up on duct tape and plastic sheeting was a liberal
course of action? Stop trying to rewrite history Padawan.
to stock up on duct tape and plastic sheeting was done
by liberals? Stop trying to rewrite history Padawan.
\_ It was a liberal's attempt at satire. Liberals think
that everything is some sort of evil Republican plot.
That's giving too much credit to Republicans.
\_ Unlike the Florida jokers this one looks a bit more credible. |
| 2006/6/29-7/3 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:43524 Activity:nil |
6/29 Hamdank decision big news for Constitution and rule of law, bad news for
Bush:
http://www.scotusblog.com/movabletype/archives/2006/06/hamdan_summary.html |
| 2006/6/26-28 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:43502 Activity:nil |
6/26 http://csua.org/u/g9l (Wash Post) Republican House members buy cheap real estate, earmark a freeway next to it, then sell the land at a huge profit \_ republicans rool while liberals drool1!!!111!!1one \_ From what I hear, he's actually owned the land for many years, and the buyer insists that the price is up because of general real estate trends, not the freeway. Gonna be hard to prove one way or another, but I'd hardly call it a slam-dunk. \_ that is a completely bull-shit. no one will *INSIST* on spending extra million or two for a lot of land if s/he can buy that land for cheap. Just admit it, he earmarked the bill and he is personally benefiting from it. \_ Uh, where'd you get "extra" million from? The price has gone up since he bought it... what real estate _hasn't_? \_ You do know about conflict of interest don't you? |
| 2006/6/23-28 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:43476 Activity:nil |
6/23 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060623/ap_on_re_us/terrorism_investigation War on Terror is working Wire tapping is a good thing Bush is great News like these will keep coming till November Republicans will hold control Democrats will whine as usual \_ So you think news like this is orchestrated and part of some long ranging plot of the geoplutocratic Cabal? \_ Of course not. It's being orchestrated by Karl Rove and the GOP. No Cabal is necessary. \_ I hope you see the humor in your reply. It certainly made me laugh. \_ Certainly. It's the irony that makes me weep myself to sleep at night. |
| 2006/6/18-19 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:43425 Activity:nil |
6/18 The FBI knows the real story, this doesn't mention
WTC bombing at all:
http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm |
| 2006/6/14-16 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:43389 Activity:nil |
6/14 Bush resume: http://www.matrixmasters.com/world/usnews/bushresume.html |
| 2006/6/6-8 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:43292 Activity:nil |
6/6 http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/06/05/terror/main1683852.shtml CBS News reports unnamed "U.S. officials" saying "they'd be surprised if [a domestic terrorist attack] didn't come by the end of the year". Compared to 9/11, the attack will not kill as many people and will probably be self-financed and not directed by an umbrella organization like al-Qaeda or Hamas. \_ Of course rumors of the attack will mysteriously fade after the November elections... |
| 2006/6/5-9 [Politics/Foreign/Europe, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:43283 Activity:nil |
6/5 http://www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/story/0,,1791111,00.html UK Guardian reports that intelligence that led to raid on residence in which a Muslim guy got shot was wrong, and that the intelligence came from a single uncorroborated tip (yet "specific" and "credible") from a police informant. Official line is that the chemical vest has not been found on premises. |
| 2006/6/1-4 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Immigration] UID:43252 Activity:nil |
6/1 Conservatives rejoice! Horowitz is pushing a bill to renew the
federal Higher Education Act to make sure LibUral professors
don't teach the wrong stuff.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20060601/ts_usatoday/exliberalnavigatesright
\_ "Horowitz acknowledges his small staff can't confirm every
incident it receives, and his fact-checkers can be "very
loose with the truth." But he mostly dismisses the
criticisms as inconsequential. " |
| 2006/5/29-6/2 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:43217 Activity:nil |
5/29 I have a feeling that anti-US sentiment is running strong. I just
don't see how a traffic accident can cause such:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/5026350.stm
\_ America haters have always wanted to throw rocks at American
soldiers. Now they have an excuse. My take is that America
will never fully understand why foreigners hate America,
nor does it have the capacity to understand and even care
what others think. "We are good, and everyone else is evil."
\_ It's really cool how you write with such sweeping
generalizations and abstractions. Do you refer to yourself in
the third person when you speak? -dans
\_ I have a feel that the I-dont-give-a-damn-about-what-others
-think sentiment is running strong in America, especially
in the cowboy zone of America: http://fuckfrance.com
\_ Big Army truck in a convoy hit a car, 1 dead Afghan, 4 injured.
It looked like the truck was driving away. I'd be mad as hell.
\_ you make the mistake of assuming that what is reported is
even remotely linked to reality.
\_ the casualty is higher than that. But this is nothing new,
though. To avoid attack, both Army and private contractors
are instructed to drive as fast as they can. If there are
people in the way, they simply run over them. Private
contractors and army drivers run over people VERY frequently
in Afganistan / Iraq. I just don't see how THIS particular
"accident" is different than any other cases. |
| 2006/5/24-28 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:43175 Activity:nil |
5/23 http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1637208/posts Dennis Hastert tells Dubya FBI raid on Democrat House member may have been unconstitutional \_ I'm sure that's going to keep Abu Gonzalez and Dubya up at night. |
| 2006/5/23-28 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic] UID:43156 Activity:nil |
5/23 http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/23/world/asia/23afghan.html We bravely salute the 16 dead and 15 wounded Afghans who died honorably in the War on Terror. War is a blunt instrument. |
| 2006/5/22 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President] UID:43135 Activity:moderate 80%like:43139 |
5/20 Say it ain't so! A Democrat bribery scheme?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12903856/?GT1=8199
\_ "All but $10,000 was recovered on Aug. 3 when the FBI searched
Jefferson.s home in Washington. The money was stuffed in his
freezer, wrapped in $10,000 packs and concealed in food
containers and aluminum foil."
C'mon, people, surely you can do better than "hiding" it in your
freezer!
\_cold hard cash? |
| 2006/5/18-22 [Recreation/Dating, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:43090 Activity:nil |
5/17 Can someone please point me to the web site that shows post-911,
people had a lot of sex? A friend of mine who is a playboy said
he never had so much sex with different women in his entire life
the months following 911. I'd like to see a more scientific study. |
| 2006/5/17-22 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:43087 Activity:nil |
5/17 Max Boot of the L.A. Times on the surveillance controversy
http://csua.org/u/fw8 (latimes.com)
"So far there has been no suggestion that the NSA has done anything
with disreputable motives. The administration has nothing to be
ashamed of. The only scandal here is that some people favor unilateral
disarmament in our struggle against the suicide bombers." [and a nuke
going off in a major American city]
He is a Cal alum, graduating in '91 with a B.S. in History at the age
of 20, and from Yale a year later with a M.S. in Diplomatic History.
