Politics Domestic 911 - Berkeley CSUA MOTD
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Politics:Domestic:911:
Results 451 - 600 of 667   < 1 2 3 4 5 >
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
2021/12/03 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular

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
        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
           \_ 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:
              "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
                (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
        \_ "I even got my own Tom Tomorrow cartoon! The jagged yellow spikes
           must be caused by all of that evil."
           \_ 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
           \_ No it was the Jews and the Neocons, according to the UN Human
              Rights Commission: http://www2.nysun.com/article/74465
2021/12/03 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular

2008/4/4-9 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/SIG] UID:49669 Activity:nil
4/4     ACLU: Defending American's Enemies
        \_ Why not ask the ACLU about it?
2008/3/14-17 [Politics/Domestic, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:49455 Activity:nil
3/14    Creatures Clone Selves in Face of Danger - Yahoo! News:
        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!
        \_ ANOREXIA!!!
        \_ No way is that woman 105 pounds.
           \_ How about this one:
              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
              \_ 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."
                    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
        But here he says he knows al qaeda is in Iraq
        \_ 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.
2008/2/22-26 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:49214 Activity:nil
2/22    House GOP plaigarizes new season of 24:
        \_ 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:
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.
        \- 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
        \_ 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
           \_ I've been reading Sara Carter's stuff since before she was with
              the times.  She's a good reporter.  And while I might accuse a
              major paper of spin (I'm looking at you NYTimes), I wouldn't
              reject it as a basic record of fact.  I'm sorry you reject news
              sources that don't fit your agenda. -op
              \_ You just accused the New York Times of spin.  It's had some
                 pretty blatant failures of editorial control, e.g. Jason
                 Blair, Judith Miller, and it is not without bias, but to
                 claim that it spins stories is stretching it a bit, don't you
                 think? -dans
                 \_ No.  Not at all.  PP was kind to the NYT.  --someone else
                    \_ How so?  Care to cite an example of egregious spin in a
                       news story on the part of the NYT? -dans
                       \_ Pick up a copy.  They used to have the news pages
                          read reasonably straight and kept the editorials to
                          the op/ed page.  No more and not for many years.
                          IMO it changed sometime in the mid 90s.  Now the
                          NYT is unreadable.  I used to read it cover to cover
                          every day.
                          \_ If it's so bad, it should be easy to provide one
                             example.  Please cite one. -dans
                             \_ It is, and if it was anyone else asking, I'd
                                provide examples.
                                \_ The Plaintiff rests. -dans
                          \_ Are you the same guy asking for proof that the
                             Washington Times is biased?
                             \_ No.  All newspapers are biased.  I don't need
                                proof of that.
                                \_ Everything is biased.  An interesting
                                   question to ponder is what would lack of
                                   bias even look like. -- ilyas
              \_ Do you read Front Page Mag and NewsMax and consider them
                 "sources of fact" as well?
                 \_ I get all my truth from Kos and DU.
           \_ UPI picked it up--do you distrust them too?
              \_ UPI and Washington Times have the same owner, dumbfuck.
                 \_ Didn't know that, pottymouth.
                    \_ Then we can safely ignore your opinion on media sources.
                       \_ Do you have any evidence at all that the owner has
                          had a negative influence on the truthfulness of the
                          stories they publish?  Or you just hate the owner
                          and assume?
                          \_ "Fifteen years ago, when the world was
                             adrift on the stormy waves of the Cold
                             War, I established The Washington Times
                             to fulfill God's desperate desire to save
                             this world."  --Rev Sun Yung Moon
                             \_ That's nice.  Do you have any evidence that
                                the owner has had a negative influence at all
                                or you just hate the owner?
                                \_ That quote is evidence.  Do you have any
                                   counterevidence.  Don't be disingenuous, it
                                   defeats the purpose of discussion.  Hint:
                                   the goal is not to win the argument, the
                                   goal is to maybe learn something. -dans, !pp
                                   \_ A quote is not evidence that the owner
                                      has had any effect.  Hint: the goal is
                                      not to win the argument, the goal is to
                                      maybe learn something.  I'm still
                                      waiting for any evidence, not innuendo,
                                      that their news is negatively influenced
                                      by their owner no matter how nutty he
                                      may be.
                                      \_ Evidence: They're reporting complete
                                         nonsense about immigrant terrorists.
                                         And they report complete nonsense
                                         all the time.  And their owner
                                         says so.  Why would the Moonies
                                         be dumping billions of dollars
                                         into this paper if not to push
                                         their own agenda?  The prima
                                         facie evidence is that it's a paper
                                         run by nutjobs with an agenda.  -tom
                                         \_ Several papers have been busted
                                            in recent years publishing flat
                                            out incorrect stories or even lies.
