Slashdot Mirror

Okay, first "right hand" doesn't always mean "thing with 5 digits that is at the distal end of an arm." Lots of things have "right hand" sides. Like this page for instance. Also you're forgetting that 666 is from a bogus translation, and the actual writting has it as 616.

Of course overly literal and dubious translations is du rigur when it comes to religious prophesies. So I'm sure your counter argument would work against the bible thumpers.

Where's the outrage over the kidnapping of this woman?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/02/10/iraq/mai n1305912.shtml

The civilized world is offended by your lack of concern for offenses against civilization. The stench of your hypocrisy fills the entire earth. Islam is a religion for spoiled children who are ruled by emotions rather than reason. It's time to grow up and join the rest of the world. Who knows? If you stop using up all of your pipes for bomb-making, in time you might actually be able to experience indoor plumbing.

I don't know about NY, but I live in Michigan which is an "at will" employment state. What does this mean? My employer can fire me at any time for *any* reason. At other employers people have been very publicly fired for being a smoker, even though they don't smoke at work, because they raise insurance costs.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/01/28/eveningn ews/main670168.shtml

The only protections are for gender, religious or racial discrimination.

Personally, I would *NEVER* play a game at work, (unless it was against the boss ;) )

These theories (Electromagnetism & General Relativity) have results that are observable, repeatable, and (as best as we can guesstimate) direct results caused by what we are theorizing exists.

The results of the theory of the big bang are observable (we've seen that galaxies are spreading apart) and we can guess that these observations are the result of the big bang (or at least that's what Georges Lemaître proposed). The problem that hangs everyone up on this is that it can't be repeated; at least not while humans are still alive. This means it can never be proved.

The other hangup for the big bang theory is that it goes against what 55-61% of Americans (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/11/22/opinion /polls/main657083.shtml, http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040216-113955- 2061r.htm) believe. Electromagnetism & General Relativity (as well as most other scientific theories, apart from evolution) don't go against what's in the Bible (I bet you could find some extremest somewhere to disagree with me on that, though).

I know everyone wants to let "science [be] science and religion [be] religion and there is no problem with the two co-existing so long as neither tries to intrude onto the others territory." The problem is that occasionally the two do collide, especially when it comes to origins (and the poor scientists of old were the ones that started that fight, as religions had their ideas written down long before science started theorizing).

And just for the record (before anyone starts namecalling), I have no problem with anyone believing anything they want to, even if it is contrary to popular opinion (99% of the world believed that the world was flat, even though it was written in the Bible that it was round). We all get crazy ideas in our heads, brainwashed into us by culture, and then call people crazy who don't believe them (walked under any ladders lately?). That's part of what makes us who we are. And now I'm rambling, so I'll shut up.

Um... They're here. And here. And here and here and here and here and here and even here and, oh, there are a few hundred more here.

Muslim leaders around the world have issued fatwa after fatwa condemning terrorism and calling for an end to suicide bombings, car bombings, bus bombs, subway bombs, and every other bombing short of another Uwe Boll film. Just because Bill O'Reilly doesn't tell you about it doesn't mean that is never happened.

This is like ford selling fire extinguishers to owners of trucks that spontaneously catch fire. What more could you ask for then to cash in on your own screw ups? Ford: Hey, we're sorry about the whole your-truck-burst-into-flames-in-your-driveway issue. We could fix the issue, but that'd be a hassle for everyone. Ensure that you never worry about truck fires again with our OneExtinguish(tm) all encompassing fire retardant package. But, in their defense (hah!), If they gave it away for free they would be in some serious anti-trust issues.

..."It seems obvious that bin Laden wants to do serious damage to the American economy, ..." I give up.. why does it seem obvious?

Bin Laden has stated that economic disruption is his goal, and American intelligence analysts haven't argued otherwise. He could be playing a sophisticated game of misdirection, but his propaganda is intended for would-be suicide bombers as much as it is intended for our consumption. It wouldn't suit his cause to misdirect his own followers.

We "bled Russia for ten years until it went bankrupt and was forced to withdraw in defeat," bin Laden boasted in his October 2004 videotape.

The October video, released just before the U.S. election, offers a glimpse into the jihadist strategy. "We are continuing in the same policy to make America bleed profusely to the point of bankruptcy," said bin Laden. His logic is simple: To bring the U.S. to suffer a fate similar to that of the Soviet Union, the terrorists need to drain America's resources and bring it to the point it can no longer afford to preserve its military and economic dominance. As the U.S. loses standing in the Middle East, the jihadists can gain ground and remove from power regimes they view as corrupt and illegitimate while defeating other infidels who inhabit the land of Islam.