\_ Basically he's saying "why do you hate America"
\_ I don't care what his credentials are; he's still a fool.
\_ Max Boot used to write a column for the Daily Cal when he was a
student that was SO conservative, most people on campus thought
he was actually a liberal troll.
\_ Uh no. What they did was storm the DC offices and demand the
editor sack him. She refused on grounds of free speech, etc.
Something along the lines of, "Even though I disagree with
everything he writes, he still has the right to say it".
\_ Another great credential: Boot is a signatory of the Project for
a New American Century. -tom
\_ weird i thought he would have been much older
\_ Why do I find the Equifax "finding out if you're good" ad that
came with that article terrifying? -John
\_ Some webmaster must think it's hilarious.
My ad was AT&T Unlimited nation-wide calling, 1st month free |
| 2006/5/17-22 [Politics/Domestic/911, Science/GlobalWarming] UID:43077 Activity:nil |
5/16 Not only our planet's getting warmer, but also dimmer. Watch
Dimming the Sun on NOVA/PBS:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sun/dimming.html
Almost everyone agrees that the greenhouse effect traps heat. But
in this episode, we see that the counter effect of visibile pollutants
that cuts 10-20% of light (and causing Global Dimming in the past 50
years), which ultimately cool the temperature of the earth. For
example few days post 911 saw a lack of contrails from airplanes
and scientists observed more sunrays passing through, which raised
as well as lowered global temperatures at a bigger swing than ever
seen. Interestingly, if we keep producing heat and but cut pollutants
that block sunrays that cool the earth, we may actually accelerate
global warming.
\_ Operation Dark Storm! -John
\_ Global warming actually raises temperatures before it lowers them.
-- John Kerry
\_ ...and your point is?
\_ most people are too stupid to understand global warming.
by showing that the issue is complicated, you reduce the
ability to convince the average public that GW is real.
you should watch this preview on MBP/GW:
http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/paramount_classics/aninconvenienttruth
\_ Interesting. Okay, I'll check it out after work.
\_ the embedded quicktime movie wasn't working for me.
here's an alternate source:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUiP6dqPynE |
| 2006/5/15-16 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:43065 Activity:nil |
5/15 http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/05/fbi_acknowledge.html "The FBI acknowledged late Monday that it is increasingly seeking reporters phone records in leak investigations." \_ No seeking needed anymore, just a quick NSA database query ... Does anyone honestly not believe the final destination for all these programs is a police state the PTB in communist East Germany could be proud of? \_ National security letters were only supposed to be used for terror suspects and spies. The FBI does not need to consult a judge to obtain an NSL. With the Patriot Act, NSLs may be issued for anyone, not just terror suspects and spies. With the Patriot Act, NSLs may be issued by FBI field offices, not just FBI senior officials. What can be obtained from an NSL? Issued primarily to businesses (like phone companies, ISPs, and e-commerce sites) and government entities (like libraries), the entity is compelled to provide phone records, financial data, Internet access history, etc., although wiretaps are not included. The entity is also forbidden from disclosing the fact that you have been probed. So, if there were an investigation into the leak on CIA secret prisons in Europe, an FBI field office could issue an NSL to SBC to provide phone records on who the NY Times and Washington Post reporters have been talking to. There is no explicit restriction on what the data can be used for, once obtained. In late 2003, the Bush administration reversed a long-standing policy requiring agents to destroy their files on innocent U.S. citizens once an investigation closed, permitting entry into a permanent database. \_ My point was that with the new NSA domestic "keep track of every call ever made" spying database, the extra step of going to the phone company is no longer necessary. -pp \_ I'm not disagreeing with you, just adding info. fyi, the total-information-awareness phone record dumps were not via NSL or FISA -- it was just the NSA asking "nicely". \_ Yes they are all different mechanism, but there is no denying that everything is moving towards more surveillance and less court oversight. |
| 2006/5/13-16 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:43044 Activity:nil |
5/13 http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/051206Y.shtml http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/042806Y.shtml http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1622082/posts "Within the last week, Karl Rove told President Bush and Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten, as well as a few other high level administration officials, that he will be indicted in the CIA leak case and will immediately resign his White House job when the special counsel publicly announces the charges against him, according to sources." \_ I like how the entire Republican party has been taking Bush's lead on the whole "never admit when you've done something wrong" thing, starting w/ the Dukester loudly proclaiming his innocence and heaping scorn on the partisan politics of those who would accuse him ...until the evidence was finally overwhelming. \_ Joshua Bolten, a white Jayson Blair? http://villagevoice.com/news/0508,murphy,61336,6.html \_ Because what was important about Blair was he was black. You know how it is, let those black folks think they are the same as whites and they will just stab you in the back. What The Fuck? \_ Um, isn't this about Jason Leopold, not Joshua Bolten? |
| 2006/5/12-16 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:43036 Activity:nil |
5/12 Wash Post and ABC News conduct overnight poll showing 66% of those
polled wouldn't mind if the NSA had a record of phone numbers they
had called. 63% also say they feel it's acceptable (41% strongly so)
for the NSA to collect phone records of tens of millions of Americans
to investigate terrorism. http://csua.org/u/fu4 (Wash Post)
\_ In other news, Americans are idiots. -tom
\_ :)
\_ You know, I don't mind the fact that the database has been
collected. I think it is a minimally invasive way to get intel
on associates of suspected terrorists. What bothers me is
the high-handed unaccountable way Bush did it. He didn't
go for any judicial review, warrants, nothing. Not feeling
yourself bound by convention, not believing anything limits
your power, those are characteristics of a tyrant. --PeterM
\_ In other news, only 29% still support the Chimposter:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060512/pl_nm/bush_poll_dc_1
\_ sloppy reporting from Reuters et al. Good+Excellent vs.
Fair+Poor is not the same as Approve vs. Disapprove.
\_ http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/008453.php
53 Percent believe that the NSA has gone too far. |
| 2006/4/12-24 [Politics/Domestic/911, Academia/Berkeley/CSUA/Troll] UID:42737 Activity:low |
4/12 Not soda-related: Can anyone name services used by the general public
which have 'five nines' uptime? That is, unavailable for less than
5 minutes in any year. One of our potential clients is requesting this
level of reliability and it seems extreme to me. I was wondering who
actually hits this level.
\- helo, "the phone system" is the standard place to talk about
5 9s. i think in many cases it boils down to "how much $ to
invest in backup power" and maybe being able to cut a service
over quickly [automatically] in the event of failure or downtime
for patching etc. i think you are probably right the person you
are talking to is a dumbass. i dunno if you are in the position
to do this but you might ask "how many minutes of downtime per
year is acceptable" ... ask this question in real time [face to
face or over the phone]. most stupid people dont know. assuming
the pass that test and realize the difference between 4 and 5 9s
is 50min, you might ask what 50min of total or partial failure
is worth [keep in mind if a WEEB site says they do $100k of
transactions per hour, you really have to measure how much of
that is gone for good and wont just be executed later or cant
be buffered somehow in the case of a partial failure]. but you
are right that at this point you have to start spending serious
money on things like 24x7 engineering staff who can replace
failed blades in cisco routers at 3am and such, or can diagnose
weirg BGP problems on easter sunday ... let alone deliberate
attacks on the system. i'm not sure what the reliability tagets
for 911 and ATC are but you might do some research on those. oktnx.
\_ I thought credit card processors and financial exchanges were
the standard. When you refer to the phone system, do you mean
POTS, or do you include the cellular network? If it's both,
then it definitely doesn't have five nines. What about when I
call a land line from a land line, and the system cannot
complete it because of too much traffic? Does that count as
down time? -dans
\_ I nominate lesser-bloviator: tom@soda, greater-bloviator: dans
\_ You're a moron. -dans
\_ Right, and name calling in retaliation for random
anonymous trolls is the earmark of an intellectual
giant. Isn't it past due for you to pointlessly insult
tom or something?
\_ I'm sorry, since I lack your intellectual stature
and slick post-modern tools for deconstruction I
fail to see how the sentence, ``You're a moron,''
states or implies that I am a genius. Perhaps you
could clarify for lesser intellects like mine. -dans
\_ Oh the irony! You're fun to play with, dans.
\_ Oh, touch my monkey! Touch it!
http://csua.org/u/fke -dans
P.S. You don't seem to understand the meaning
of the word irony. Please consult a
dictionary, or Dave Eggers' handy guide in ``A
Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius.''
\_ Actually I understand it quite well, thanks.
\- the std reference on irony is ARISTOTLE
not EGGERS
\_ Your usage suggests otherwise. How does
your use of the term irony actually
match the definition? -dans
\_ Actually, my usage is bang on.
\_ No. Really, it's not. You might
describe my language as sarcasm,
but not irony. Irony is when the
opposite of what is expected
happens. Nothing more. There is
absolutely no way you can
correctly describe my comment as
ironic. -dans
\_ You're wrong.
\_ Eh. Are you enjoying
trolling? -dans
\_ Since it's so easy...not
really. I find this whole
conversation absurd since
I know what relationship
I'm referring to and you
clearly have no clue.
It if makes you feel smart
then by all means, keep
trying...but you'll still
very wrong.
be very wrong.
\- are you enjoying being
a fool?
if you look at a roman
source like quintillian
if you look at roman
sources, e.g. quintillian,
they will commonly
emphasize the idea of
opposite meaning but in
the older greek conception
[as exemplified by
socrates "know nothing"
attitude, or as discussed
formally in aristotle
with examples mostly
from homer and attic drama]
it often better character-
ized as "understatement"
or dissembled meaning
rather than opposite.
often defeinition talk
about a "contrary" meaning
to what is stated, but
contary has a different
sense than opposite.
1. some what ironically
\_ Do you mean
somewhat? -dans
\_ OOhh!! Face!
Face!! You
got him!!!1!one
UCB DEAD PROFESSOR and
MACARTHUR GENIUS was
one of the main modern
scholars on IRONY.
see: http://csua.org/u/fko
2. the wikipedia entry
on irony is pretty decent
and more importantly a lot
more readable than some
formal discussions.
\_ That's nice. I always
quote the wikipedia as
a reliable source on
scholarly literary
topics. -dans
\- you referenced "a
dict" and dave
eggers.
i cited:
1. quintillian
2. aristotle
3. vlastos
4. wikipedia
wikip is probably
the only one
accessible to you.
i assume you didnt
see the Nature
study comparing
the EB and Wikip.
it did pretty well.
a key to using
the wikip is to
know enough about
the subject to
be able to tell
if it is trustworthy
on factual points.
keep digging buddy.
--------------------------------------------------/
\ \_ You're right. -tom ... Now that
\ would be ironic, no? -!tom
\_ So, in other words, since you clearly have no idea what the hell
you're talking, you are incapable of judging whether or not the
wikipedia entry on irony is accurate, and you were just pulling a
source out of your ass! Awesome! Please tell me oh great and
mighty master of irony, were my previous two sentences ironic; is
this one? -dans
\_ So, rather than admit you can't read my mind and are therefore
probably wrong, you flip out and resort to ad hominem red
herrings. I'm beginning to see a pattern in your behavior
here... You can have this thread, btw -- I won my bet. =)
\_ Little Dan, this is your Mother. Please stop embarassing us.
\_ Fuck you. If you had any knowledge of my mother's
condition, you'd realize that's in remarkably poor taste.
-dans
\_ Now that's ironic. Little Dan, did you cry?
\_ No. Properly speaking, if you wanted to mock me by
insinuating that I am a baby, you would call me
Danny, but it doesn't really work unless you knew me
when I was called that. -dans
\_ Why would he?
\_ Now that's ironic.
\_ I think dans is the self appointed expert irony mind
reader guy around here -- let's see what he says,
first.
\_ she's on the cover of Crack Ho Magazine?
\_ yermom
\_ the motd: delivering idiotic banter with 5 9s reliability |
| 2006/4/5-7 [Recreation/Dating, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:42694 Activity:nil |
4/5 http://csua.org/u/fg1 (tboblogs.com) Dept. of Homeland Security, head of ICE Tampa office and head of ICE Operation Predator (protecting against sexual predators) pleads no contest to charges of exposure of sexual organs (to a 16-year-old girl who reported the incident) and disorderly conduct (masturbation in the mall food court for 10 minutes). http://news.tbo.com/news/metro/MGBKPR9ONJE.html "after Figueroa fled the scene, two more security officers approached him in the parking lot and asked why he was running. He said he was trying to find his car." (When it rains, it pours ...) \_ Republican pedophile trifecta complete! |
| 2006/3/31-4/3 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:42586 Activity:moderate |
3/31 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060331/ap_on_re_us/attacks911_calls This is a pretty depressing article. Makes me proud to attack terrorists in Afghanistan and Iraq. \_ I don't think anyone was ever ashamed to attack terrorists. It's the innocent people caught in the middle that many can't stomach. \_ Iraq? Are you still believe Iraq has anything to do with this? \_ At the time of the attack we thought Iraq had something to do with it and even some of the Democrats supported it. At any rate the attack was done out of good intentions and our brave Commander in Chief actually did something. Had Frenchy Kerry been our president he'd already given up and surrender to Iraq and Iran. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1607156/posts \_ First of all, if he is brave, he would actually *GO* to Vietnam like John Karry. Secondly, there are evidents suggesting that Bush decided to attack Iraq only weeks after 9/11, when there are no evident suggesting there is any link between Iraq and 9/11. Thirdly, have you realize Bush has bankrupted both our Treasury *AND* our credibility around the world because of this? \_ Let me just say one word. 911! -libUral thinking like a conservative \_ he should of invade Saudi Arabia instead. Majority of hijackers are Saudis... no? \_ There is no need to invade the Saudis since high ranking officials are already "bought" \_ I don't think anyone was ever ashamed to attack terrorists. It's the innocent people caught in the middle that many can't stomach. Is what happened to those 9/11 victims worse than men being mistakenly identified, hauled out of their homes to the screams of crying women, thrown in prison with no trial, tortured to death, and later found to be innocent? 9/11 was horrible. So is what's happened since. \_ Our will to defend our way of life will never flag. At times there is collateral damage, but that is the price we are willing to have others pay for our Freedom. \_ Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius? \_ Just replace "Freedom" with "quest for the revival of the Muslim Caliphate" and it works for bin Laden too! \_ So which innocent guys have been tortured to death? That's a pretty bold claim. What's the evidence? \_ We care why? \_ Welcome Time Traveller/Recent Cryogenic revivee! Google \_ cryonic "Abu Ghraib" |
| 2006/3/30-31 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:42555 Activity:low |
3/30 Carroll freed only because the US military made secret
negociations with the terrorists. News at 11.
\_ Khalilzad says no ransom was paid and no "arrangements with anyone"
were made by U.S. officials. He did thank Iraqi politicians for
their efforts, though. The video put out by the kidnappers today
said that the U.S. released some female Iraqi hostages.
\_ URL please. Everything I'm reading says no ransom was paid.
\_ so much for not negotiating with terrorists.
\_ Nono. We never negotiate with terrorists. The release of
a few female prisoners was planned long time ago and
it merely coincided with Carroll's release. The terrorists
thought we negotiated but we didn't. We're already winning
the war on terror and there is no need for negotiation.
\_ So everyone but the kidnappers says there were no negotiations
and you believe them. Nice. |
| 2006/3/27-28 [Politics/Domestic/911, Science/GlobalWarming] UID:42475 Activity:nil |
3/27 http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/03/27/radioactive.smuggling/index.html This is rather disconcerting news about US security. |
| 2006/3/26-27 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:42445 Activity:moderate |
3/26 http://csua.org/u/fc5 Remember those whiney, rigid unhappy kids in pre-school? They grow up to be whiney, rigid, unhappy Republicans. \_ Yeah, "95 kids from the Berkeley area that social scientists have been tracking." Why do I get the feeling that the results would have been different if it were Orange County "social scientists" doing the research. - Never whined to a teacher in my life. have been tracking." Why do I get the feeling that the results would have been different if it were Orange County "social scientists" doing the research. - Never whined to a teacher in my life. \_ Are you suggesting the researcher's political bias would affect the outcome of the experiment? Inconceivable! \_ This is old. Can't you find something new to troll about? |
| 2006/3/25-27 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:42430 Activity:low |
3/25 United 93:
http://www.apple.com/trailers/universal/united93/large.html
GO BEAH!
\_ Go 911! Go Republicans!!!
\_ Somehow, this preview evoked a lot of my immediate post-911,
anti all Muslims Go George Bush type of feelings.
\_ The RedneckForce in you is strong. FEEL IT. Accept it. Yeeeees.
Exceeeelent.
\_ that is what this film want, no? let's kill all 1.3 billion
Muslims.
\_ I have a feeling that once we are done with 1.3 billion
Muslims, Chinese is next on the list. |
| 2006/3/22-23 [Politics/Domestic/911, Reference/Religion] UID:42377 Activity:moderate |
3/21 I think it's hilarious the "Human Rights Commission" in
Aghanistan wants to kill a muslim who converted to
Christianity. Even more funny is that because he
converted to Christianity he must be insane and therefore
that is his only hope for not facing a death sentence.
\_ The state-sponsored "Afghanistan Independent Human Rights
Commission," in a country where the constitution is based on Sharia.
\_ Mission: Accomplished
\_ Freedom Is On The March
\_ i'll commission YOUR human rights |
| 2006/3/15-17 [Computer/SW/Security, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:42248 Activity:nil |
3/15 Homeland Security is everyone's business:
http://www.twotigersonline.com/banners.html -John |
| 2006/3/10-13 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:42179 Activity:low |
3/10 The Rove nixes the Dubai deal. Who says he doesn't care about
security?
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=1708847&page=1&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/03/10/politics/main1388791.shtml
"CBS News senior White House correspondent Bill Plante reports the
announcement came about after the company's consultations with White
House political strategist Karl Rove."
\_ How about Dubai was already going to pull out, and they wanted
Rove to manage the spin?
I guess it could have been Rove decided that Dubai should pull
out, Dubai said yes, and Rove also managed the spin.
\_ How about Dubai was already going to pull out, and Rove managed
the spin? I guess it could have been Rove+Bush decided Dubai
should pull out, Dubai said yes, and Rove also managed the spin.
\_ First it's China's Unical deal. Then, it's this. Yes,
protectionist economy!!!
\_ Heh, I think you've just proven beyond a doubt that you
understand the terms you're trying to use. -3hp to you! |
| 2006/3/3-6 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:42095 Activity:high |
3/3 UNC low-grade terror attack
http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=local&id=3958312
\_ One idiot driving his car through "a popular campus gathering
spot" does not make for a terror attack, no matter why he said he
did it. Otherwise, we're going to have to arrest Jodie Foster for
the actions of her Army of One.
\_ One person can't execute a terror attack?
\_ Doesn't it seem odd to you that something that could so easily
have killed several people, even by accident was non-fatal,
and that the guy is now claiming to be a terrorist? It
just doesn't add up.
\_ You make the mistake of implying that all terrorists are
rational, sane individuals. -John
\_ HEIL GERMAN JOHN!
\_ And you're making the mistake of assuming that there is
any correlation between what the news says and reality.
\_ I was about to launch into a diatribe, but then it
struck me how random this comment is. -John |
| 2006/2/24-27 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:41989 Activity:nil |
2/24 The Republicans running Congress won't take time to investigate record
oil industry profits (which I think is a stupid thing to do anyhow),
but they *will* investigate Citgo for offering discounted heating oil
to the poor. Good to know they are fighting hard for the little guy!
http://tinyurl.com/qctl8
\_ Why should Congress investigate any industry's profits? Congress
isn't a brilliant investigative arm of the government. It's always
just showmanship for the cameras. Or baseball hearings... sheesh.
\_ "Which I think is a stupid thing to do anyhow" |
| 2006/2/16-17 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:41885 Activity:high |
2/16 Conservatives argue for impeachment:
QUESTION: Is spying on the American people as impeachable an
offense as lying about having sex with an intern?
BRUCE FEIN, constitutional scholar and former deputy atty general
in the Reagan Admin: I think the answer requires at least in part
considering what the occupant of the presidency says in the aftermath
of wrongdoing or rectification. On its face, if President Bush is
totally unapologetic and says I continue to maintain that as a
war-time President I can do anything I want . I don't need to consult
any other branches . that is an impeachable offense. It's more
dangerous than Clinton.s lying under oath because it jeopardizes our
democratic dispensation and civil liberties for the ages. It would
set a precedent that . would lie around like a loaded gun, able to be
used indefinitely for any future occupant.
NORM ORNSTEIN, AEI scholar: I think if we.re going to be intellectually
honest here, this really is the kind of thing that Alexander Hamilton
was referring to when impeachment was discussed.
\_ Congress seems to be agreeing with the necessity of the wiretaps.
What's your point?
\_ Both Congress and the American public are overrun by cowards
who do not believe in freedom. What's your point?
\_ Welcome to a Democratic Republic. It isn't perfect but it
is the best thing the planet has seen so far in governments.
If enough voters cared about this they'd speak with their
votes. Since most people don't vote at all much less based
on issues like this, you would seem to have the minority
opinion on how important this really is.
\_ Fuck you, you patronizing fuckhead asshole.
\_ *laugh* If you weren't such an idiot, then you
wouldn't find everyone so patronizing. Pull the log
from your own eye before pointing to the splinter in
someone else's. ;-)
\_ Fuck you. I can keep this up all day.
\_ Exactly. Now you have identified your problem.
\_ Stick it in your ass.
\_ You're such a cutie! Muwah!
\_ Come a little closer and say that, punk.
Just see what happens.
\_ Just about everyone agrees with the necessity of the wiretaps.
It's the part about doing this without oversight that violates
FISA and has people in an uproar.
\_ The thing is, it's Congress' opinion that counts, not any
professor.
\_ Although I think it's unlikely that a GOP Congress will
impeach a sitting GOP President, there are still plenty
of conservative congress-people who agree with the
speakers above.
\_ And there are Democrats who agree that the process
should continue with congressional oversight.
\_ I really mean no offense, but I think you're
missing why this is an issue to begin with. The
wiretapping has never been the issue; the issue's
been that the wiretapping was going on without
oversight (specifically, Judicial, according to
FISA). If I misunderstand your confusion, I look
forward to your elaboration.
\_ I do not understand the uproar about FISA. Let's say the
Pres. does an illegal wire tap, but never uses the evid.
against you in ct. How are you hurt (esp. if you never
find out that your were wire tapped)? What exactly are
you afraid of?
\_ Well, let's say you're in the opposition party and the Pres.
uses wiretapping to spy on you and set his party's political
strategy. Ridiculous, you say. But if there's no oversight,
there's nothing to prevent people from doing this sort of
thing. Really, court is the least of your concerns.
\_ Or they could end up with 500+ of your FBI files... but
no one would ever do that.
\_ So what? The Pres. could easily get access to these
files if he really wanted it. I don't see how FISA
makes this any easier/harder for the Pres.
\_ FISA prevents the executive branch from violating
the constitutional right against illegal search and
seizure. The international calls go to domestic
lines, and potentially citizens, so FISA allows taps
for cases that have probable cause. What the
executive branch is doing ignores probable cause and
may be using tainted evidence to gain domestic
wiretaps. So if someone in the 300k list of people
listed as terrorists calls say Clinton's Senate
office and hangs up, that's a link. No oversight so
now the NSA tells the FBI says we have credible link,
tap all lines in that office, we'll review the
transcripts. There would be no probable cause to tap
the lines without the tainted no-FISA evidence.
\_ I'm specifically talking about the FBI files.
The wiretap provisions of FISA do not restrict
the Pres. access to FBI files.
I don't follow your argument. At some point the
gov needs to get a valid warrant, that means
the warrant needs to be based on independent
evid not on the tainted wiretap info.
Say the NSA fingers a suspect and tells the
FBI about it. The FBI can't get a warrant to
FBI about it based on a so-called illegal
wiretap. The FBI can't get a warrant to
wiretap the guy w/o a showing of probable
cause. This can't be based on tainted evid.
The FBI will have to est. independent evid
to support a showing of probable cause. This
is what their warrant will be based on. The
fact that they got a tip from the NSA is the
same as if they got an anon tip and invest-
cause. This warrant can't be based on tainted
evid. The FBI will have to est. independent
evid to support a showing of probable cause.
The fact that they got a tip from the NSA is
the same as if they got an anon tip and invest-
igated. There is no taint.
[ I say so-called illegal wiretap b/c I think
FISA is an unconstitutional limitation on
the Pres. constitutional duty to defend this
nation from her enemies. ]
\_ So why would you be discussing your important political
policies in cleartext? Why wouldn't you be using encry-
ption? I still don't understand. When I value my info
enough that I don't want a 3d party intercepting it, I
use encryption. If the opposition party doesn't value
the information enough to take measures to prevent it
disclosure, then it is their own fault if the info is
disclosed.
\_ We're talking about phone conversations, not email.
Also, why should the resources of the US be used for
political gain of one political party?
\_ There are secure phone sol'n for sensitve info.
Use that if you really care. If not, don't be
surprised if someone overhears your conversation
and uses it against you.
I'm not exactly sure why you are bothered that
one party might be abusing government resources
for political gain. Both parties do it. Its not
something that can be prevented.
\_ Congress can decide to impeach on whatever they want. The
Constitution is itself vauge about the terms of what constitutes
a "high crime", so practically speaking as long as you have the
political clout you can just trump up charges and start the
impeachment process. You don't need peanut gallery commentators
to argue for or against impeachment. Is GW going to be impeached
during his term? Not likely unless the Dems can pull off some sort
of electoral revolution during the midterm elections. Chances
of GW getting impeached are probably one in a thousand if not
less.
\_ Just an aside, but Bubba would say, (a) under oath, he didn't lie
about Monica, (b) in the public sphere, "sexual relations" didn't
include oral sex, and (c) in his private life with Hillary and
Chelsea, he lied like hell.
Similarly, Dubya would say there's a loophole on spying on the
American people (a) if one end of a call comes from outside the
country, and (b) one of those individuals is suspected of al Qaeda
activity (c) during a war on al Qaeda (Dubya interprets the
Congressional resolution authorizing "all necessary and appropriate
force" in fighting al Qaeda as enabling his war powers against al
Qaeda). |
| 2006/2/13-15 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:41827 Activity:low |
2/13 Yes, Virginia, the United States does engage in torture:
http://csua.org/u/eyz
\_ Well, yes, we know that Al Qaeda is trained in trying to make wild
accusations and so forth
\_ "A draft United Nations report on the detainees at Guantanamo
Bay concludes that the U.S. treatment of them violates their
rights to physical and mental health and, in some cases,
constitutes torture."
Your herring, sir, it is red.
\_ Bullshit:
"The report, compiled by five U.N. envoys who interviewed
former prisoners, detainees' lawyers and families, and U.S.
officials, is the product of an 18-month investigation ordered
by the U.N. Commission on Human Rights. The team did not have
access to prisoners at Guantanamo Bay."
\_ Were these the UN Human Rights Commission envoys from
Libya, the Sudan or Zimbabwe?
\_ well, that was because they were invited for the official
GTMO tour, but denied access to the prisoners, so the
UN team declined to go at all
\_ The reasons for the results being bogus don't change the
fact that it's bogus.
\_ so the bogosity comes from the fact that the UN team
doesn't have damning proof, like videotape or
high-ranking whistleblowers with an authentic log?
\_ Well, unfortunately, it appears that the Bush Administration
has the same propensity. So we really need to allow a nuetral
third party in to make observations. Too bad the Congress is
too spineless to do its job of oversight. Maybe it will get
more fortitude after Nov 2006. |
| 2006/2/9-11 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:41782 Activity:moderate |
2/9 Pres. Bush reveals details of terrorist plot to run planes into
US Bank Tower in LA, foiled in... 2002:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/02/09/terror/main1300711.shtml
"[T]the White House would not say whether the 2002 plot was thwarted
as a result of the spying program."
'"The plot was foiled in early 2002 when a Southeast Asian nation
arrested a key al Qaeda operative," Mr. Bush said'
...the hell is he bothering to talk about this now?
\_ Oh my god! West Coast is saved thanks to George Bush! He
protects us from terrorists and 911 and all the evil guys
who hate freedom. I'm definitely voting Republican again.
...the hell is he bothering to talk about this now?
\_ Cause they only just got around to making up all the evidence.
\_ His whole argument for the wiretapping is "trust me." He's
manufacturing "trust". "I", meaning a SE Asian nation, "am keeping
you safe from the big bad bombers."
http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/T/TERROR_PLOT_MAYOR?SITE=JRC&SECTION=POLITICS&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2006-02-09-15-09-55
http://tinyurl.com/badpc (customwire.ap.org)
P.R., Pure and simple.
\_ The peasants were starting to revolt
\_ "In his remarks, Mr. Bush inadvertently referred to the
[US Bank Tower] as 'Liberty Tower.'" hahahah
\_ That means his wife was once a Liberty-ian. I thought they
were against huge governments.
\_ The US Bank Tower used to be called the Library Tower.
\_ Does this make his wife an ex-Liberty-arian?
\_ A news reader on KCBS radio made the same mistake last night.
\_ why now? well for political reasons, obviously, for one. he's
a politician. they're all the same. on the security side, you
generally wouldn't talk about something like that right away because
you'd want to have a chance to turn those people to get their
buddies. if you announce to the world you caught someone, their
buddies immediately know, too, so your intel asset value just
dropped to zero. k?
\_ The timing is still bizarre: too untimely to be useful,
politically.
\_ very important GOPers have been saying the wiretapping
program has problems -- the subcommittee head overseeing
the NSA even recommended a full review. oh look, al qaeda
is coming after L.A., and Dubya stopped it! John Q. Citizen:
"It must be because of the Tewwowist Surveillance Program!"
\_ Even though he was very careful not to say so....
\_ Dubya is a fucking moron. He has a very low bar when it comes
to scoring political points.
\_ And where did they find the details? Next to WMD in Iraq? |
| 2006/2/7-9 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:41742 Activity:nil |
2/7 http://www.insightmag.com/Media/MediaManager/Rove2.htm Is this really what you apologists think is acceptable? \_ At this point, I think not having the backing of the White House when running for reelection (even as a Republican) is going to be a win in many areas. |
| 2006/2/6-7 [Politics/Domestic/SIG, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:41730 Activity:moderate |
2/6 Democrats, not Republicans, want to grow the Army to far bigger:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060206/ap_on_go_pr_wh/budget_defense_6
"His approach, which is opposed by many Democrats in Congress who
believe the Army in particular is being stretched too thin and needs to
get far bigger, ......"
\_ I actually support the idea of bringing back the draft, although
not on the scale seen in early decades (and certainly not with the
unfair Vietnam-era deferments). The currently professional
military does not accurately reflect American society as a whole -
generally it is more conservative, more Christian, more macho,
and more working class than America is as a whole. A fair draft
would make the Army much more reflective of society as a whole,
and probably less prone to form a distinct special interest
"power bloc." Not to mention the fact that more Americans
would have a direct stake in American military action, either
directly or through family ties. --liberal
\_ You want your military to be Politically Correct or to save your
ass when The Bad Guys show up? Who gives a shit if the army
isn't quota perfect? Few things are. Is this some bizarre
troll or do you really actually believe all that crap?
\_ I'm completely serious. We fought WWII with a military
made up of everyone. Stop jerking your knees and think
\_ Uh.. Tuskegee Airmen?
about it for a second - I'm not talking about quotas.
The Founding Fathers had good reason to fear an entrenched
warrior class - see also Eisenhower's "military-industrial
complex" speech.
\_ The average soldier in the army is not what Eisenhower
was talking about. You want to go back to WWII style
combat where they lose 5000+ men a day in every major
conflict and sometimes more? What was so great about
that? Today we have a highly mobile, all volunteer,
professional army much much smaller than WWII which kicked
the hell out of Sadam's WWII style draftee army in GW1
and GW2. Morale, training, effectiveness, and every
other measure of army quality has never been higher. I
don't think a draftee PC Army can *ever* approach the
quality armed forces we have today. When I need a
plumber, I don't check to see if he's properly reflective
of the make up of the community. I want to know that he's
the best plumber I can get for my dollar. Seriously, go
look up the WWII loss totals for various battles. WWI
was even worse and the deaths even more pointless. (I'll
grant that GW2 isn't a 'fair' comparison since it was
really just the long awaited end of GW1 but Iraq still
had a number of well equiped units that got flattened
if they didn't flee).
\_ I'm not op or supporting a draft but GW and Afghnstn
are not good examples of our superior army over WWII.
We had overwhelming superiority in equipment and
air support, and the enemy knew it. That aspect is
not a draftee vs. nondraftee issue.
\_ The Soviets had overwhelming superiority in equipment
air support, numbers, and everything else, but still
got their asses handed to them in Afghanistan. They
use draftees. We don't. We bombed the place and
used fast light highly motivated ground forces when
needed. 10 years later the Soviets retreated in
shame. 10 weeks later we owned the country.
Draftee armies just suck. There's a good reason for
that if you think about it for 2 seconds. When it
comes to protecting my skin, I'll take the
professionals who signed up for it over a much
larger group of enslaved walking targets who only
want to get home alive, thanks. Maybe you know
something that the top military and civilians in
our government don't know. Write a letter, maybe
they'll do a draft for you. There's no way you're
going to convince anyone that a drafted army is
better than an all volunteer professional force.
\_ The Soviets were fighting against guerillas
armed with the latest US technology and with
US support. Afghanistan would be totally
different if, say, France was helping the
rebels. Even now, only the capital is truly
under control and the rest of the country is
as lawless as ever.
\_ France? Huh? The Soviets are the WWII army
you say you want. I don't care who they were
fighting. They got their asses kicked. I gave
you a professional vs. draftee example. I gave
you another WWII vs. volunteer example. You're
just trolling now. I can not 'create' a war
that will satisfy your ideal conflict. Such an
event has never taken place and never will.
You have yet to show a place where draftees
came even close to beating professionals or
volunteers much less the 2 ass kicking examples
I gave of the opposite. Good bye.
\_ How about the Hessians losing to the
Americans in the Revolutionary War?
Weren't mercenaries also at the root of
the military problems of ancient Rome?
Anyway, that is beside the point I was
making about Afghanistan, which you ignored.
\_ Professional army was cool until US had to
occupy Iraq for the long term. Now there isn't
enough manpower, and regimes like N. Korea and
Iran knows that US's hands are tied. The
other problem with professional army is that
now that they have Iraq, they had trouble
getting new recruits.
\_ In one of the letters that Osama bin Ladin addressed
to the American people, he stated that his goal
was to bankrupt the United States. It doesn't
really matter if we have overwhelming superiority
in equipment. Our net gain from this war (and
from Vietnam) will be zero, if not negative. And
we are just playing into the hands of Al Quaida....
\_ Math is good. Compare the cost of GW2+Afghan+
DHS+everything-else to the federal budget.
AlQ hasn't done jack in the US since 9/11. I'm
failing to see the failure in the current policy.
\_ The American economy is only doing well due
to massive government stimulus. If the
Iranian Oil bourse starts chipping away at
the dollar's current place as the
reserve currency of the world, Asia will
stop buying up all our debt and the economy
will crumble. We will no longer be able to
inflate away our $8 trillion debt.
\_ huh? why would we not be able to
inflate away our debt? asia not buying
our debt will only help, cause it
causes dollar to fall and improves our
exports and reduce trade decifit. debt
is in US dollar so it will stay constant
(and become smaller relative to exports).
\_ China's currency is pegged to ours.
If they stop buying our debt we have
to raise our interest rates. A lot. |
| 2006/2/6-7 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:41718 Activity:nil |
2/6 Those brown people are all terrorists right?
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1156497,00.html |
| 2006/2/2 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:41677 Activity:nil |
2/2 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060202/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/cia_leak_1 Ignore who is the source of which quote, but what's the difference between the sentences below: (1) In an abundance of caution, we advise you that we have learned that not all e-mail of the Office of Vice President and the Executive Office of the President for certain time periods in 2003 was preserved through the normal archiving process on the White House computer system. (2) Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald is raising the possibility that records sought in the CIA leak investigation could be missing because of an e-mail archiving problem at the White House. |
| 2006/2/2-6 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/SIG] UID:41674 Activity:moderate |
2/3 Republican
\_ SUV
\_ How do Republicans relate to SUVs? I don't get it.
\_ Conservative
\_ NRA
\_ Fish that sucks blood from inside your ass.
\_ liberals from Yale talk from their ass.
\_ Peace and Freedom!
\_ Whigs!
\_ Wife-swapping.
\_ Religious.
\_ Corrupt
\_ EEEEEVVVVVVVUUUUUULLLLLLL!!!!!! And they stole our "ic"! PETTY!
I love the motd. In a single stroke so open mindedly dismissing
about half the entire country with one word labels.
\_ I think most of these have the politicians in mind, not
necessarily the voters.
\_ Not me. I have contempt for the Republican politicians,
but not as much as for the voters.
\_ Pft, as if. <My party> is full of sweetness and light, but
we all know <opposition party> sucks and is evil.
\_ You're a moron. Not republicans in general, just you.
\_ *laugh* Thanks for the compliment. I'm glad to have helped
you focus your wrath on specific individuals instead of
150,000,000 people you don't know. Think of it as a growth
opportunity.
\_ You're overestimating, probably by 2x or more.
\_ An unabashed terrorist that lies, abuses power, and ruins
people's lives for personal gain under the cover of spreading
"freedom" around the world
\_ Ob: "<Myparty> is pristine and pure and goodness and light, but
<Yourparty> is villainous and scummy and evil and corrupt and
abusive". |
| 2006/1/30-2/1 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:41605 Activity:nil |
1/30 I'm not normally a knee-jerk Al Jazeera-basher, but they seem to be
consistently _the_ way terrorists get their demands made public. How
do they justify making, for example, hostage-taking a viable practice?
Refusing to air the tapes seems like a reasonable thing to do. Why
don't they?
\_ It's newsworthy to their viewing public.
\_ So would be a lot of immoral stuff.
\_ Bashing Al Jazeera for being bastards wouldn't be knee jerk. They
are the propaganda arm of the extremist muslim movement.
\_ Y'all kids are too young to remember, but the US media showed
a lot of "propaganda" by various anti-government factions during
the 60's and 70's, depending on how interesting it was. Why?
Because it was happening in the US. Why does Al Jazeera show
the tape? Because it affect their part of the world. |
| 2006/1/27-28 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:41574 Activity:kinda low |
1/27 Army admits to kidnapping family members as tactic:
http://csua.org/u/et0 (yahoo news)
\_ I didn't think that was a big deal for the Army.
\_ Hostage taking is a very big deal.
\_ So what?