                                            This is the only one moonie owned.
                                            Correlation != causation and all
                                      \_ I'm not sure how you parse intent as
                                         innuendo.  Intent is not rock-solid,
                                         slam-dunk evidence, but it is,
                                         nonetheless, evidence.  Seriously,
                                         quit being a douche. -dans
                                         \_ Thank you for bringing this
                                            discussion to a new low.  It is
                                            responses like this that turn me
                                            off from bothering to try to give
                                            you researched respones to your
                                            queries such as the NYT one above
                                            because you're just not mature
                                            enough to have this sort of
                                            discussion.  You called me a
                                            douche, because you got frustrated
                                            that I wouldn't just back down
                                            because you're pushy and unwilling
                                            to support your claims in any real
                                            way.  This isn't HS or a freshman
                                            dorm chat.  "Douche", indeed.
                                            \_ Blah blah blah, wah, wah.  Let
                                               me translate pp's post for the
                                               audience at home: "I can't argue
                                               my point on merit so I'll
                                               politely dodge the issue,
                                               refuse to provide evidence for
                                               my points, and say my
                                               opponent's evidence 'doesn't
                                               count', all while pretending to
                                               participate in the discussion
                                               in good faith.  But if the
                                               opposition bluntly calls me on
                                               my shit, and points out that I
                                               am being a disingenuous
                                               fuckhead, then the opposition
                                               is being juvenile." -dans
                          \_ "The Washington Times will become the
                             instrument in spreading the truth about
                             God to the world." --ibid
                             \_ As above, same question.
                          \_ Other than that they have about 50 people total
                             staff, no original reporting, and mainly put out
                             short summaries of stories from other "sources"
                             that are nearly always, dunh da dunh, the
                             Washington Times?  Nope.  You suck at this game.
                             \_ No original reporting?  Sara Carter has done
                                some of the best investigative reporting I've
                                \_ I was clearly speaking specifically about
                                   UPI.  You really really suck at this game.
                                   \_ Clear to who? It wasn't clear to me. -!pp
                                      \_ Then you're an idiot too, but I doubt
                                         you're !pp.
                                         \_ Oh, you're crazy, that explains a
                                   \_ Crystal clear to me.  Do you read?  Can
                                      you read?  Do you have thumbs?  SHOW ME
                                      YOUR THUMBS!!! -dans
                                \_ Can you give me some specific examples? Now
                                   I am curious, what a motd-rightwinger thinks
                                   is an example of good reporting. -!pp
                                   I am curious to see what a motd-rightwinger
                                   thinks is an example of good reporting. -!pp
            \_ Let's just say that if the Washington Times is the originating
               source they have a pretty high burden of proof.  That article
               had absolutly nothing to back itself up.  I'll wait till I see
               something real before giving it any cred whatsoever.
               \_ What media sources do you give 'cred' to when they publish
                  poorly sourced stories?
                  \_ The Economist, the IHT, maybe WashPo, WSJ news pages before
                     it became a Murdoch tool. -!pp
                  \_ The Economist, the IHT, maybe WashPo, WSJ news pages
                     before it became a Murdoch tool. -!pp
                     before it became a Murdoch tool. How about you? -!pp
                     \_ You give 'cred' to the WaPo?  Wow....
                        \_ What do you give 'cred' to? WashPo is the largest
                           source of unsourced articles, because of the way
                           Washington DC works. Often you cannot get good
                           inside the beltway news any other way. WashPo is
                           also politically moderate, more or less. I am not
                           saying it is perfect, but it is a much better than
                           average newspaper. Not in the same league as the
                           others I listed though.
                           \_ I don't give free 'cred' to any media source.
                              If you're not sourced you're no better than
                              Drudge.  I read Drudge.  I find him amusing.
                              He sometimes even gets a story right.  That
                              doesn't mean he has any credibility.
                              \_ All of those sources have a better track
                              \_ All of those papers have a better track
                                 record then Drudge.
                     \_ I'm not a regular WSJ reader, but I generally respect
                        the news pages.  I'm not ready to write it off just
                        because Murdoch purchased it, but am definitely
                        waiting to see what happens.  My list also includes
                        the New York Times, The Economist, and the Christian
                        Science Monitor. -dans
         \- if you are going to bother to infiltrate the US, isnt it kind of
            odd to go after a "hard target" like an AZ army base.
            \_ Not if it has intel info you want.  Sounds like a better
               target than Walmart, dont you think?  And better PR value, too.
        \_ 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.
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
           \_ 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
                 \_ 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.