- - - -

He said the September 11 attacks have "shaken the throne of America and hit hard the American economy at its heart and its core." Bin Laden said that if the U.S. economy suffers enough, Americans will withdraw from those countries mentioned.

- - - -

According to bin Laden's math, each $1 al Qaeda has spent on strikes has cost the United States $1 million in economic fallout and military spending, including emergency funding for Iraq and Afghanistan.

"As for the size of the economic deficit, it has reached record astronomical numbers," bin Laden said, estimating the deficit at more than $1 trillion.

Al Qaeda has long made a point of hitting economic targets. The World Trade Center was likely targeted on Sept. 11 both because attacking it would kill thousands and because the twin towers were symbols of America's economic power. In a video that surfaced in December 2001, bin Laden said the Sept. 11 attackers struck the American economy "in the heart."

Bah, what I just posted wasn't from TFA, but from an article that another commenter added: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/01/19/60minute s/main1220146.shtml

What I'm wondering is how much his fame as a Tennis Player played in his acquisition by 4 Kings (the Gaming team). Is he really good enough to play competitively, or did they just throw him on the team because he'll get them media coverage (as is happening now).

I for one will be interested to see how he makes out at the CPL and alike. Will he be successful? Will this be a break for competitive gaming? We'll have to wait and see.

Staying slightly On-Topic, if anyone didn't catch the 60 minutes special on Fatal1ty and Professional gaming, check it out. I found it quite interesting.

According to prior posters, the IRS's system was implemented back in the early 70s. IIRC, 32-bit processors were still a long way coming at that point

YDRC. 32-bit microprocessors might have been a long way coming, but, at that point, mainframes were 32-bit (e.g., S/360 and S/370), 36-bit (e.g., Univac), or whatever the Burroughs machines were if you ignore the tag bits (48-bit, I think).

Also, they might have used decimal rather than binary, in which case the word length wouldn't have mattered.

Now, perhaps the problem is software, but the software problem might have been due to the author of the tax-processing software not bothering to do multiprecision arithmetic, or the compiler developers not bothering to provide it.

Or it might have been due to the software having been developed in a time when income, etc. levels were an inflationary factor of N away from current levels.

Or it might just have been Gates oversimplifying, or of somebody mishearing what he heard (the quotation marks in the article nonwithstanding).

Or it might just have been somebody making something up; that's not exactly unheard of.

No seriously, you call this flamebait, but if you look at rankings of the US education system, even within that system alone the falloff rate of whatever index is used is drastic. The handful of highest ranking schools is far better than next group.

Here's a 1998 ranking of western or western influenced nations. Look where the US is:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/ch ronicle/archive/1998/02/25/MN54903.DTL&type=printa ble

Granted it's old, but you're not paying attention if you believe the US is getting better not worse.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/09/13/national /main838207.shtml

If you're not convinced, come to the US and talk to a random person on the street. Ask them a question not related to television and football.

Heck, ask them where Tikrit is for that matter.

The International Obesity Task Force estimated that Finland, Germany, Greece, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Malta have all now exceeded the United States' 67 percent in overweight or obese males.

Statistics from around the globe shows a rapid increase in the prevalence of obesity the past 10 to 15 years. Obesity is more common in Germany and the United Kingdom compared to the United States. In general, the males are more likely to be overweight than the females, but women comprise the majority of the obese and severely obese. Compared to other countries, Italy has the greatest number of obese and severely obese, followed by Germany. The prevalence of obesity in the United Kingdom is 14.5% and in France, 7%. The Netherlands and Australia have the least obese and severely obese people, but they have about the same (28-32% of population) overweight people as in the United States.

The International Obesity Task Force estimated that Finland, Germany, Greece, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Malta have all now exceeded the United States' 67 percent in overweight or obese males.

Statistics from around the globe shows a rapid increase in the prevalence of obesity the past 10 to 15 years. Obesity is more common in Germany and the United Kingdom compared to the United States. In general, the males are more likely to be overweight than the females, but women comprise the majority of the obese and severely obese. Compared to other countries, Italy has the greatest number of obese and severely obese, followed by Germany. The prevalence of obesity in the United Kingdom is 14.5% and in France, 7%. The Netherlands and Australia have the least obese and severely obese people, but they have about the same (28-32% of population) overweight people as in the United States.

This research cannot possibly be correct. Why? Because, as others have pointed out, the only thing that can "cause obesity" is consuming more calories than you use. Period. End of story. (Unless somebody comes up with a way to absorb calories without actually eating them.)

So while there may be a virus that changes an individuals metabolic rate, or perhaps gives them intense and constant urges to eat, it is still the act of eating that results in getting fat.

Certainly I can understand why people who have this virus (if it's true) might gain weight more easily than those without it, but THEY CAN CONTROL THIS.

Over the past few years I have been experimenting with lowering my metabolic rate as much as possible. I used to eat upwards of 3000 calories a day, easily. I'd eat a large lunch and then, usually around 9pm, I'd eat a large dinner. The result? 260 Lbs. No so good, despite my height of 6'4".

I started a caloric restriction diet, which was absolutely brutal for the first two months. I ate 1 meal a day. No exceptions. I tried to keep this mean as close to 1000 calories as possible, but aside from that the content of the meal didn't matter. The result? I now weigh 190 Lbs. I would like to get that to about 180, but it seems that 190 is the weight I can most easily maintain while eating about 1000 to 1200 calories a day.

In addition to the weight loss, my cholesterol is now excellent despite the fact I routinely eat fatty foods and foods high in sodium. And there is a lot of evidence that eating less and slowing your metabolism will lead to a longer life due to reduced free radical production by the cells in my body.

The point is, during the first couple of months of my diet I ate less than 1/3rd what I usually ate. My body was absolutely screaming for food almost all the time. I had to learn to control this, and it was by no means easy. I found that if I hate food in my apartment, I basically would eat it. My will power just wasn't there. What did I do? Got rid of the food. When I bought food, I would buy enough for that meal. For those times where I would feel faint (only happened rarely due to drops in blood sugar early on) I would snack on things like olives (healthy and filling, but have few calories), and drink a decent amount of water or lemon water.

At any rate, while it was tough, I controlled myself. I reject the argument that I have greater will power than the average American fattie. I certainly don't. (Trust me.) It's a matter of choosing the long term benefits of not being a fattie over the short term pleasure of eating when you're hungry, or upset, or whatever. Sometimes this is hard, but if you're committed to it anybody can do it. The problem is most people simply choose the short term pleasure of eating that last piece of pie.

Can you show me any short paragraphs or excerpts from your well documented evidence? Or will it be a link to a 5 page article full of vague accusations?

A few minutes with Google provides more than enough citations, even after excluding those from lefty publications:

CBS News says "Mr. Bush appreciates loyalty above all."

In Military Week, Lt. Col (ret) Karen Kwiatkowski lays it on the line: "George W. Bush and Dick Cheney habitually reward cowardice and incompetence. They continually place political loyalty above ethics and loyalty to country."

The British Guardian quotes Michael O'Hanlon saying "I certainly think Bush values loyalty above all else."

Time Magazine says "For a President known to prize loyalty above most else..."

The Washington Post says: "But on a matter of first-order significance to many conservatives, the president let personal loyalty override what had been a central tenet of his political strategy."

The St. Cloud Times says: "George W. Bush's particular brand of immoderation lies in the premium he places on trust and loyalty". It goes on to cite Alberto Gonzalez, Karen Hughes and Don Evans as examples. Of course we can add Harriet Meiers and Michael Brown to that list.

In a Newsday story, James Klurfield writes "What's going on here, folks, is that loyalty to the president is being rewarded above all other values, including competent performance."

The Council on Foreign Relations has an entire article called Loyalty as Foreign Policy

The New Republic says "...Moreover, both Johnson and Bush have been known to place a high premium on personal loyalty."

You can look at the whole of a Knight Ridder wire article entitled Bush's Loyalty Raises Doubts About His Political Judgment.

The British newspaper The Telegraph says "...Mr Tenet, who, like President Bush, prizes loyalty above most other virtues..."

I think I've made my point. You can find more for yourself with minimal effort if you care to.

let's put it this way: 2005 was the warmest year on record since worldwide temperature recording began

Another point, where are the "innocent Americans" that are being spied on? Can you name one? Has anyone been prosecuted based on such spying? Do you think an "innocent American" who had no involvement in terrorism would have any trouble at all getting such evidence thrown out?

Well, there were cases of people getting put on the no-fly list, causing innocent Americans to miss their flights. Per CBS News, "[Senator Ted] Kennedy says he had to enlist the help of Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge to get his name stricken from the list. The process took several weeks, in all." Imagine how long it would take for an "ordinary" citizen without any political clout to get this resolved.

So, yes, there's precedence for concern over things like this.

Speaking for myself, I'm not opposed to the surveillance, but I want some due process to ensure that the government is not abusing this power. My concern is that the Bush administration may be ignoring that due process.

You know, I don't like to generalize or use sterotypes, but you know it's real easy when I read posts like yours. Because when someone defends Bush and actually has the gall to quote investigations, etc to support their argument, it would be comical if it wasn't so scary...

You know, there is a country you would feel more at home at, one where everyone thinks the same and thinking is enforced. Trust me, you'll love it there. It's called North Korea.

The real problem here isn't whether a certain amount of Americans, such as yourself, who don't have a problem with internal spying, because you're so fucking scared of your own shadow that you want big daddy bush to watch out for you; The problem is that it has been shown over and over and over again that we (True Americans who question, read, investigate through rational thinking) can't trust bush. How hard is it to understand this?

As a very small example, take the Nobel Winners who have, shall we say, a very dim view of how bush abuses scientific reports. Especially studies that don't agree with his 19th centure view of the world.

So to conclude, if non-partisan scientists, including most of the former EPA chiefs, including those from Republican administrations, don't trust bush, why should anyone else?

Personally, I have no problem with it being taught in a philosophy class, though apparently others do when it's a philosophy class in a government-funded high school.

The course description reads:

[T]he class will take a close look at evolution as a theory and will discuss the scientific, biological and biblical aspects that suggest why Darwin's philosophy is not rock solid. The class will discuss intelligent design as an alternative response to evolution. Physical and chemical evidence will be presented suggesting the earth is thousands of years old, not billions.

The difference, in my view, is like that of a "Religions of the World" theology class vs. Sunday School.

will only be actionable if it turns out to be orders to go blow up more buildings full of people.

I'm glad you think so, as that's the justification the Administration is using for their actions:

"I would argue that the actions that we've taken there are totally appropriate and consistent with the constitutional authority of the president. ... You know, it's not an accident that we haven't been hit in four years," the vice president said... (CBS News)

Why get a warrant, whose purpose is to legitimize trials, to do these taps if it isn't headed for trial in the first place???

The purpose of a warrant is not (and, may I say again, not) to legitimize trials. The purpose of a warrant is to ensure that wiretaps are not abused; it's called checks and balances of power. You may have heard of Watergate. I understand it's a very nice building in Washington where the Democrats had their campaign headquarters during the Nixon administration - oddly enough, the very administration that Cheney claims was the last administration with the (to his mind) appropriate level of executive power.

You still haven't answered my question. If a valid legal method for getting warrants after-the-fact exists, why isn't the administration using it? Are they afraid their wiretaps are based on shoddy justifications? Perhaps they feel the fact of the wiretaps would get leaked and reflect poorly on them (cf. irony)?

The "well warrants aren't really needed unless you plan to go to court" argument would work in Russia, but the last time I checked the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States was still intepreted as protecting citizens against unreasonable searches, and the court systems (one of the three branches of government, yes?) have consistently interpreted warrants as the appropriate method for making sure searches remain reasonable. Even retroactive warrants.

The administration had used two basic defenses: "We need to react fast," and "We have all the power we say we have, because we're the Executive branch." The first is invalidated by $1805(f). The second is a perfect case example of why the tripartite system of checks and balances was put into the Constitution - to protect us from idiots like this.

(Having said that, I'm hoping the checks and balances start kicking in. They're a bit overdue at this point).

Finally, don't forget that an Oil Shock will make all other sources of energy economically viable. Wind, Solar, Sea Tides, Geothermal, etc. will all become competitive once the price of Oil goes through the roof.

How will this energy be stored/distributed; batteries or hydrogen?

Alberta oil.

What if Jerry Springer was the senator?

He abandoned the senate race shortly thereafter. But Wikipedia reports that he has had quite the political career: 1968, campaign aide to RFK; 1970, ran for congress and lost; 1971, elected to Cincinnati city council; 1977, elected mayor of Cincinnati; 1982, lost the Dem primary for Ohio governor; 2004, member of the Ohio delegation to the DNC.

Click here to read the article and watch the streaming video. It was posted on Digg earlier.

I scoff at Bill Gates' "efforts" to reduce spam. What has he done precisely?

Probably just deferred the responsibility to one of his underlings. Aside from that, he talks about crazy methods such as deciding how much money the sender has to pay you before you open the e-mail.

Gates has plenty of articles which detail how much he hates spam. Anyone can sit down and write this, but Gates gets the high exposure interviews with the Wall Street Journal and the AP.

Gates is all talk. If you want to read some articles from some very interesting people, check out A Plan for Spam by Paul Graham. It talks about simple ways to write Bayesian spam filters and does a very good job at describing how they work. Another valuable member of the anti-spam community is Jonathon Zdziarski who has written many books about how to actually get rid of spam. You can also read the Slashdot interview with him.

My question is: Would the Bush Administration correctly interpret the information that they receive from illegal wiretaps? I'm curious, because they had a document entitled "Bin Laden determined to attack inside the US" and another document entitled "Sociology and Psychology of Terrorism: Who Becomes a Terrorist and Why?" that warned that bin Laden's terrorists might hijack an airliner and dive bomb it into the Pentagon or other government building. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/05/16/attack/m ain509294.shtml So, if we record all conversations of every American, who will interpret them? If we gather every email and letter that goes across the sea, who will interpret them? At some point it's like Carnivore, where it's overload of information. The issue isn't that we didn't have information to stop 9/11 without illegal wiretaps, it's that we have retards interpreting those documents (Yes Dubya, I'm looking in your direction!)... I don't understand the NEED for MORE intelligence. How about the need for GOOD intelligence interpreted by people that actually can read? Just a thought...

How little does the American public care about this launch? So little that we've got to look to British news outlets to find decent coverage!

As a matter of fact - this list from Google news shows a pretty even balance between US and the rest of the world in coverage. Blame the Slashdot editor, not the media on this one.

Crow tastes pretty good with Tabasco.

The idea that one might live one's life in private and without fear of molestation is a *very* recent phenomenon.

From Kant's Was ist Aufklärung? (“What is Enlightenment?”):

Den Privatgebrauch nenne ich denjenigen, den er in einem gewissen ihm anvertrauten bürgerlichen Posten oder Amte von seiner Vernunft machen darf.

“I call privacy that usage of reason a man may make from within his public office.”

Is privatam seruitutem seruit illi an publicam?

“Doesn't a man that performs his private office also serve the republic?”

That America, perhaps, was never a democracy but always a republic, implies that we've never entertained democratic notions of privacy.

Apparently Ted Kennedy is one of the people who oppose renewable energy, at least when it affects his property values or vista.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/26/sunday/m ain560595.shtml

As a proprietary software vendor your biggest priority should be to make your customers as happy as possible.

One would think.

There are several problems with this, though. Sometimes what the customer wants is not what your company wants. Sometimes what is good for the customer is not good for the company.

Consider the DR-DOS incident. Microsoft intentionally released a version of MS-Windows that detected DR-DOS, gave some obscure error, and refused to load. This was proven to be intentional: it was the only encrypted code in the release, and changing DR-DOS to report it was really MS-DOS made everything run just fine. (Some reported it ran better on DR-DOS than on MS-DOS.)

What did Microsoft's customers want? They wanted to run MS-Windows on top of DR-DOS. What did Microsoft want? According to memos released during their anti-competitive trials, they wanted to bury DR-DOS.

Unfortunately, the only customers corporations try to please are investors and traders. And we know what investors and traders are: greedy motherfucking cockroaches.

The facts speak for themselves. Corporations tend to give their customers only what is also good for the corporation. And if they can, they fuck over their customer for a little profit.

Fortunately, software isn't like an energy monopoly. Now we're mad as hell, and we aren't going to take it anymore.

Here's what happened. After 9/11, authorities found a bunch of e-mail addresses and phone numbers in the phones and computers of confirmed terrorists. They tracked down those leads. Most of the people the NSA started eavesdropping on -- about 7,000 -- lived overseas, and their phone calls were to other foreigners living abroad. But, according to Risen's book, "about 500 people" living in the U.S. who were in contact with suspected terrorists had their communications tapped. Risen calls this "large-scale" spying on the American people even though, as the Weekly Standard recently noted, this constitutes "1.7 ten-thousandths of 1 percent of the U.S. population."

He made that statement Friday, January 23rd, 2004 so he still has 11 days to pull it off. So he can still slack off for ten days and pull an all-nighter of something. (Maybe he could offer each spammer 2 million dollars to go away? For less than billion, problem solved .. right? ;)

Microsoft Enters The Living Room
SAN JOSE, Calif., Oct. 8, 2004 (AP)
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/08/tech/mai n648325.shtml
[about the announcement of Windows Media Center Edition 2005, not the Xbox]

Microsoft Unveils New Xbox 360
REDMOND, Wash., May 13, 2005 (AP)
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/05/13/tech/mai n695041.shtml

Xbox 360 beats PlayStation to Japan stores
HANS GREIMEL
Associated Press (Posted on Thu, Dec. 08, 2005)
http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/business/1335 5006.htm

Gates Highlights Windows Vista Program
By MAY WONG, AP Technology Writer Thu Jan 5, 3:53 AM ET
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060105/ap_on_hi_te/ga dget_show_gates

MTV, Microsoft team up for online music
ALEX VEIGA
Associated Press (Thursday, Jan 12, 2006)
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/enterta inment/13398835.htm

That's just from 5 minutes of Googling. Someone with a Lexis account could produce pages and pages of AP stories about Microsoft products.

Sure, the media likes to ooh and ahh over Apple, but the media likes to ooh and ahh over everything. It's ridiculous to suggest that a similar product announcement from Microsoft wouldn't go out over the AP wire.

Microsoft Enters The Living Room
SAN JOSE, Calif., Oct. 8, 2004 (AP)
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/08/tech/mai n648325.shtml
[about the announcement of Windows Media Center Edition 2005, not the Xbox]

Microsoft Unveils New Xbox 360
REDMOND, Wash., May 13, 2005 (AP)
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/05/13/tech/mai n695041.shtml

Xbox 360 beats PlayStation to Japan stores
HANS GREIMEL
Associated Press (Posted on Thu, Dec. 08, 2005)
http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/business/1335 5006.htm

Gates Highlights Windows Vista Program
By MAY WONG, AP Technology Writer Thu Jan 5, 3:53 AM ET
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060105/ap_on_hi_te/ga dget_show_gates

MTV, Microsoft team up for online music
ALEX VEIGA
Associated Press (Thursday, Jan 12, 2006)
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/enterta inment/13398835.htm

That's just from 5 minutes of Googling. Someone with a Lexis account could produce pages and pages of AP stories about Microsoft products.

Sure, the media likes to ooh and ahh over Apple, but the media likes to ooh and ahh over everything. It's ridiculous to suggest that a similar product announcement from Microsoft wouldn't go out over the AP wire.

i think, in situations like this, business has an opportunity to change the world more than governments. but everyone seems to bow to the pressure.

That's a HUGE industry,over 12 billion dollars in 2004 in the U.S., and you know it's a bigger market now... of course, that counts not only women, but still... lots of case modding of women going on.

Two words: Leonard Gregg. But I don't think it was random, or in the middle of the night.

Wherever people profit from cleaning up messes, you'll find some who are willing to make the messes themselves. It's human nature. The only question is whether current corporate governance factors improve on what humans bring to the organization, or exacerbate the worst parts. I think the latter is true, and getting more so all the time.

And we know how good the government is at collecting back taxes. Oh, and lets not forget the beauty of jetting off to some country with no extradition treaty with the US. Let's face it: if this guy doesn't want to pay, he won't, and all the government will get is his assets, which certainly isn't going to cover 1 billion+ USD.

Perhaps that is because you only see the suggestions as complaining. "Don't start a war with someone that isn't a threat based on lies" isn't a complaint. It is a factual statement of where the Democrats would have saved money that Jr. didn't.

Wrong. Back in 2002, the Democrats were just as gung-ho about going to war in Iraq as the Republicans. You can even go back to 1998 and hear Bill Clinton explain how great of a threat Saddam Hussein was and why he needed to be removed. Other major Democratic leaders like Joe Biden, Ted Kennedy and even John Kerry also explained why Saddam had to be removed from power. Now most people in the USA understand that support was just pre-election poo-pooing so that the swing voters would not think the Democrats were a bunch of peacenik wimps (with their losses in the 2000, 2002 and 2004 elections, that did not work), but these statements are on the record, and the Democrats will not get away with a post-war rewrite of history.

Why do you need to see some concrete plan to notice that the Democrats are the only surplus generator in recent histroy

Clintons' surpluses only started after the Republicans took control of Congress in 1995. The U.S. was still coming out of a recession from 1993 to 1995, and Bill Clinton also signed into law a very hefty tax hike, both of which accounted for the shrinking deficit, but during the time the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress and the White House (1993-1995) there was no focus on controlling spending at all. Repealing that tax hike is what helped to bring us out of the 2000-2002 recession.

When the debt is gone, taxes will be 25% less than they are now, and the budget will be balanced. If you want a 25% cut in taxes, you have to take the small tax increase now.

Heh. The problem with that idea is that any extra revenue realized from tax hikes (prior to their killing the economy) is going to be wasted on more useless BS like TV subsidies. The government needs less money, not more, but there needs to be a legal cap on how much money the government can spend before it can borrow more money.

merely the Placebo effect?
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/08/26/health/w ebmd/main797796.shtml/

You are describing weather, and weather changes, correct. But when you measure weather over time, you get a climate average, and that average is shifting:

CBS: "The year 2005, the World Wildlife Fund said, is shaping up as the worst for extreme weather, with the hottest temperatures, most Arctic melting, worst Atlantic hurricane season and warmest Caribbean waters.

It's also been the driest year in decades in the Amazon, where a drought may surpass anything in the past century, said the report by international environmental group. "

BBC: "The area covered by sea ice in the Arctic has shrunk for a fourth consecutive year, according to new data released by US scientists.

They say that this month sees the lowest extent of ice cover for more than a century.

The Arctic climate varies naturally, but the researchers conclude that human-induced global warming is at least partially responsible. "

I'm pretty much there with you.

There is no way that President Bush would ask, say, the NSA to do anything illegal is there?

And, although there may be a few renegades, there isn't much of official Washington that would use secrets for political gain.

But then there is the press which has recently developed some badly misplaced priorities, actively supporting and publicizing leaks of sensitive ongoing intelligence and military operations against the enemy over and over again. You would think it would be easy to understand that this harms our national security, yet much of the mainstream media passes over the issue in silence. On the other hand, they have endless energy and interest in a kerfuffle involving no crime.

Maybe the media will start taking the war more seriously if Al Qaeda makes significant progress in their announced goal of killing four million Americans. Or maybe not. If there are more successful large scale terrorist attacks in the United States, aided by the media's disclosure of on-going military and intelligence operations, I expect that the majority of the media won't engage in self-examination, but will rather most likely start banging the drums from the fever swamp. The fever swamp runs deep, and support for the President among the media is thin.

Well, if the other party gains power, maybe things will change... or maybe not.

Thank goodness we are a country where you can still engage in dissent against the mainstream.

Don Weber, an NSA spokesman, said in a statement Wednesday that the cookie use resulted from a recent software upgrade. Normally, the site uses temporary, permissible cookies that are automatically deleted when users close their Web browsers, he said, but the software in use shipped with persistent cookies already on.

"After being tipped to the issue, we immediately disabled the cookies," he said.

WASHINGTON (AP) - The CIA got caught with a hand in the Internet cookie jar.

The agency removed tracking software known as a "cookie" from one of its Web sites this week after a private group discovered the banned practice, said Mike Stepp, who manages the CIA's public Web site.

"It was a mistake on our part. It was not intentional," Stepp said Tuesday. "The public does not need to be concerned that the CIA is tracking them. We're a bit busy to be doing that."

Stepp said an outside company had redesigned the reading room Web site, which was posted to the Internet on Jan. 29.

"Unbeknownst to us, it was loaded with some software, commercial off-the-shelf software used for Web analysis," Stepp said. The software included a cookie that tracked repeat visitors to the site.

...The Hummer of power supplies.

Exactly. Now I don't know about you, but IMHO, when I see a Hummer driving down the street, price tag aside, I don't go "Man, I really would want one of those!", rather I look at them in disgust, as a tremendous waste of metal and energy. Those things get what 7-9 MPG? Its laughable! Don't you find it funny that they don't even publish what the MPG is for that vehicle? Like someone mentioned before, I don't go around boasting my car gets 1 MPG. I'd feel more guilty about having something that is just so wasteful. Why do you think LED lights this Christmas are really taking off? People just want to feel good about what they purchase and knowing that they only consume 10% of the energy and last 10x as long as conventional lights, makes them popular. In 2-3 more years you wont see anything but...

not the Jewish people ....

How About This

So you assume that any trial that begins in 2002 is about a crime that happened atleast 2 and a half years ago? Let's look at the facts, shall we?

SEC charges against Adlphia were in regards to accounting fraud commited between 1999 and 2001.

SEC charges against AOL were in regards to accounting practices after their merger with Time-Warner: from 2000 to 2002.

Bristol-Myers Squibb - states in the article--very clearly--that they inflated their 2001 revenue by $1.5 billion.

CMS Energy's round-trip trades occured between the 3rd quarters of 2000 and 2001.

Duke Energy's round-trip trades occured in 2001 and 2002.

Dynegy committed round-trip trades in 2001 and included them in their 2002 first quarter revenue.

El Paso Energy's round-trip trades occured in 2001.

Halliburton - lol, do I even need to explain this one? I don't think the Bush administration will be clamping down on this one any time soon.

Homestore.com - inflated revenue in 2001.

Kmart's SEC investigation was about actions taken in 2001.

Merck's false revenues were declared from 1999-2001.

Mirant was convicted of energy gouging from 2000-2001.

Peregrine Systems reported false revenue from 2000 to 2002.

Qwest fraudulently concealed the fact that, based on a series of accounting errors, it improperly recognized $112 million of revenue between 2000 and 2002 from its Wireless division.

Reliant Energy committed energy gouging in 2000 and 2001.

WorldCom fraud was masterminded starting in 2000 but took place up till July 2002 when the company filed for bankrupcy.

Stop talking out of your ass. This page also details the amount of money each of these fraud committing corporations contributed to the Democratic or Republican parties during the 2002 election cycle. It's pretty obvious which party is in favor with the white collar criminals.

And when it comes to the human ability to speak in "code" so that one audience hears one thing while another audience hears another, we're fighting millions of years of evolution.

Then, on Aug. 29, the phone rang in Binalshibh's Hamburg apartment at three in the morning.

It was Atta with an important, but cryptic message: "He said to me, 'One of my friends related a riddle to me and I cannot solve it, and I called you so that you can solve it for me.'" Binalshibh is heard saying.

Atta goes, "Two sticks, a dash and a cake with a stick down."

Binalshibh said, "I said to him, 'Is this the riddle? You wake me from a deep sleep to tell me this riddle? Two sticks and I do not know what?'"

Eventually, Fouda says, Binalshibh realized what Atta meant. So he says to him, "OK. Tell your friend, he has nothing to worry about. It's such a sweet riddle."

Binalshibh explained it: "The two sticks represent the number 11, then the dash, and then the cake from which a stick dangles represents number nine. Thus, the picture becomes complete: the 11th of September."

It can't be "incriminated" at all. There is no crime of "driving on the same road as a criminals vehicle". It's simply a lead to be used on investigations. It may pan out, or it may not.

Or it might result in a case of mistaken identify that causes the police to classify you as a threat and unload seven shots into your head.

There are no UN Resolutions explicitly authorizing either US or NATO military action in the former Yugoslovia as there were with the recent Iraq War (key phrase "serious consequences" - diplo-doubletalk for WAR)

23 Sept. 1998: UN Security Council Resolution 1199 does not authorize military action ... the Iraq War phrase "serious consequences" is missing

24 Mar. 1999: The Kosovo air war begins.

Three-months elapse

10 Jun. 1999: After NATO's unilateral not authorized by the UN attack of Serbia, the UN kinda gets around to authorizing what has already happened as things are winding down dead UN link ... alternate link

20 Jun. 1999: The Kosovo air war ends

FICTION - "We are *done* in Kosovo." Visit the US Army Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo *today* as in like *not* done

TRUTH - "We have had no combat fatalities in Kosovo. We are done and the war is over. Service people have died, but not because of enemy combatants and insurgents"

Having never deployed any ground troops to the combat zone there were no US combat deaths.

partial FICTION - "Clinton never lied to the American people, and never relied on cooked up intelligence to sell the war. We went in to stop genocide and get rid of the bad guy. We did just that."

If "Bush Lied" on Iraq then so did these characters, Clinton included. Rather funny to see what Clinton & Co said about Iraq & Saddam. Reads identical to what Bush2 was saying.

I will not dwell upon the domestic aspects of Clinton lying or otherwise although "[Clinton] admitted that he had made false statements under oath [lying] about his relationship with the former White House intern [in the context of a sexual harassment lawsuit] and surrendered his law license for five years" CBS News

How long will we be at war? Is the war on terror ever over?

This sounds eerily similar to 1984 - as long as we're at war with somebody, we have to sacrifice our liberties so that Big Brother can protect us.

It will be over when they are capture, killed, or lose interest in attacking us. It is likely to go on for at least 5 to 10 years more as things are. It could go on much longer.

Are you advocating that we should stop trying to protect ourselves before their power to attack is destroyed? Is there any casualty level that would make you change your mind? Al Qaeda's leaders have stated that they want to kill 4 million Americans. Should we let them kill and destroy at whim and hope that they stop when they reach 4,000,000 American dead? (After all, if they did stop after reaching that point, it would undermine attaining one of their highest goals: reestablishing the Caliphate.* (You do know about that, right?)).

By the way, which rights have you had to give up? Voting? Free speech? Religion? Freedom of association? You can still criticize the government, right?

1984 is a great science fiction book, but it is hardly a lense of universal wisdom on war, politics, and free societies.

* An Islamic super state in which church and state are combined, run under Islamic (Sharia) law, and covering all Muslim lands, and which ultimately expands to cover the world. 9/11 and 3,000 dead Americans was just a small down payment on that "dream."

... the DHS to harass a college student working on a paper, especially when we have missing truckfulls of radioactive materials, unchecked illegal immigration linked to terrorism, and gross negligence in disaster preparedness? (cause, you know, let's not forget that FEMA is in the DHS now)

<sarcasm>I'm so comforted that a noticable portion of my paycheck gets usurped for such important security concerns.</sarcasm>

If you are a taxpaying U.S. citizen, I advise you to see how your contributions to the government are apportioned and spent.