\_ You probably approve of the rape, wiretapping and torture, too. |
| 2006/1/27-28 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:41561 Activity:high |
1/26 Cringley on Wiretaps:
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20060126.html
\_ as usual, cringely provides more technical insight than
probably any other journalist I read. so what do people think
of this? while it assuages some of my concern about who is
being tapped, and how egregious a disregard of the law it is,
the basic issues still seems to be: why couldnt they jsut get
the court orders? that is what I find troubling. the "we neednt
be troubled by the law" mentality
\_ cringely often gets details wrong or exhibits a general lack
of clue, at least when he's writing about anything i know
much about. this sort of makes me wonder how much to trust
his details when he's writing about stuff i'm not that familiar
with.
\_ One of my profs who worked at justice said that most wiretaps
were the pen register type. He told me that in most cases this
type of "wiretap" could be done w/o a warrant. Usually the pen
register info was the source of probable cause for a warrant.
\_ The worst part about this concept is that it assumes a level
of unsophistication from the terrorists. By now they should be
tossing triple encrypted cyphers across the network on single
use emails. It's an overreliance on tech vs. human resources.
\_ uh, what, you use your emails multiple times?
\_ Sorry. Should be "email addresses".
If there is anything I hate about the Bush admin it's their
"don't worry your pretty little head about it, we know what's
best" stance. Lotsa folks are okay with it, but it rubs me wrong.
\_ Actually, I doubt that the terrorists would be using email.
More likely they will post a jpg or msg on a public anon
site at a specific time w/ specific content w/ the msg
embedded in the image or msg (the content itself could be
format of the msg or the subject matter of the image).
What the gov. is likely doing is correlating postings w/
specifically timed narrow searches to determine where the
terrorists are.
BTW, explain to me how 1 use email system would work. Would
you have a list of emails to use/check? What happens if one
end is caught and the list is revealed?
\_ This is funny, I came to the same conclusion entirely on my own. |
| 2006/1/26-28 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:41542 Activity:kinda low |
1/26 "There's no doubt in my mind it is legal." -GW Bush (Jan 26, 2006)
[warrantless eavesdropping on communications, where one end is
international and with a reasonable basis to believe there is a
Al Qaeda link during a declared war on Al Qaeda]
\_ Bush administration rejected an amendment offered by Mike Dewine
in 2002 that would have made this legal because the Justice Dept.
said it would be unconstitutional.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/25/AR2006012502270.html
http://csua.org/u/esc [wapo]
Really. They simply don't want ANYONE to know what they're doing.
Not even in sealed records in the court. Wake up.
\_ Dubya, in the same interview today, also said that he would be
cautious about passing a law which explicitly makes it legal:
"... if information gets out to how we run it or how we operate
it, it'll help the enemy"
\_ Bull... Shit...
\_ Ok smarty pants, tell us why Osama stopped using his
satellite phone, then? Didn't like the color anymore?
\_ Well, he heard we were busting into his carrier pigeon
network, so he figured we might apply the same
techniques elsewhere.
\_ http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/21/AR2005122101994.html
\_ http://tinyurl.com/bmvja (washingtonpost.com)
Seriously, fuck you.
\_ Ok, I read your article and it's got nothing to do
with anything. I won't stoop to your childish
level and spew some random junior high level noise
in response.
\_ You're joking, right? His article answered your
question completely. What are you talking about?
\_ No it didn't. It was chock full of "appears"
and "might have" and other conjecture. Once
you strip the noise out, there isn't much left
and frankly even if you assumed it was all
true, the whole thing doesn't deny that Osama
stopped using his phone due to them figuring
out we could find them that way, which was the
whole point of this in the first place. If we
tell them how our intel gathering works, then
they'll change their methods. This seems so
obvious I can't believe we're discussing it.
\_ The Post article is confusing and misses some key
elements. This fills out the rest:
http://www.slate.com/id/2132975/?nav=navoa
Answer:
(1) The Daily News (of Pakistan) broke the news a day
after the missile strike, reporting that 30 minutes
after Al-Zawahiri called the newspaper from his sat
phone, U.S. missiles landed on their camp.
(2) The same day, the Washington Times had reported in
the 21st paragraph of an article that Osama uses sat
phones -- but, unlike the Pakistani newspaper, did not
link the use of sat phones with the missile strike.
(3) An intelligent person would conclude that bin Laden
made the "A-ha!" connection from (1), not (2),
especially because it's (a) a Pakistani paper, and (b)
the link is spelled out, unlike in the Wash Times.
(4) The meme that the Wash Times was responsible for
bin Laden's stopping his use of his sat phone was
propagated and perhaps largely initiated by two Clinton
people in a 2002 book which stated as fact the
accusation against the conservative Wash Times.
(5) The 9/11 commission further propagated the meme,
and cited three "very responsible, very senior
intelligence officers" as confirming the accusation in
the 9/11 commission report.
(6) In all likelihood, the sources in (4) and (5) are
mistaken. Definitive evidence of (1) would make this
almost certain.
\_ Are you sure the amendment refers to the same thing?
It looks to me like the amendment was for all aspects of
surveilling and wiretapping non-U.S. citizens, period, not just
intl<->domestic calls.
\_ Do you think Al-Queda employs constitutional law legal
scholars?
surveilling and wiretapping non-U.S. citizens (obtaining warrants
based on a "reasonable suspicion" of terrorist activity), not
not just intl<->domestic calls.
\_ "I am not a crook!" -Richard Nixon |
| 2006/1/25 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:41523 Activity:low |
1/25 Remember the L.A. Times columnist who wrote that he didn't support the
troops, and how the freeper reaction was pretty tame? Well, apparently
all the wackos are on http://littlegreenfootballs.com:
http://asia.news.yahoo.com/060125/3/2emvs.html
"Michelle Malkin quickly nominated Stein as 'one of the most loathsome
people in America.'"
http://tinyurl.com/8nmhl http://tinyurl.com/7ns9o (lgf)
"If I ever run into the a**hole, I'm going to knock his frickin' block
off."
"If Al-Reuters thinks theres only 1 guy who'd punch this jerk upon
viewing him on the street, they are WAAAAY off."
"#13 krazykounselor: And you are a stupid, chickenshit, worthless pile
of shit. It would be worth the jail time to get my hands around your
scrawny neck."
\_ I'm glad you are able to express your freedom of opinion
by holding troops in subjective respect. I'm sure you can do
that in a theocracy/socialist paradise as well.
\_ I'm glad you are able to express your freedom of opinion by
holding troops with unqualified respect. I'm sure you can do
\_ There's a diff. between fear and respect
that in a theocracy/socialist paradise as well.
\_ http://www.drmenlo.com/lgfquiz
Little Green Footballs or Late German Fascists?
The funniest thing is that registration for LGF is closed.
They are against free speech, even in practice.
\_ 77%. It's possible to get 100%. There are no trick questions.
Yes, there are Late German Fascist answers in there.
\_ 85% too many hints |
| 5/16 |