                             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
        \_ 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
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.
        \_ 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
                 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://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
           \_ 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.
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.
                    \_ 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.
                                               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
                 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?
        \_ 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:
        \_ 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
        \_ 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.
        \_ 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
           \_ 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
                 \_ You fail to understand how delusional the Bushies have
                    \_ 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
              \_ 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
                    \_ "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
                 \_ 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
2007/5/23 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton] UID:46733 Activity:nil 50%like:46725
2007/5/22-24 [Politics/Domestic/Abortion, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:46727 Activity:high 77%like:46720
5/22    We're in trouble:
        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
           \_ 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?
                          \_ 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.
                                     \_ 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 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
        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):
        \_ 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://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:
                    \_ 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
        \_ 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
           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)
        \_ Steven Emerson: crank:
           \_ 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?
                 \_ 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.
                 \_ 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
                       \_ 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
                             \_ 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
                                            \_ 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.
        \_ 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???
           \_ 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
                                    \_ 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:
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?
        \_ "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:
              Et al
              \_ Yes, I know, but I haven't seen anyone on motd defending
                 \_ "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?
        \_ 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:
        \_ 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:
        \_ 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.
                       \_ 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
                                         \_ 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
2007/3/10-12 [Reference/Celebration, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:45923 Activity:nil
3/10    Happy Birthday Osama! Allahu Akbar!
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
           \_ 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://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
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:
        \_ but.. but... privatization fixes everything!  invisible hand!
           invisible hand!
           http://preview.tinyurl.com/2gan3z (cnn.com)
           \_ Goddamn unions...
           \_ 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!
        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,
                 \_ I doubt he cares.
        \_ Remember, no matter what the gov't says, the minimum wage is always
           \_ 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
        \_ 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
            \_ 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:
           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.
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
        - 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
        New GOP commercial
        http://www.gop.com (under "Top Story")
        \- the '64 tv comercial is super famous ... enough to have its own
           wikipedia entry.
           hmm, i never noticed the WHAUDEN line.
        \_ Response.
           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:
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
        \_ news says he's about to be charged wtith multiple rape counts
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
        \_ 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:
        \_ 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:
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!
        \_ 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
           \_ 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!
           \_ 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
        \_ 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:
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:
2006/10/5-7 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:44702 Activity:high
10/5    Ok, found the Michelle Malkin video youtube banned.
        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.
        \_ 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
                      \_ 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
                         \_ 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
                               \_ 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
                                  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
                                  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.
                             \_ 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."
                                  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
                                           \_ 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
                                                 \_ "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
                      \_ 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$:
        \_ 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
                 \_ 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.
           \_ 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
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:
        \_ 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:
        \_ Wow, the headline really doesn't agree much w/ the bulk of the
        \_ 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
           \_ 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:
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."
        \_ 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)
        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.
        \_ 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
        \_ 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?
        \_ I see no traces of censorship.  Maybe you need to take off your
           \_ 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,
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
        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):
2006/8/29-9/1 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:44196 Activity:nil
8/29    Homeland Security (Coast Guard) whistleblower on youtube:
        \_ 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.
                 \_ 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:
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:
        Order (and subsequent Notice of Appeal) can be found as:
        \_ 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
              \_ Ann Coulter, who else?
                 \_ 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.
                                         \_ 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
                           \_ 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
        \_ 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".
           \_ 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
        \_ Is he gonna sue the Pentagon and the AP as well?
        \_ 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:
           \_ 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
        \_ 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
                      \_ "..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.
        \_ 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:
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
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:
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.
        \_ "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:
        \_ 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?
        \_ "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
           \_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:
        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:
                   \_ Interesting.  Okay, I'll check it out after work.
                   \_ the embedded quicktime movie wasn't working for me.
                      here's an alternate source:
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
              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
                        \_ 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
        "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?
           \_ 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
           \_ 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:
           \_ 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
                                                           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.
                   \_ 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,
                      \_ 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).
        "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.
              \_ 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:
        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.
           \_ that is what this film want, no?  let's kill all 1.3 billion
              \_ 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
        "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
        \_ 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!
        \_ 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
                 \_ 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
                    \_ 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
        \_ 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
2006/2/13-15 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:41827 Activity:low
2/13    Yes, Virginia, the United States does engage in torture:
        \_ 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:
        "[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://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,
              \_ 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:
        "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?
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
        (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
                 \_ 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
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:
        \_ 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
           \_ 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://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:
                       (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
              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:
        "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
        "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
2021/12/03 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
Results 451 - 600 of 667   < 1 2 3 4 5 >
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Politics:Domestic:911: